It’s High Time to Give Fulton Sheen His Due

Comments (131)

1. I say guile. This is the man who “prophesied” the false church, then went on to voraciously sell it and do his part to keep people in it. When my eyes were beginning to open I watched one of his “shows” and almost vomitted over his enthusiasm regarding Vatican II.

2. And to take it one step further than what is noted above, take the Buckley/Bhp Sheen interview to roughly the 36:00 minute mark. His enthusiasm for the “Sprite of VII” to becoming “kinder, less rigid, and open to the world” is out and in the open. No doubt a man of the council, and rather he knew it or not, complicit with the devils great plan and revolution.

3. Sheen, and I do love a lot of his sermons, is ultimately… an American.

   And the Vatican II Council is filled with Americanist Enlightenment principles. I’m sure Sheen was also a victim to a lot of what passed for modern psychology, itself descended form the likes of Freud and Jung, who based their methodology based on the fact that the Catholic Church could not be the source of Truth because it was supposedly wrong when it condemned Copernicus and Galileo, and rested on an origins story that was not playing well with Charles Darwin’s zany delusions.

   Hence that’s why we got America – the new city on a Hill and light to the nations – and subsequently the Vatican II Council.

   Do I blame Sheen? No. But, yes, his unfortunate theological views are informed by Americanism and the Council and thus are laced with problems.

   I do believe in a certain sense, there is an approach to converting non-Catholics by using things that are common in their false religions. Or rather we should say we can exploit the bits of Truth they have retained or know naturally to lead them out of it. At the end of the day all humankind is descended from Adam, and was dispersed from Babel, and as such they retain in their traditions bits and pieces about the original Paradise, the Flood of Noah and even prophecies of someone who would come that has a lot of allusions and foreshadowing to Christ.

   This is something Our Lady of Guadalupe used by utilizing pagan references and symbols on the Tilma that they would recognize in order to identify her and thus that she would convert them. So if Sheen intended to convey this meaning in his statement, then there’s nothing inherently wrong with it, but such things need to be carefully explained without giving the impression that false religions are okay or beneficial to remain in.

4. Sheen was no Catholic saint

5. At this point all my heroes have feet of clay, and I’m okay with it. Only Christ is perfect, the rest of us are just people. Abp. Fulton Sheen did in the Catholic world what Billy Graham did in the Protestant world. Don’t pass out. At this point, I’m no longer a “Catholic or nothing” Christian. If I had to pick what camp to be in, Bergolio or Billy Graham, I’d take Graham, so I feel that both Abp. Sheen and Billy Graham brought many, many probably hundreds of thousands of people to Jesus Christ, and I, insignificant evangelizer that I am, cannot possibly sit here and toss stones or even pebbles. I wish I had a 1000th of souls saved that either one of them did. Let the hand wringing begin. Both were brilliant preachers, and neither of them can fairly be judged by contemporary knowledge. We ourselves didn’t know how bad, how very bad, VII was, until fairly recently. Now Bishop Sheen may very well have fallen right in line with the apostates we see today, I would not at this point put any of the past names above it. At this point I’d wonder if St. Peter himself wouldn’t fall in with them, there seems to be a supernova of gravity pulling all and sundry into it, so no one seems immune. As I said, all my heroes now have feet of clay and I am now a 100% cynic. That is what my church did for me.
   But there’s no getting around Sheen’s oratory skills, which educated and inspired millions. I wouldn’t take that away from the downtrodden Catholics of today. My God, we need to let people have what gets them through life, because life is rough. We’ve lost a lot. Bye-bye, it all goes, down the big, sucking hole that is our church.
   Let them have Fulton Sheen. I can’t see what difference it makes at this point.
   Most of our churchmen are prancing homosexual boy sodomizers, child molesters, stinking, rotten grotesque pedophiles, corrupting little boys and teenagers, and spending their free time crapping all over our faith, and surely Bergolio is one of those with a twist of demon worship. Compared to 90% of these perverted dissenters, Abp. Fulton Sheen looks positively glorious.

6. Sheen spent an entire chapter in his book “Footprints in a Darkened Forest” (1967) praising Teilhard de Chardin.

   “It is very likely that within 50 years when all the trivial, verbose disputes about the meaning of Teilhard’s ‘unfortunate’ vocabulary will have died away or have taken a secondary place, Teilhard will appear like John of the Cross and St. Teresa of Avila, as the spiritual genius of the twentieth century.”

   Whatever really derailed his cause, it was ultimately for the best.

7. That being said, I do get your point Louie, and agree with you 100%. If our Catholic churchmen of yesterday, including Abp. Fulton Sheen, had held the line, we wouldn’t be in the stinking mess we are in today. They did not do their one job, and millions of souls will probably be lost because they did not do their one job. He was a man of the council, that is true, but I doubt he knew where it would lead. The men today know where it leads, they lead it themselves, to Hell, but it is doubtful Abp. Sheen knew that.

8. Upon death, we are assigned to three possible places—Heaven, Hell or Purgatory. I don’t know where Sheen is, but God doesn’t make mistakes. He is where he belongs—only God knows for sure. Sheen wrote beautifully of Our Lady, “The World’s First Love”, for example and spoke of Our Lady with great holiness and tenderness. It’s always good to remain close to Mary, the Mother of God. I agree with Evangeline. I don’t know for sure, but I think at the end of his life, Sheen realized the Council was an intentional derailment of the Holy Roman Catholic Church. Let us pray for the soul of Bishop Sheen.

9. Interview With Bishop Fulton Sheen on Council’s “Communionistic Revolution”

   “Pope John did what the Risen Lord did. The Church has been behind closed doors for centuries. He said: ‘Open the doors! There is a world waiting for salvation. Go into it!’ The Lord is again appearing behind the closed doors of the council as we debate and discuss, and there is no stepping back as we hear Him say, in the words of the Apocalypse: ‘I have set before you an open door, and let no man close it.’”

   (Prior to V2 Missionaries were non existent and The Church was generating no conversions? This old church bad, new church good subtext was so destructive of Tradition)

   In these words Auxiliary Bishop Fulton J. Sheen of New York, who is director in the United States of the Society for the Propagation of the Faith, summed up his impressions at the end of the third council session.

   Bishop Sheen’s recent speech in the council debate on the missions met with a wide echo. He expanded on his ideas in an interview given to this correspondent.
   What will come of the council? he was asked.

   “This council,” he replied, “is the battleground of what might be called a communionistic revolution. There is a war not against truth, which is revealed and held in common, but against entrenched modes of thinking, patterns of administration, nationalistic hoardings and antiquated mental heirlooms. Those who are fashioned in these molds often are no more willing to give them up than the rich landowners of Latin America.

   “But from all over the world came the communionists with a new revolution, asking that the Church adapt itself to the world, enlarge its offices to embrace all nations and acknowledge that there are other civilizations besides the Western.

   (The Body of Christ must adapt itself to one of its ancient and permanent enemy, the world – just like Christ did)

   “This revolution took place in the council between a minority group with entrenched ideological capital and a new majority group made up of many nationalistics.
   “We must understand that there can be not only a capitalism of money, but also of ideas. The communionistic revolution now is dividing the intellectual wealth and distributing it to the Church all over the world.”

   He was asked: Will not such an ideological division cause unrest in the Church?

   “I don’t think so,” said Bishop Sheen. “The council needs both tendencies, and so does the Church. The minority group softened the ideas of the majority group in the council, and this will give the latter balance, make their definitions more precise, prevent them from throwing out the baby with the bath.

   “On the other hand, the majority group gave a breath of fresh air to the stuffy air of the past centuries, enlarged the horizons of those who lived close to the Mediterranean and made them conscious that the men and women outside the Church are not enemies but friends.

   “The two groups — the minority and the majority — are like a weight on a flywheel. Without the weight the flywheel would fly off the axle; with the weight the flywheel goes faster. The two mentalities are necessary like the subject and predicate of a sentence.”

   “But,” this correspondent said, “the result might be a mere compromise.”

   “On the surface,” replied Bishop Sheen, “it may seem as if there is compromise between the two, but there is not. There actually is a synthesis. Take infallibility as defined by the First Vatican Council. That was only one side of the Church and the Scriptures. It needed to be combined with the doctrine of the collegiality of bishops, for Peter, the supreme pontiff, was chosen from among the twelve.

   “As I see it, the equilibrium which is coming out of this council, as it builds up its doctrine and practice, is something wonderful to behold.”

   Which issue stands out among those that came up during the third council session, Bishop Sheen was asked.

   “I think,” he said, “the one note that rang out in the council was that the Church is to be the Church of the poor. The magnificent gesture of the Holy Father in surrendering his triple tiara symbolized it. The council actually has discovered another presence of Christ. Besides the Eucharistic presence in the tabernacle there is also the presence of Christ in the poor.

   (It was not his personal possession to hand over to the UN but it did signify that he refused to be crowned by his friends as the head of all nations and kings and politicians whereas Jesus allowed Himself to be crowned by His enemies because He is King of all.)

   “This affects also the priesthood. Priests will no longer be like gasoline station attendants caring only for the regular clients who come in weekly for refueling.
   “They will also be explorers digging for the Holy Spirit in the souls of their fellowmen. It likewise affects religious congregations inasmuch as it will cure them from organizational sclerosis, as they begin to have dialogue with one another and serve with bishops for the glory of the entire Church.

   (The V2 rocket blowed-up religious congregations)

   “In this light one of the principal fruits of the council is the practical realization that we are all living cells in the Mystical Body of Christ.

   “The bishops from comfortable dioceses have become uncomfortable at the sight of their impoverished brethren from Latin America, Africa and Asia. The unstudious bishops have become conscious that they have missed much of their episcopal vocation in counting and administration. On the other hand, the experts in the council have realized how far removed they sometimes were from the dust of human lives.

   (Hmmm, precursor to the smelly sheep?)

   “It really is like a new Pentecost. Each was going his own way. Now they have, as the Acts of the Apostles state, ‘one mind and one heart.’”

   (Mmmmm the enthusiasm reigning at Vatican Two, attributable to The Holy Ghost or attributable to an emotional state “effervescence” – that condition described by Emile Durkheim as “Collective effervescence, …the state in which men find themselves when…they believe they have been swept up into a world entirely different from the one they have before their eyes.”

   See p. 24, “Vatican II, a sociological analysis of religious change,” Melissa J. Wilde
   O, and there is only one Pentecost)

   A last question came from this correspondent as to whether this impact of the new Pentecost will last beyond the council, once it has adjourned?

   “Of this,” Bishop Sheen replied, “I have no doubt whatsoever. The impulse is so strong it is bound to remain effective. The various local conferences of bishops will grow in stature. (The local conference of Bishops active at the council were the liberal ones from South America and they seized control of the council and met every day at Saint Marta to strategize.

   (Say, isn’t that where Pope Francis chose to Live? Why yes it is, what a curious coincidence .)

   There will be independent initiatives which all will fit into the general pattern of that inner renewal of the Church Pope John has initiated, and Pope Paul now is promoting with the best of intentions.

   “The doors have been opened wide, much too wide to be closed again.”

   (Oh, no; that’s not pretty good as the Granddaughter of ABS, Sweet Pea, loves to say).

   Father Placid Jordan, O.S.B.
   NCWC News Rome Correspondent

10. Calling Sheen a modernist, unqualifiedly as it seems, strikes me as possibly excessive—even in light of the evidence presented here. There is evidence, granted, that he had a modernist notion of one thing or another. But is that enough to deserve being reduced to a modernist? What about all the evidence in his work that he was anything but a modernist?

    And in some cases, the interpretations given here of some of Sheen’s ideas possibly misrepresent him. Take, for example, the idea that “governments have no eternal end.” Given Sheen’s own Thomism, one has to ask: What kind of end is Sheen talking about? A per se end or an end per accidens?

    According to Louie’s interpretation, it would seem the answer is both; i.e., Sheen is denying that governments have any eternal end. But, again, in light of Sheen’s Thomism, it is possible he is only denying that governments have a per se eternal end, which of course would be compatible with holding that they can be subordinated to ends that are supernatural.

11. Did he not read “Pascendi Domini Gregis”, St. Pius X’s encyclical exposing modernism?
    As a contemporary of Archbishop Lefebvre and Fr Gommar de Pauw, he should have known.
    And if he was a true man of God, a true Bishop, he would have known.

12. Louie: “If the above quote was attributed to Jorge Bergoglio and shared with the very same people who are presently decrying the grave injustice allegedly being done to Fulton Sheen, nearly all of them would denounce it for the pure garbage that it is. And yet, they clamor for Sheen’s beatification.”

    Bam! 🙂

13. Not extreme at all. 1% poison is still poison…and still kills. To be Catholic, one must hold to all doctrines of the Catholic Church.

14. Maybe you missed the citation above from Pascendi wherein Pope St. Pius X identified what Sheen stated about Christ being hidden in all religions (and that would include Pachamama idol worship!) nearly verbatim as “the apologetic method of the Modernists.” That’s good enough for me. The man was a Modernist to be sure.

15. At one point, if memory serves me, Mr Buckley asks Bp Sheen if he can name anything that would warrant excommunication. Sheen is at a complete loss for words and can muster no offense whatsoever that warrants excommunication. Of course, years later in 1988 we do see what the NO V2 sect finds excommunicable.

16. I understand you believe that’s sufficient evidence. I just have some doubts about your interpretation of this evidence.

    For instance, you see Sheen as having spoken about “Christ being hidden in all religions.” But your quotation has Sheen speaking, not of “Christ being hidden in all religions” (as you put it), but of Christ being brought out of “peoples” (Sheen: “to bring Christ to peoples as we are to bring Christ out of them”).

    So while Sheen speaks of one thing, you accuse him of speaking of another. How do you justify that? Are peoples and religion the same thing?

    You also identify Sheen’s idea with the idea that Pius X ascribes to modernists. But is this equation certain? Whereas Sheen speaks of bringing Christ out of different peoples, Pius X describes the modernists as holding that, within a non-believer, there is the “germ which Christ Himself bore in His conscience.” How are these two things the same — (A) Christ and (B) the germ which Christ Himself bore in His Conscience?

    A and B strike me as clearly different, and so make it doubtful (for me at least) that what Sheen had in mind is what Pius X had in mind in describing modernists.

17. Do you all think that the miracle attributed to him was faked somehow?

18. I strongly believe that Mathew 24:24 speaks of the so-called “miracles” in the Novus Ordo sect.

    “For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets and shall shew great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect.”

    Beware of any Modernist “miracle”.

19. You seem to be blind.

    “Christ is hidden in all world religions…….”

    The question is ….are you willfully blind?

20. Archsbishop Sheen certain did speak some Modernist ideas later in his life.

    But that’s not necessarily tantamount to calling him a Modernist.

    It’s a tough call in Bishop Sheen’s case. I tend to think he was just influenced by it all and not a full-fledged one. I also tend to think, based on some testimony from people who actually knew him, that he was brainwashed and scandalized by the revolutionaries who took over the institutional Church after Vatican II. He was one among many clerics, religious and bishops alike who underwent that sort of re-education.

    It’s very easy for one in the year 2019 to look backwards to that time and condemn this person and that person as a “heretic” or an “apostate” or a “Modernist” based on something they said or did. Certainly, many DID fall into heresy, apostasy and Modernism then. No question. But all of them? No.

    There are conditions which apply to those terms: “heretic”, “apostate”, “Modernist”.

    They are not to be used lightly.

21. BTW, Mr. V…you’ve been listening to a lot of the late Fr. Hesse.

    I can tell. It shows in your whole attitude and diction in these more recent months…even aside from your direct quotes from his talks.

    God only knows what Fr. would make of the whole fiasco which is the Roman Church now.

    I tend to think he’d just say”God damn all the torpedos” and continue on being a faithful priest.

22. I remember hearing this concept. Did they mean that even in false religions there can be an observation that in some way even pagans are obliged to acknowledge God? Louie I would go with St. Pius X as well. I’m fairly confused now on Abp. Sheen. Modernists have all but killed the church. I want no part.
    You know it is very hard to know what is true anymore. I feel everything I have been taught is now suspect and every day we find out how bad these men all were. Still the unpleasant truth is better than the pleasant lie. As far as canonization it seems clear enough fake saints have already been made by Francis for pure political reasons. I would be really interested in knowing Louie, or anyone, what your general opinion is of the canonizations of Jacinta and Francisco Martos. I was disappointed to see them made saints during this papacy. Do you feel that affects their sainthood? They were surely saints.

23. @2Vermont: totally fair criticism. When I revisited Sheen’s words, I sloppily scrolled to the bottom of the passage. My sincere apologies to Louie for the mistake.

24. Guile seems too harsh to me. There’s no question, of course, that some of his remarks are problematic. But people, both of good will and sound mind, can make problematic statements. So guile doesn’t explain it for me. (Perhaps Sheen’s daringness and creativity as a thinker would be better explanations.)

25. As a former “Sheen Enthusiast” and now newcomer to the apparently well known awareness that Sheen was a modernist, I find myself very grateful for this post. Once again i can laugh at my own folly, thanks to the biting humor employed here to cut to the chase and expose the truth, even if it stings. I’m still chuckling about the “Lifetime Achievement Award” for the fake saints of the Revolution. And I truly held Sheen in such high esteem for years, treasuring my worn copy of “Three to Get Married”, which helped me get through many years of the social decline of modern relationships while I was coming of age. Yes, this dust up has accomplished a lot of good for those of us more recently enlightened to the true state of affairs. I see now what a perfect mascot he was for the Cult of Celebrity that the modern Church was nurturing and grooming, setting the stage for what it’s become today. Reminds me almost of the direct connection between Scientology and Hollywood. I will admit Sheen’s oratory skills and dynamic presence charmed me. To have this exposed is a great grace and gift to me. Now hopefully I will be more prepared to recognize the false prophets and fake miracles that are bound to present themselves as time unfolds. Everyone’s ox gets gored around here, no exceptions! Scales keep falling away…love this group.

26. He accepted the New Mass. Maybe he underwent the brainwashing program.
    Otherwise, how could such a well educated man not see?
    Imagine what it must be like (as I heard from a monk who could no longer say the Novus Ordo mass), when you, as a NO priest, facing the community in the jointly said Our Father… hear them say with their eyes fixed on you “For Thine is the Kingdom and the Power and the Glory”.

27. The point is this: We’ll never know with absolute certainty what happened to Sheen. Not in this world.

    Needless…and let it be said endless…theological speculation, which includes speculation upon another’s interior disposition, has been the absolute bane of the Church even since the time of the Apostles. It needs to stop.

    Best to lay off all that and focus upon the person of Jesus and what He did, what He said, and what He TOLD US we must do as it all has been transmitted to us through the Tradition of the Apostles.

28. NQP: “Needless…and let it be said endless…theological speculation, which includes speculation upon another’s interior disposition, has been the absolute bane of the Church even since the time of the Apostles. It needs to stop.”

    Perhaps I missed it, but I don’t think anyone in this particular combox has discussed anything about Sheen’s “interior disposition”, but of his words and actions (ie. his exterior, manifest disposition). And his words and actions are quite clear….he is a man of the Second Vatican Council, a modernist.

29. Is it possible that certain folks (ie. real Catholics) “canonized” by Francis and any of the other false popes could still be Saints in Heaven? Absolutely. In fact Padre Pio comes to mind. However, canonizations made by false popes are invalid.

30. “Perhaps I missed it, but I don’t think anyone in this particular combox has discussed anything about Sheen’s “interior disposition”, but of his words and actions (ie. his exterior, manifest disposition). And his words and actions are quite clear….he is a man of the Second Vatican Council, a modernist.”

    I would say any given act of formally declaring a deceased person, with metaphysical certainty, to be in the direct vision of the eternity of God is an act of theological speculation.

    That is the essence of the entire “sainthood” process of the Catholic Church as it has evolved. It is an act of theological speculation, NOT part of Tradition or Revelation and therefore NOT crucial to faith in Jesus….and quite disposable.

    The actual fact is, we DON’T KNOW who is in Heaven and who isn’t with absolute certainty. Not a single soul who has ever lived do we know.

31. NBQ: Are you Catholic? Or are you Eastern Orthodox? Because Catholic teaching is that we DO know who is in Heaven when they are canonized by the Church.

32. NobisQuoquePeccatoribus: “Not a single soul who has ever lived do we know.”
    No, YOU and those of your religious persuasion don’t know. We Catholics DO know and we believe what Holy Mother Church tells us.

33. Everyone is Heaven is a Saint—most are not canonized. Some who were canonized may not be in Heaven. The recent “popes” come to mind.

34. Canonizations of the True Cburch are infallible.

35. That is certainly true Clare, it’s all an eye opening experience and in some sense it’s positive and in another sense it’s not. It’s turning me into a hard core cynic.
    I must admit I do miss the old days when we assumed all our priests, bishops, cardinals, and popes were holy.

36. …and Catholic.

37. Having been wary of Fulton Sheen for some time now, that interview was confirmation of how much a man of the council he was. I’m also reminded of how he apparently brought back Bella Dodd to the Church, but instructed her not to name names of the communist inflitrators she helped enter the Church who were (at the time) bishops and cardinals.

    Can’t say I’m a fan of Buckley either, but I’m led to believe he was a Mason.

38. Oh’ and again, the one who goes by, mmf,

    You non-Catholic fool. You demonstrated perfectly well as objectively, that you do not hold the divine and Catholic Faith and just recently. Is your diabolically corrupted mind so short in, “imaginative”, memory oh’ mmf? You no more hold the divine and Catholic Faith than the man called, “Francis”. Yours is a most perverse twist on the pious deception oh’ mmf. Jorge Bergoglio makes his diabolical nature patently evident. You objectively demonstrated a diabolical corruption of your mind, and you did it so manifestly well, as you perfectly dehumanized the other in your midst, you most wretched fool. Who do you really think that you are? A, “Catholic”, and oh’ really now, you poor, poor miscreant fool, mmf. Beg Almighty God for His mercy in forgiveness, as, “perfect contrition”, as there is no Absolution available in the cosmos, you miserable fool. In caritas.

39. I have to give Louie credit for this article. Most people woudnt have the guts to call this spade a spade.

40. Well said.

41. Yes. The truth is not complicated or esoteric. A child who’s reached the age of reason, by 7 years of age, can know truth from falsehood as regards the Holy Faith. Trying to introduce complication or a lack of clarity is a sign of heresy, a sign of replacing God’s Religion and Moral Law with another.

42. Thank you for all your efforts to witness to God and the Holy Faith over the past few years. Can’t remember if you’re a brother or sister.

43. Or did he compromise after the Council in order to maintain worldly power and prestige. There is nothing but compromise with evil since that Council. Lord have mercy. Truth is anathema in false Church.

44. Longtime no hear. God bless you. The frenzy about canonising recent famous persons, priest or layman, because they were famous and recognised for some temporal gifts or actions, is wrong, goes against Faith and reason. It is not of the Catholic Faith. Heroic virtue or martyrdom of a true Catholic in the Holy Faith – no, it’s something wholly other, wholly new, of the world, and for the respect of those who reject God in His Holy Faith and Laws.

45. Nicely done.
    Thanks.
    Maybe he really thought the Council would make some important and
    needed changes to the Catholic Church. Some very good people believed
    that. It was after the Masons and the devil took over that things started
    going wrong. Also after the Council there were huge changes which had
    never been approved in the Council

46. Evangeline – we have to be prudent in our condemnation of the Church and some of the priests and bishops and cardinals who have been guilty of a very grave sin. There are certainly many good and even holy priests, bishops, and cardinals, and nuns as well.

    Also just to point out that taking the name of our God in vain has become as common as breathing in our culture, as even children are heard to say, “My God,” not as a prayer. I believe we must avoid taking the name of God in vain as a way of expressing shock or dismay.

47. Name one.

48. Evangeline, EENS.
    protestantism and the conciliar church are damning.
    You said that Graham brought folks to Christ.
    Did Graham bring folks to THE Catholic Church, i.e., the Church founded by Christ Himself? Did Sheen, for that matter?

    I know it hurts. I get it. It’s that same feeling when we found out Mother Teresa was a heretic. It’s not fun to see the folks we thought as heroes (because we were poorly catechized) turn out to be enemies of Christ.
    May God have mercy on us all.

49. prisca ann–How do you bring folks to the “Catholic” church when what the world believes is the Catholic church isn’t Catholic? A true conversion would have to be the Traditional Catholic Church which is very difficult considering its scarcity. I’m not challenging you. I guess I’m just being practical. The N.O. church is not Catholic. It is a huge stumbling block. Hopefully, those who found Christ through Graham or Sheen eventually found the Truth of Our Lord’s Church.

50. The NO church is not Catholic, amen.
    It’s hard enough converting Protestants to Catholicism without having to explain and undue the damage done by, for example, Jorge.

    My son’s in-laws are die-hard Baptists and “Catholics are all damned”. They are beside themselves with what they see Jorge doing and they believe HE represents Catholicism! “Catholics worship pachamamas!”
    It’s hard.

    Satan is so crafty.

51. Nice to hear from you as well Lynda. Thanks.

52. just brief thought.
    ‘The case’ of Abp Sheen is a good starting point to think about one’s position in light of heavily presence of sedevacantists in this combox. Let’s leave sainthood aside for a while. Try to answer this question first. Was Abp Fulton Sheen member of the Church or not. Try to think for yourself rather than looking for an answer in next combox entry. And keep thinking, see where your answer leads you, what are the implications. If you don’t know the answer realize where you stand.

53. “It’s hard enough converting Protestants to Catholicism without having to explain and undue the damage done by, for example, Jorge.”
    I know, prisca ann. It’s really tough when you have to say “You must convert to the Catholic Church in order to save your soul. That said, I need to explain a little problem which we Catholics have because of the “Second Vatican Council,” etc……
    About the only thing that I can tell them is that satan has attacked the Church from the day in was founded on Pentecost AD 33, and what we are seeing now appears to be his coup de grace. We must, all of us, turn with evermore diligence and fortitude to Christ who expects us to fight the battle no matter what. He will be there to help us. Thanks for what you said.

54. Here is the next “combox entry”: I cannot judge whether Sheen was a member or not. That’s God’s (and the Church’s) business. He appeared to be supportive of VII. Let’s leave aside Sheen’s membership status for a while. Try to answer this question first. Was the Second Vatican Council anti-Catholic and, therefore, demonic? Try to think for yourself rather than looking for an answer in the next combox entry. And keep thinking. See where your answer leads you (maybe into the true Faith). What are the implications (answer: whether you go to Heaven or not). If you don’t know the answer….but wait!—you DO know the answer, don’t you?

55. “I cannot judge whether Sheen was a member or not. That’s God’s (and the Church’s) business. ”

    This is incorrect; the Faithful must always discern – in the external forum – who is with and who is against.

56. MC: “Try to think for yourself rather than looking for an answer in next combox entry.”

    You know what I think? I think you are a condescending jerk. How’s that for thinking for myself?

57. List evidence confirming or denying Sheen’s membership.

58. Sedevacantists are just Catholics. Just a brief thought.

59. Was the Second Vatican Council anti-Catholic and, therefore, demonic?

    V2 is very confusing. It contradicts itself and can be interpreted as contradicting Magisterium but also, in hands of skillful rhetorican, can be presented as non-contradicting just unclear.
    Where this lead me? If I want Church teaching I wont go to V2.

    Now, can we return to my question. Was Sheen member of the Church or not?

60. From your answer I can deduct that you are sedevacatist. Do I have this one right?

61. Oh really? So where is their ‘catholic’ church? In the past? In present, just invisible? What if I want to join? Is rejecting of my faith is all that is required? If I just bow before them I will be fine?

62. Sorry, I don’t want to initiate flame war that leads to nowhere.
    Instead of producing variety of deflecting questions answer (to yourself, if you wish) this one: was Sheen in the Church or outside of it?

63. Once and again, you miscreant fool as mmf,

    You do not hold the Faith anymore than the wolf in Sheep’s clothing did, as so called, “Archbishop Sheen”. “Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio”, makes this perfectly clear for anyone who actually holds the Catholic Faith that it is impossible, as with apodictic certitude, for Sheen to have actually as truly been a Consecrated Bishop of the Catholic Church, you miscreant. Your tacit denial of this demonstrates objectively that you do NOT hold the Catholic Faith, period and end, regardless of your useless as clamorous chatter, you belligerent fool. You demonstrate this now time and again, so called, mmf. Sheen assented to the church of the Antichrist, all dressed up in the metaphysical, accidental forms of Holy Mother Church, while at once perfectly devoid of the substantial form of the Church, while perfectly desolate then of all things Christ Jesus, as His Vicar, His Sacraments, and His Gospel. Who are you mmf, you non-Catholic charlatan? You now tacitly claim that Giovanni Batista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini was Catholic, and as thus he was a true Vicar of Christ, you imbecilic fool, as this is precisely who Sheen assented to. You then tacitly claim that the church which begot the so called, “second vatican council”, was the Catholic Church, established by the Son of God made true Man, as this is the church which the enemy of Christ, as Sheen assented to, you blind and blasphemous fool. This is precisely what you tacitly claim, by your very query of, A Simple Beggar for proof, in the objective realm, that the wolf dressed as a Bishop, as Sheen, was a member of The Christ’s Church. Your intellect is so abysmally darkened that you don’t even know what you ask. May Almighty God have mercy on your soul. In caritas.

64. Apage ‘In caritas’. Apage!

65. Yes, be gone from the church of Antichrist, Sheen’s church as well, oh’ M.C., where you apparently assent as well, on your sure and certain path to your own eternity in Hell, accompanied by that miserable fiend, Sheen, you miscreant fool. May Almighty God have mercy on your soul. In caritas.

66. Oh my goodness, MMF, how you contradict yourself. The man worshipped at the throne of Vatican II – which you claim to reject – and very publicly and emphatically so. What more do you need? Lumen Gentium 16, perhaps, thereby in which he implicates himself as an antichrist WOLF in sheep’s clothing?

67. Of course not! See above.

68. Rejecting the false church of Antichrist would be a good start…

69. Good Tuesday evening ASB,

    It’s becoming a bit confusing, yes. Is it, “mmf”, or is it, “Tom A”, as they both demonstrate unutterably stunning internal contradiction, in much like kind, if you will. I’m just sayin’. God bless and keep you. In caritas.

70. You would do well to reject your faith in the false church and its blasphemous teachings. Start there.

71. The actual Church teaches that we can have a pretty DAMNED good idea of what became of Sheen. He gave no public sign of repentance or the abjuring of his errors for the benefit of his followers whom he was leading to damnation right along with him. The actual Church also teaches – surprise – that CATHOLICS aren’t even supposed to pray for those who (objectively speaking) die outside of the Church.

72. Good morning to you, In caritas. I admit I am a bit shocked at the sudden display of contradiction and a sort of alter-ego by mmf; discernment of spirits is needed.

73. The true Church doesn’t contradict Herself, and God forbid we should place our faith and immortal soul in the hands of any “rhetorician”.

74. From your own comments and in the external forum, M.C., I can deduct that you, yourself, are an heretic.

75. MC, I’m not interested in even considering any of your questions until you lose the attitude. That is the issue here… not whether I am a sedevacantist.

76. Re A Simple Beggar.
    Thanks for sharing your answer.

    So, if Sheen is ‘of course’ not in your church and he is in mine I can assume that we are in different churches. You say that good start for me will be to leave my Church. And where will I go? To yours? What do I see here? Sede are biting everybody around. Calling names those who do not agree with them in the slightest. More, they are fiercely biting between themselves. Like mad dogs. What if I decide to go with Jehovah’s Witnesses instead? They are as in love with what they think as sedes are, but usually more polite.

    No, A Simple Beggar, I will not leave the Church. I accept that there are plenty of sinners here and I’m one of them. Sheen might have been wrong, but he is still in the Church. I guess in your church there are only ‘saints’ (they must be, in a sense, if they survive all that biting). I think if sede were in that crowd Maria Magdalena wouldn’t have any chance.

    I don’t see will on your side (not personal) to listen or to exchange arguments, only aggressive propaganda and bullying. The main reason I stay with the Church is because I believe that there is no salvation outside of Her. I know that you also use Church’s documents to ‘prove’ you are right. This is the same way Our Lord was bullied when on desert. I will do everything I can not to leave and with God’s grace I stay on the Peter’s bark. I only afraid you may deceive many.

77. “The actual Church also teaches – surprise – that CATHOLICS aren’t even supposed to pray for those who (objectively speaking) die outside of the Church.”

    Source?

78. “And where will I go? To yours?”
    The person(s) you are addressing are on this blog to steer people AWAY from the Catholic Church. They pose as Catholics but betray, by their manifest lack of charity, who their real master is: ol’ Nick. Pay them no mind.

79. That’s also my impression. I try not to address individuals as I know nothing about them. To bad that Aka Catholic combox becomes den of sedevacantists of this sort. Hope it will pass.

80. You poor miscreant fool, as M.C.,

    You know not what you write, as edified in this, as your denial of Church teaching, ” I guess in your church there are only ‘saints’ (they must be, in a sense, if they survive all that biting.” Your claim is that you are in the Catholic Church, that same Church established by the Son of God. You live utter contradiction, as the Church established by Jesus the Christ, has ALWAYS taught that, “ONLY SAINTS GET TO HEAVEN”. And so your point again about there must only be, “saints”, in the Church which A Simple Beggar free submits her will unto, as the divine Ordinary and Universal Magisterium of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. You prove what she writes, that the Church she fully submits to is ACTUALLY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, as literally based upon what you yourself have written, and your intellect is so abysmally blind to Truth, that you do not even know what you write. May God have mercy on your utterly darkened soul. In caritas.

81. And oh’ again is it mmf or is it Tom A?, almost indistinguishable as one from another now, in utter anti-Catholic gibberish,

    And so the one who calls himself—“mother most forgiving”—or is it, Tom A?—who fully as utterly dehumanizes as if Lucifer himself, the other human person in his midst, as literally calling them a machine, and building a rhetorical argument to support that diabolical perversion of the mind, as a, “bot”, just a few days ago on this blog, and you, that same person who did that, is now actually as literally staking the claim that the precious few who do not spew diabolical rhetoric as from their Prince of this world himself, rather only as exclusively use Ordinary and Universal Magisterial teaching to witness the Truth, are the same people who demonstrate, “lack of charity”, in the very words spewing from your diabolically corrupted mind???? Precious none of this can be made up, rather it can only be borne witness to. The Hell that awaits you should you not repent in perfect contrition, causes a true Catholic to shudder in fear for you. Amen. In caritas.

82. Prove your accusations mmf. You are a LIAR and your father is the Father of Lies. Prove your claims using the same holy and divine Magisterium which you continue to affront. You cannot, you miscreant imbecile, as you continue your sure as certain personal path to Hell. Amen. In caritas.

83. Surely the question is, being baptised into the Holy Catholic Church, does one adhere to the Holy Catholic Faith or not?

84. Like I said: some here pose as Catholics.

85. Oh’ and again, the one who goes by, mmf,

    You non-Catholic fool. You demonstrated perfectly well as objectively, that you do not hold the divine and Catholic Faith and just recently. Is your diabolically corrupted mind so short in, “imaginative”, memory oh’ mmf? You no more hold the divine and Catholic Faith than the man called, “Francis”. Yours is a most perverse twist on the pious deception oh’ mmf. Jorge Bergoglio makes his diabolical nature patently evident. You objectively demonstrated a diabolical corruption of your mind, and you did it so manifestly well, as you perfectly dehumanized the other in your midst, you most wretched fool. Who do you really think that you are? A, “Catholic”, and oh’ really now, you poor, poor miscreant fool, mmf. Beg Almighty God for His mercy in forgiveness, as, “perfect contrition”, as there is no Absolution available in the cosmos, you miserable fool. In caritas.

86. Yes Tom A/ mmf, you do. God have mercy on your non-Catholic soul. In caritas.

87. Prove your accusations mmf. You are a LIAR and your father is the Father of Lies. Prove your claims using the same holy and divine Magisterium which you continue to affront. You cannot, you miscreant imbecile, as you continue your sure as certain personal path to Hell. Amen. In caritas.

88. M.C.:

    Where is the Catholic Church?

    Members of the Catholic Church are those who are baptised, profess the faith, and submit to the Roman Pontiff. Not a fake “pope” who is a heretic, by the way. That’s where the Church is.

    There is a quote attributed to St Athanasius: “they have the buildings, we have the faith”. If it was true in the times of the Arian heresy, it is certainly true now. That’s just the reality.

89. M.C.:

    “I don’t want to initiate flame war that leads to nowhere.”

    Well it’s usually the anti-sedes who initiate flame wars… all the sedes do is try to mop up all the false accusations and correct the heretical statements made by the initiating anti-sedes, and the anti-sedes don’t like being corrected so they throw more stupid accusations like sedes are all bitter and proud and schismatic etc etc etc. That’s why they lead nowhere, because the anti-sedes have already made their mind up that they don’t want to listen… even to the copious amounts of Church teaching that the sedes put right in front of them.

90. M.C.:

    “was Sheen in the Church or outside of it?”

    Fulton Sheen was all gushing about the heretic Mason John XXIII, he was fully supportive of Vatican II with its heresies of ecumenism, religious liberty, collegiality, and that the Catholic Church is only a part of a larger “Church of Christ”, he said and participated in the Novus Ordo Missae, and he spoke very favourably of the heretic Teilhard de Chardin. Doesn’t sound like the Catholic Church to me.

91. Dear M.C.,

    The reason that your church is not the Catholic Church is that it preaches a new gospel, has new Sacraments, a new “Mass”, new theology, a new catechism, a NOVUS ORDO to EVERYTHING – even a new Sr. Lucia of Fatima. They left NOTHING untouched and this makes it a NEW RELIGION. St. Paul tells us that if even AN ANGEL were to come preaching another gospel we are to reject him. The Pope cannot be an heretic, much less promote the worship of idols (ala Pachamama). He cannot tell the Faithful that Communion is permitted for the divorced and remarried. He cannot tell the world that atheists can go to heaven. No one can be at once a Catholic and an heretic as heretics are outside of the Church, de Fide. Do you believe that Protestantism also leads to heaven? Do you believe that people have the right to religious freedom? Those are only two examples of beliefs you likely hold which, along with sins, will earn you a nice, hot, tortuous cubby hole in hell. Now I don’t wish this for you or anyone, so please: do not die in this state of willful ignorance or false obedience, whichever it may be. At least read through the comment sections of past articles, takes some notes, explore what the Church and Her authentic Popes and Magisterium have always taught, and PRAY for Truth. Don’t just sit there all comfortable as the chaos swirls around you. There IS chaos and confusion because something is VERY WRONG.

92. Where is YOUR church, mmf? You don’t believe exactly as he does now do you? You are very wicked indeed, as evidence by your blatant and malicious contradictions.

93. M.C.

    I bully no one, and we MUST get our teachings from the true Church and her authentic documents. Where else can we get the Truth? Opinions are not Truth as by their very nature they contain doubt. Your church places affronts to Almighty God daily – 24/7/365 and you can’t SEE this? Humble yourself just a little and ask GOD to open your eyes, for time is very, very short and eternity is very, very long. May God have mercy on you and me.

94. M.C.:

    You’re getting confused as to membership of the Church. To be a sinner does not revoke your membership of the Church, otherwise none of us would a be a Catholic. A Catholic in the state of sin, particularly mortal sin, is a dead member, but a member nonetheless. To be a HERETIC, on the other hand, and you’re out.

    Pius XII said, in Mystici Corporis: “not every sin, however grave it may be, is such as of its own nature to sever a man from the Body of the Church, AS DOES schism or heresy or apostasy”. That’s why so many here are saying that Fulton Sheen (for example) is out because, being a very intelligent man, and having full knowledge of what the Church taught before Vatican II, he assented to the heresies of Vatican II and all that came afterwards. We cannot judge his soul, which only God can do, but we can make observations as to a man’s words and deeds, and since Vatican II is doesn’t look good for him. I hope for his sake that he repented on his death bed. May God grant us all the grace of a happy death.

95. Librorum: Well it’s usually the anti-sedes who initiate flame wars
    Wrong. Just look at “Aka” comments. Whatever the subject of main article is sedes keep coming out with they provocative statements (quite like Luther did) with hope that somebody answer and then, most of the time ignoring what that poor soul said, follow next provocations but this time with names calling. Eventually there is just names calling… until next post.
    If nobody reacts they turn against themselves.

    At least this is my observation so far.

96. Well, thats an interesting assessment MC given you (an anti-sede) were the one who firstbcame in here with the condescending attitude towards the sedes.

97. A Simple Man, Librorum,
    I think I get your point. Our point of view on present situation in the Church is, probably, similar. We recognize that “strange” thinghs happen. Positions seemingly contradicting Church’s teaching are rampant, people sometimes treat her like a social club, knowledge of Magisterium use to replaced with ad hoc created sermons etc. I think we can agree on that in general. Where we differ is reaction to situation.

    As I see it sedes don’t want to have anything common with “the others’ or at least this is what they say. They grabbed Magisteriuim with they understanding of it and run away from ‘NO sect’. Let’s assume for a minute that they really have the Ch. teaching right. Is that enough? No, it is not. While running from modernists they left the Church.

    As I see it the Church was indeed infested by modernists (and others). Those heresies are among us. I don’t want to follow them as much as you don’t but I wont leave the Church. That is if God’s grace prevent me from doing that.

    Now, who is right? You or I?
    I’m no scholar, I did some reading, some research but in many details I’m not expert at all, and yet I’m convinced that sedes are outside the Church, not other way around. Why? Crisis in the Church was pronounced long time ago by many. Agree? Pay attention to meaning of the word ‘in’. As an example: Our Lady of Akita spoke about bishops vs bishops, not about true bishops against false ones. Apostasy in the Church will start from the top – it will start within, wont come from outside. I can go on and on, and believe you can make even longer list. On the other hand we have the warning about false prophets…

    The point is that while mother Church is pure, people are not (with one exception, ant this is mot pope I’m speaking about). This people’s property is clearly visible inside the Church. I do not support errors, but because they exist I want leave.

    If you are right… then there is no Church anymore. You have teaching of past and… nothing else. No churches, no public worship, no sacraments (I refer to somebody’s claim that after ’58 there is no new priests). So sede are just group of people with specific attitude. Nothing else.

    No sir, if you are sede you are outside the Church. I know you can point out to some words in documents and argue that you are right… but you are not. Come back. I know it wont be easy. I’ve known couple of JW, couple of protestants that turned away from what they were told in their sects. Only few returned – hatred to Catholicism was rooted so deeply.

    You’ll have my prayers tonight.

98. I did. I tried to read some comments and just couldn’t stand this constant sede provocations. True, I skipped most when I noticed that your goal is not discussion but provocation and left with almost nothing to read.
    I may be wrong though and because of that you may call me non-catholic or names. I don’t want to prove I’m not a camel.

    I thought you are not interested in what I write until I became sede 😉

99. “If you are right… then there is no Church anymore. You have teaching of past and… nothing else.”

    In addition to the history of the Church and the body of teaching which I can access on the net, I also have the Rosary and the conviction that Christ will resurrect His Church. I must wait faithfully till then. I will.

100. Sedes are not outside the Church and they don’t hate Catholicism. Did you not read what I posted earlier:

     “Members of the Catholic Church are those who are baptised, profess the faith, and submit to the Roman Pontiff.”

     We are simply Catholics who, following the teaching of the Church, do not recognise heretics to be pope.

     The ones that are outside the Church, and who hate Catholicism, are those who have inflitrated positions of authority in order to impose a new religion. Sedes want no part of the new false religion, we’re just Catholics.

101. M.C.

     I was once ignorant of the “mere” documents of which you speak, and about the meaning of “Magisterium”. The difference between you and me is that once I became aware of them (Cbrist’s Voice), and actually READ them, I immediately assented to the teachings therein, as we MUST in order to be or to perhaps become, Catholic. Now the journey to that point was a delicate and stepped process which I now recognize; my hope for you is that you, too, are on that same journey to Truth. Right now you are simply regurgitating what amount to nothing more than worthless opinions spoken among “conservative Catholic” circles, and I already know them well. Satan has you by the nose, brother. I can appreciate the sentiment, but any prayers are wasted energy. Akita is a false apparition – behold Satan as an angel of light. You cannot outsmart him, M.C. Better hurry now and begin reading some of those truly Papal “documents”; afterall it is CHRIST speaking to you. Also read John’s 1st Epistle.

102. “Sticks and stones…”, M.C. It’s true that most adults are little 5-year olds in adult bodies. If your destiny is hell then you ain’t heard nothin’ yet. Beg GOD for the Truth and start now.

103. Thank you for your voice if reason.

     I am a convert so we may be missing something. Isn’t sainthood official confirmation by the Church that one is in heaven?

     Am I seeing sinners loudly declaring that this prelate with verified miracles to his credit and a life dedicated to God can’t possibly be enjoying the beautiful vision?

     I’m not saying he is beyond purgatory at this point but isn’t making the judgement that he can’t possibly be in heaven a grave sin?

     Seems to me some crazy presumption from a gallery of sinners with scant hope of heaven themselves.

104. Just how many people would you say found the rare “True Lord’s Catholic Church” without first thing entering the heretical conciliar church?

105. MC: “I thought you are not interested in what I write until I became sede ”

     No, that is not true. What I *did* say was that I wouldn’t consider your original question(s) until you lost the attitude. But as anyone can see, you haven’t. You are still the one trying to provoke with your condescending attitude. I posted to you in this last reply because I was calling out your hypocrisy and your lies .

106. I would agree with your brief thought. Nothing in Tradition suggests that that it isn’t. It is the only reasonable perspective one can have with regards to Bergoglio at this present time. Indeed, I’d say sedevacantism probably applies to the overwhelming majority of all episcopal sees now.

     That being said, I’ll add my own brief thought: sedevacantism, while it is a Catholic position, will not extract the institutional Church from the mess it is in with an apostate regarded as Pope of Rome. Not it alone, anyway. The ultimate problems run much deeper, consist of an admixture of things theological, philosophical and hermeneutical, and find their origins much further back in history, further back than the Modernism which burst forth at Vatican II, and I dare say even prior to the Protestant revolts of the 16th century.

107. ”
     MC: “I thought you are not interested in what I write until I became sede ”
     No, that is not true.
     ”

     I know, I know. That’s why I put ‘wink’ at the end of that sentence.
     As per my attitude… As said I wont bow. I hope I did not insult anybody personally, that was not my intention at all. I can talk to heretics and schismatics and atheists and anybody with the goat to bring them to Church. My way may not be perfect. Oh well. I don’t intend to change this ‘attitude’.
     I don’t think this subject is worth discussing anymore.

108. As somebody quoted above. Yo can have everything outside the Church except salvation.

109. I wrote what you posted. You do not hate Cath. explicitly. You even say you are Cath. But by hatred, you can call it emotions, that are displayed here against members of the Church painted picture is different than words.

     Now,
     “Members of the Catholic Church are those who are baptised, profess the faith, and submit to the Roman Pontiff.”

     This is true what you said. Just look at sede, you have to baptized yourselves as you don;t have priests (with few that are still alive). Agree such baptism can be valid and licit. Faith – I leave it aside for now. Pontif – you have no pope to submit to and I don’t see how you ever will have one. Not impossible, Just I I can’s see how new, true pope arise in your religion and how will you distinguish him from false prophet.
     You do not submit to Roman Pontiff but to idea of Roman Pontiff – and then you do as you fit because you can change idea at will. I believe you are trying to do right thing though but you trust yourself too much.

110. I understand. How do you address contradiction I described above – that all bad things will happen within the Church not outside of it? I leave Akita subject for sometime later unless you say that every prophecy speaking about corruption inside the Church are false.

     If you think you can go away and taking (stealing?) teachings you do not submit to the Church (as you think you are). I predict that if you, as a group, survive for longer time many branches of sede will appear, each claiming to be true Catholic. Exactly like it happened to protestants.

     So even if you relay on true documents your conclusions are wrong because they lead to absurdum: destroy the Church to save it. When Our Lord was tempted on desert, he was temped with the words of the Scripture. I can easily imagine Mr “In caritas” writing all the insults to Our Lord who, in his, opinion rejects Scripture.
     I heard advice once (not in religion context): don’t believe everything you think. This is good advice.

     I will refresh first letter of John when I have more time, cant catch what are you referring to from memory.

     And one more thing. I don’t follow any “conservative Catholic” circles, I’m not even sure what exactly you mean by that. I do some reading but I think for myself, at least I try to. I try as honestly as I can, realizing I’m not smart enough to have an answer for every question, but I have no doubt where the Church is, even if she is in seemingly bad condition.

111. “The ultimate problems…find their origins…prior to the Protestant revolts of the 16th century.”

     Such as…?

112. MC: “My way may not be perfect. Oh well. I don’t intend to change this ‘attitude’. I don’t think this subject is worth discussing anymore.”

     So, in other words, you’ll continue to be condescending and provocative to sedes despite the fact that you came in here accusing sedes with being the provocative ones.

     Yes, I can totally see why you wouldn’t want to continue *that* subject given it would continue to highlight your hypocrisy and deceit.

113. Still waiting on those “origins” which pre-date the Prot revolt. Let me help you here. Those origins were HERESIES which Christ’s Church ultimately condemned. There was NOTHING wrong with or in the Catholic Church.

114. Dear M.C.,

     Do you submit to everything that your Pope Francis teaches? If he is your Pope, then in conscience you must.

     The Church is the persecuted, not the persecutor; in other words She doesn’t persecute Herself and that is exactly what you have going on there if it is the true Church, which it is not.

115. You seem sincere, M.C., but there is so much about the Catholic Faith that you don’t know nor understand. I’m not saying that to be condescending; it’s just simply the truth. I was once where you are, having similar opinions over the years. We don’t save our soul with our opinions, we save our soul by thinking with the mind of the (true) Church. The actions taken by this false church of yours for 61 years now have all been long condemned, as in those who do such things are ANATHEMA (condemned), and “by their fruits you will KNOW them,” so that should tell you something…

     Your Pope blasphemes God daily, and often the Blessed Virgin Mary as he has done today. A true Pope is incapable of blaspheming God nor has a true Pope ever done so. The Church you hold on to has changed EVERYTHING, and its Pope blasphemes. Logic and reason along with GOD’S GRACE should tell you that what you have there is a new religion, not the Catholic religion. Per St. Thomas Aquinas, truth is found when we conform out intellect to the reality that IS. Please look up the definition of cognitive dissonance and think about that.

116. M.C.,

     From your above comments, you say you have “no time” to read Papal documents, Councils or Scripture.

     Well, here’s a red pill.

     Why then, do you waste time in forums? Is that more important? Your sorry “reasoning” shows your lack of study, and it’s quite frankly pathetic, and like ASB pointed out, it’s just a learned mishmash of clichés. You are presently running with manifest gross heretics, and calling them “the church”. Then you actually have the nerve to turn around and accuse others of leaving that so-called “church”. You couldn’t even so far as define what the Church even is.

     Please, stop wasting your valuable time in forums, and others too, and spend that time reading those important documents and Scripture. There, you will learn something, and then may have something to say.

     Until then, don’t try to “help” anyone, or lecture anyone on how to be Catholic. True words are born of pain.

117. A Simple Beggar,

     Do you submit to everything that your Pope Francis teaches? If he is your Pope, then in conscience you must.

     No. Primo: Francis is not Pope, secundo: I do not ‘must’ submit to everything he, or anyone else says if he contradicts Magisterium. You said: A true Pope is incapable of blaspheming God. We may dive into semantics here but I disagree. Yes a pope wont do such a thing but he is definitely capable of it. What I mean is if he can speak and if he does have free will. He if physically capable of commuting any sin. I he decide to so Holy Spirit wont stop him. If you say “he is incapable” I understand that he submitted himself completely to will of God and has His protection, which means support do do right things not limitation to his free will.
     Thus your “incapable” does not mean “impossible”. I hope you understand what I try to say (doesn’t mean you have to agree), if not we can discuss in more detail.

     We don’t save our soul with our opinions, we save our soul by thinking with the mind of the (true) Church.
     No disagreement from me here,

     there is so much about the Catholic Faith that you don’t know nor understand
     nor here.

     Now, let me ask another question. Do you know and understand everything about the Catholic Faith? Do you? Without meaning any offense, I say I doubt. If so, does your categorical statements bear little less weight? There always can be something you don’t know, what can flip your opinion upside down. (Not sure if you are familiar with work of Goedel in mathematics – this seems to be similar issue).
     To follow that thought, do you think all saints, or anyone did posses full knowledge? Did St Robert Bellarmine knew everything? If not how can he be a saint? Do you reject his sanctity?

     The Church is the persecuted, not the persecutor; in other words She doesn’t persecute Herself
     True again. But… to be short. Apostasy is foretold to start at the top of the Church. It means it will start among Her children. She does have supernatural protection and wont be harmed but her children can be harmed. Going back to thought from previous paragraph – if you, lets say you are still member of the Church (no personal) say,: I don’t trust this supernatural protection (not explicitly of course) and I will study and study and learn everything about the Faith and then _I_ decide what the Catholic Church is and what not – how does it sound to you? Does it ring the bell?

     Children of the Church will revolt (as they always did) and it will be ‘family matter’, inside. It happening now. Don’t run away, stay in the Church and share your knowledge for common good for Her good, not against Her.

     I have similar thought about ‘new religion’. I like this quote that today Church and anti-Church occupy the same space. I humbly try to stick to Tradition as much as I can.

     I don’t doubt in your good intentions either. I just think you’ve chosen wrong path. You believe too much in what you think.

     Sorry for lengthy posts. I try to explain why I think you are wrong. Many areas are, and will stay uncovered. That is the main reason I insist to answering simple questions without addressing anything else. How do you cope with contradiction about apostasy growing up within the Church. I your understanding this is simply impossible.

     And few words to james_o:
     James_o thank you for your opinion about me. You say I have not enough knowledge to be on this forum (btw, this is not “forum” this is just combox). That may be true that I don’t have knowledge you require and this certainly is issue with most of us here. My advice to you will be to simply ignore my posts or convince others not to discuss anything with me what is unworthy of your time. Limit yourself to personal insults that will be enough for me to disappear.

118. MC, my advice to you is to study study study. Study Catholic sources pre V2 only. Read the Church’s history, read the papal documents, read the pre V2 Councils’ documents. Read pre V2 Church approved theologians. The 1917 Code of Canon Law, the Catechism of Trent. Once you have a working knowledge of those documents, then you will have the tools needed to see if Vatican 2 is rupture or continuity. Even though I disagree with several people on this blog, it is apparent to me that those individuals do know the actual Catholic Faith. We just disagree on certain interpretations. This disagreement is natural and not unexpected since there is no Pope. Take no offense, but it is very apparent to many readers here that you have not taken the time to get to know the Catholic Faith and have been influenced by the Novus Ordo false church more than you imagine.

119. Tom A,
     I cant argue your advice. I’m obliged to deepen my knowledge of the Faith. Sources you suggests are the one I usually use but also I do not reject a priori everything post V2 because I do not believe the Church ceases to exist after V2 or that went hidden to catacombs. Yet, even if learning about faith is a duty I believe that at some level
     you can relax. one: your mental capabilities are what they are, two: extensive study can interfere with other obligation of your state. Then escape into books can be sinful. Like with study of Holy Scripture. There are so many levels, you can discover new elements in well known parts. People are spending all the time they have to examine the Church interpretations, historical context, linguistic context etc. I find that fascinating, yet realize I can not do the same. Does it mean I’m outside the Church?

     I don’t follow what you, sede, agree or disagree on but I understand that differences can and will exist, there is no problem here. You are surely aware about great theological debates from the past. In them one side held and defended wrong position (hint: non -Catholic) – this is obvious. Still both sides stayed within the Church. I know that situation today is not the same but some similarities exist.

     Take no offense, but it is very apparent (…) that you have not taken the time to get to know the Catholic Faith and have been influenced by the Novus Ordo false church more than you imagine.
     I take no offense at all. You mention V2. You are only guessing what my position re V2 is. Same way I guess what your position is but I don’t want to open yet another topic.

     I indeed can be influenced by NO as I was in it for long time but wonder where in, my posts you see that influence. Anyway, what I’m interested in is how do you rationalize apparent contradiction that apostasy will start within the Church. By what I understand you (again sede, not you personal) hold that if somebody holds position leading to apostasy is automatically outside the Church.

     — —
     Sorry folks, my posts are rather lengthily. I think combox is not a good place for such elaborations. It has to change. I try to address objections raised by you but really I’m interested in your answer.

120. MC, I too was once where you were. You will find at some point in your studies that what came before V2 is not what is taught after V2. At this point you will have a decision to make that only you can make. Trust the V2 authorities which you will see have taught error, or reject their authority. The first option will lead to self deception and holding an internal contradiction. The second will lead to being an orphan and mystery.

121. M.C.

     Some statement I made were poor and incomplete explanations because it was not the best time for me to be replying. That being said, there are people reading here who are seeking the Truth, and don’t presume to have found it yet. Only through humbling ourselves in realizing that we are nothing and know nothing, exposing and ridding ourselves of any sins we may commit to which we are blind, and incessant prayer to God and the Blessed Virgin that they might open our eyes and lead us to the Truths of these matters do we even have a chance. I’m not the one thinking for myself or with the thoughts of other mere fallen and blind humans, you are. We MUST look to what the actual Church teaches and Her Popes (pre-Vatican II) for the answers because She is our mother and all Truth flows from Her.

     That being said, enough with the accusations of others being outside the Church because you say so. Enough with the opinions. If you or anyone is going to refute anything, you must PROVE it.

     If you believe Benedict is Pope, then PROVE that he is NOT an heretic and is the actual Pope. You cannot as an heretic cannot be Pope and there has never been an heretic Pope, and for one the only Vatican Council of the Catholic Church (I) says so, and if anyone has the time to REPEAT the proof that has already been posted here ad nauseum please do so as I don’t have time at the moment. A simple search, “heresies of Pope Benedict” will prove that he is an heretic.

     You must give proof of your position, or please don’t waste your time with such long comments containing only your opinion (doubt). Souls are at stake and you could very well unknowingly be the cause of the loss of at least one of them by confirming them in their error. You admit lack of time or inclination, rather, to study; you, then, need to step back and examine your priorities. Time can always be made for what is important to you, and what could be more important than the Truth, being that your soul depends on it? “I was busy with work,” is not going to fly at your Judgment.

122. MC, while my differences with ASB can run deep and appear nasty and vile, I do know that he understands the Catholic Faith as taught prior to 1958. Do not be scared of discord between sedes on matters of discipline. It is the natural result of there being no Pope. As ASB said, if it is important to you, nothing will be able to stop you from searching for the Truth. Be warned, the Truth can be extremely inconvenient.

123. OK. I think we progress no more. Let me tell you what I tried to do, and why.

     If you or anyone is going to refute anything, you must PROVE it.

     This is exactly what I intended to do showing that sedevacantism leads to absurdum. My goal was not to focus on particular elements of sede reasoning but to look at the whole thing.

     To explain it I use analogy from mathematics. I like to use math as it evokes no high flying emotions.

     Assume that I know only basic math, only addition and subtraction. Those I understand pretty well. You, on the other hand, are much more advanced, you know quadratic equations and trigonometry and can flawlessly transfer tensors between frames. Now, you provide me theory that I do not understand but I see that result of that theory is 2+2=5. Based on my knowledge, way inferior to yours, I can say your theory is wrong. I can not pin the error, but I know that 2+2 is 4 not 5.

     This is what I tried to do here. I asked about output that is, or at least seems to be wrong, namely: prophecies predicting fall inside the Church not outside (here is handy link from today https://www.gloria.tv/post/673ibNxZXgdFAatk2HxWXtwXD). No one answered to this.
     Another output of your theory is that – practical conclusion – Church ceases to exist, or Her properties changes dramatically in 1958 (or whatever date you choose). This is what I see, and this is what I asked to be explained. I don’t want to discuss V2 or B16 or any other element of your theory. I want to hear what you say about output contradictions. I did not get any answer. Instead I hear something like that: M.C. you know nothing, go get study our theory and when you accept it, then we can talk about V2 and B16. I’m not buying this. I know you err somewhere in your thinking otherwise there would be no contradictions.

     To be honest I know more than simple addition. I can construct ‘proof’ that 2 + 2 = 5 myself. There are many ways to do it. Simple one is to introduce division by zero. Of course this zero will be hidden and the more complicated functions I use the harder it will be for you pin the error. But if you think clearly you don’t need to to be fluent in all branches of mathematics, you just look at output and say:”This is wrong” because 2+2=4 not 5 like my theory says.

     There is more about sede that ‘doesn’t feel right’ but I see no point rising it up. It leads to nowhere. I only hope that silent readers of this combox, if they are still here, don’t fall on your massive propaganda.

     Here is another link from today that shows option for Catholics who care about faith in present crisis. (I didn’t read it myself yet and this is not recommendation but only example. I don’t afraid to show it because of the author, who’s got my confidence. His followers not so much though, but this is different story.)

     Wish you all well, and will pray for your return, that you can use your knowledge to save people not to mislead them like you do now even if intentions are pure.

     Don’t believe in everything you think.

124. I don’t have the time to waste in futile efforts to even begin to explain to someone such as you why you are dreadfully deceived. You aren’t interested in the Truth; you’re only interested in your own thinking, commonly-held opinions and the likely false prophecies which you hold on to to in order to justify your position. I could sit here and refute your position using pre-“Vat II” prophecy and Scripture alone, nevermind the authentic Magisterium but it would be to no avail. Without the Grace of God neither I nor you can see the reality as it is. May God have mercy on your soul.

125. It’s naughty to flaunt one’s mathematical prowess. Far from doing so, a mature mathematician would feel comfortable in his own skin and not need to offer an example from tensor analysis—a subject included under the umbrella of advanced mathematics—to those uninitiated in that field. I here presume that some on this blog would fall into that category. Blessed Mother, pray for us sinners.

126. The conciliarist’s “saint” John Paul II had an opportunity to confront various indigenous people regarding the demonic elements found in their indigenous religions. He NEVER said a negative word about any of those elements. This was his opportunity to bring them to Christ and he did nothing—rather, he encouraged them in their error:
     http://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/speeches/1986/november/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_19861129_aborigeni-alice-springs-australia.html

     Bergoglio is just taking his cue from JPII and, what’s more to the point, from “The Council!!!” (i.e. Vatican II). It’s the devil.

127. Ha, ha, ha!
     I don’t think I have any math advantage over you maybe beside that I like math. I used mathematical example thinking it will be emotionally neutral. Still I have reply focused on me and not answering the question.

     Maybe my post was too long and you missed the point.

     I try to say the same in one sentence:
     Sedevacantism is false because it produces false results (contradictions).

128. What the heck? What are you talking about A Simple Beggar? I am interested in Truth. This is why I asked questions. Why do you avoid an answer?

     I didn’t ask you to refute my positions (or rather what you think my positions are), I asked you to defend yours explaining obvious, imo, contradictions.

     This is pathetic. I suspect you don’t think at all, only repeat what was put into your head and what you think is true (again, not personal but all sede oriented). All your replays are attempts to drag me into your program where you have ready step by step procedures. You are unable to operate outside of that knowledge. I suppose time is needed for you to start see again.

     No grudge. Saying truth that is what I’ve expected anyway. Wish you the best (personal).

     M.C. out.

129. Tom A, once and again, as again and again, demonstrating that you simply cannot hold the Catholic Faith,

     You said this about ASB: “MC, while my differences with ASB can run deep and appear nasty and vile, I do know that he understands the Catholic Faith as taught prior to 1958. Do not be scared of discord between sedes on matters of discipline. It is the natural result of there being no Pope.” Your differences with her, as ASB, are objectively demonstrative of one who holds the divine and Catholic Faith, as ASB, and one who simply cannot hold the Catholic Faith, as you, Tom A. ASB is NOT A, “SEDE”, rather she is a Catholic who understands that there has been no Vicar of Christ in this world, since the death of the Angelic Pastor, as Pope Pius XII on Oct. 9, 1958, as that simply IS, the reality as it is. Amen. You freely choose to continue to conflate your perfectly miserable opinion, which inherently contains doubt, with Truth, as the divine and Catholic Faith. Those two realities simply CANNOT BE CONFLATED; as your result then is reduced to the infinitely lesser reality as pure doubt, you miscreant fool. Yes, you own that label as a fool is one who continues in his same error after correction time and time and yet time and again and a miscreant is one who affronts the law. Amen. As you blend your own fallible error with Truth, you affront the law, as the divine Ordinary and Universal Magisterium is Jesus the Christ teaching and governing His Church, as it has always been, as it is divine. Amen. Alleluia. You fool as Tom A, you, “sound nasty and vile”, because you are. “You will know them by their fruits”, as commanded the God-Man. “Differences”, simply cannot, “run deep”, in matters deFide, which includes Church discipline, as requiring the same assent of faith, as matters of Faith and Morality, period and end. You affront the Magisterium as taught by Pope Leo XIII in, “Satis Cognitum”, with that vile error of yours’ and again, who taught that the visible Church is known in Her, “Unity of Faith”, and, “Unity of Communion”. There CANNOT BE, ANY DIFFERENCE, in matters of Faith, yet alone so called, “deep differences”, you miscreant fool. Holding the Truth is the only means by which a soul achieves the Beatific Vision. Holding doubt in matters of Faith, Morality, and Church discipline, earn a soul an eternity in Hell, deFide. You defy the very meaning of, “UNITY”, as you suggest, “deep difference”, is not only possible but actually part and parcel with the, “Unity of Faith”, you imbecile. That is not evidenced by one who holds the Catholic Faith, speaking in any sense of the, “Senses Catholicus”, you heathen.

     And you wrote this: “Do not be scared of discord between sedes on matters of discipline. It is the natural result of there being no Pope.” You are an utterly miscreant fool Tom A, as you pen such utterly glib gibberish, but this conflation of error by you with Truth, will cost you your eternal soul, you miscreant fool, as you have been warned time and time and time again. There simply CANNOT BE confusion in matters of Church discipline any more than in matters of Faith and Morality and you have been repeatedly warned of this infallible as Magisterial command, as found both in the Vatican Council teaching, where it was defined and as in, “Ad Apostolorum Principis”. Not knowing or defying Church discipline, as Authored by the Supreme Pastor and Teacher, as ONLY the Vicar of Christ is and thus can do, that is to teach and govern, will buy anyone their eternity in Hell, period and end. Amen. The Christ commanded: He who knows My commands and follows them loves Me, and as I Am in the Father, you are in Me and I in you. You are so far from Truth as you remain in perfect intellective darkness Tom A. You continue to make these utterly miscreant and foolish non-Catholic statements by virtue of your pathetic and hideous neo-pagan fiat and you simply do not even know it, you miscreant fool. Your error is as utterly profound as it is obstinate.

     You continue to fail to see, as the Angelic Doctor taught and the Magisterium has received, the intellect MUST CONFORM AS PERFECTLY to the REALITY AS IT IS, to be truth, you miserable fool. ANYTHING AS EVERYTHING ELSE, is mere as utter deception, you imbecile. That is Catholic Church teaching and you reject that time and again, thus you are not Catholic Tom A. You can play your charade right into your own personal eternity in Hell and it doesn’t change Truth as being that which Almighty God commanded it to be, as the intellect perfectly conforming to the, “reality as it is”. Amen. Alleluia. Whether the, “reality as it is”, relates to matters of Church Discipline, Faith, or Morality, Truth is Truth. Period and end.

     In Truth Tom A, there is no confusion to be had. The Vicars of Christ have protected the Truth and governed Christ Church with their divine Authority given them. The Magisterium is as the Magisterium is. Amen. The Vicars of Christ have spoken, they do not speak again, as Truth CANNOT CHANGE, as He Is a Divine Person, Jesus the Christ. You cannot see because you do not hold the Catholic Faith. It is pure and it is simple. Amen. Alleluia. As Pope Leo XIII taught in, “Satis Cognitum”, the Magisterium would be as noise to those who do not hold the divine and Catholic Faith, as it is perfectly clear to those few who do, and perfectly independent of any intellective gifts which God may have bestowed upon any perfectly miserable creature; as the intellect does not get us to Heaven, the will does, and it must be in charity, as a reflection of Charity Himself, as Deus Caritas Est. Amen. Alleluia. I pray that you assent to the Catholic Faith and discipline before you draw your last breath. God cannot bind His Church to error, as error is opposed to Him. He is the Shepherd who leads His flock and they know His voice and follow Him, as in His divine Magisterium, where He teaches and governs unto the Last Day. Amen. Alleluia. In caritas.

130. Dear Tom A,

     Please explain for us how the Sacrifice will fail, per the prophecy of Daniel, if it hasn’t already, due to 2Thess Ch. 2 having already happened (the Pope being the withholder.)

     Simple logic tells us that the Sacrifice can only fail if there is no Jurisdiction flowing from the only place it can come from: the Chair of Peter.

     In looking at the signs of the times through the Grace of God and the light of Faith, one can see that the time is well nigh to prepare our souls for the Second Coming and Last Judgnent which is to come as a thief in the night. Those attached too much to this world will not want (will) to admit or to see this and thus not be prepared, in reality as in Truth.

     I pray that God has mercy on you and me.

131. Dear Tom A,

     Please don’t misunderstand; I feel absolutely no nasty nor vile sentiments toward you. I do, however, have such sentiments toward all which God hates and that would damn our souls, that being Satan, error and heresy. It is ultimately those things which I address in speaking to you, and I’m certain the same applies for In caritas. War is never pretty.

     You FEEL that because there is no Pope there is no discipline and that Epikeia (Supplied Jurisdiction) applies with no Pope, when IN FACT it cannot be applied to anything touching on the Sacraments.

     I KNOW that because there is no Pope I must obey the Magisterium (Christ’s Voice) LEFT TO US under these horrific circumstances which – being God who knows all things – Christ certainly foresaw on June 29, 1958.

     I’ll stay on the safe and narrow path of obedience and self-sacrifice, avoiding sacrilege and idolatry AT ALL COSTS to me, while praying that you, too, find your way there very soon.

     May God have mercy on us both.

     Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, pray for us.

Comments are closed.