On 25 May, the Remnant – America’s oldest traditional Catholic newspaper – published a plea calling on the College of Cardinals to remove Francis from office.
I have to admit, when a kind reader called my attention to this fact (along with a link and very little in the way of detail), I was genuinely surprised and cautiously encouraged.
I wondered, was the Remnant taking a stand similar to the one long ago taken here?
Has Michael Matt finally concluded the obvious; namely, that Jorge Mario Bergoglio has – after numerous admonishments from theologians, priests, bishops, and cardinals – plainly condemned himself by his notorious heresy and must therefore be to us as a heathen and publican? (cf Titus 3, Matthew 18)
Is the Remnant now joining us in calling on the College of Cardinals to make a formal declaration of this fact for the good of souls, etc.?
If so, it would be a pleasant surprise indeed.
After all, as far as I’m aware, Mr. Matt’s public position on the Bergoglian occupation of Rome hasn’t really changed since he said back in October:
Even in Amoris: Which dogma has Francis officially and unequivocally denied? Name one! You see the problem? One cannot be a public and pertinacious heretic by default, weakness, innuendo or ambiguity.
Well, after having read the article in question, I now realize that by publishing this call for the cardinals to remove Francis, the Remnant has drifted even further away still, not just from me, but from Catholic tradition itself.
The author of the article, Elizabeth Yore, “a child advocate attorney who has investigated clergy sex abuse cases,” details Bergoglio’s mishandling of the Chilean sex abuse scandal involving Bishop Juan Barros and his close association with convicted abuser Fr. Fernando Karadima. (A story that I treated in a post HERE)
Mrs. Yore does an admirable job of making the case that Francis is guilty of leading what amounts to a cover-up that served to protect, not the sheep, but the predator.
The “money quote” and portion of the article under discussion here reads:
The College of Cardinals should immediately convene and remove Francis, the Bishop of Rome for his gross and grave negligence and personal complicity in the systematic flouting and abuse of his own zero tolerance policy causing a scandal of epic proportions brought upon the global Catholic Church and the Chilean Catholic Church. In Francis’ new Motu Proprio Guidelines on Bishop Removal the standard for removal is “In the case of the abuse of minors and vulnerable adults it is enough that the lack of diligence be grave.” § 3. Three years of papal stonewalling and coverup is the definition of grave.
It is easily arguable that the Francis coverup timeline demonstrates overwhelming evidence of a pernicious and wanton breach of ecclesiastic duty to ensure the protection of children and the moral integrity of the episcopacy. For once, will the Princes of the Church protect the little children? Or will they continue to quake in their mitres in the face of the dictator Pope?
For most readers of this space (and one would hope most readers of the Remnant as well) the reason why a call such as this should never have found its way into the pages of any Catholic publication – “traditional” or otherwise – is obvious:
In publishing this passionate plea, the Remnant is leading the naïve to believe that a reigning Roman Pontiff (if you will allow) is somehow subject to the Church’s policies (in this case, Article 1 § 3 of “Francis’ new Motu Proprio Guidelines on Bishop Removal”), and furthermore, that the College of Cardinals has juridical authority over him.
This notion is so irreconcilable with authentic Catholic tradition that one would be shocked to find it published by any one of the many neo-conservative outlets, much less America’s oldest… (you know the rest).
Mrs. Yore is a well-intended advocate whose sincere concern for the victims of abuse is unquestioned, and yet, had she done her homework (never mind the publisher doing his) she would have seized upon the following from the very motu proprio that she cited in her article:
The decision of the Congregation [to remove, or not, a bishop from office] as stated in articles 3–4 must be submitted for the specific approval of the Roman Pontiff… (see Come una madre amorevole – Article 5)
In other words, the “zero tolerance policy” that Mrs. Yore cites for allowing the cardinals to remove Francis has no teeth apart from the Roman Pontiff!
Be that as it may, it is necessary for the sake of clarity to say that no one – not even the entire College of Cardinals – can judge, rule over, much less remove, a reigning pope.
While most akaCatholic readers understand this perfectly well, I can tell you that some do not; i.e., there is good reason to fear that many will fall prey to this erroneous manner of thinking, especially given the presumed credibility of the source.
I have literally witnessed otherwise solid Catholics on my social media feed sharing Mrs. Yore’s article, along with commentary suggesting that the Remnant should be praised for taking such a bold stand.
Yes, it’s a bold stand alright, it’s just not Catholic.
It also perfectly illustrates why Cornelia Ferreira, in a recent post on this blog, called for A New Voice for Truth:
“It is now obvious that formerly traditional papers have lost their vigor,” she wrote, and so a publication like The Catholic Inquisitor is much needed in order to fill the “void in the propagation of Catholic Truth.”
I sincerely hope your new publication gets off the ground and flies Louie.
While watching the wranglings of the clerical sex abuse scandals from a front seat perspective, I realized most Catholics in general, from Voris to Matt , really were clueless about the legal maneuverings of the Bishops and the Cardinals in response .
Only Faithful Catholics like Randy Engel and a few of her friends, legal and otherwise ,knew the stories behind the story they would read in the Catholic and secular press.
What emerged in my own observational opinion , was an institution that valued finance over souls and it’s past indifferentism reflected in the New Order of the Mass , the failure in the Catholic educational system and all the novel forms of evangelization were all just symptoms of the increasing corruption within.
While the majority of Catholic apologists and news outlets continue to make excuses for what has been going on, my hope for your new publication is the continued and widespread hard hitting truth that you post on your blog.
Frank Walker of Canon 212 has given you a big thumbs up too describing you as an “honest man” vs Karl Keating and others.
Wow. He got the seal of approval from that all so important Frank Walker(who? what?). LOL
These are the very same Cardinals who put this ultramodernist in the Seat of Peter. I have no trust that they will remove him. I’ll believe it when I see it. This impostor is exactly where they want him. I applaud Michael Matt for publishing this article even though I doubt it will have any impact. Perhaps, Burke will come forward as the leader for this effort. I’m not holding my breath.
“….the Remnant is leading the naïve to believe that a reigning Roman Pontiff (if you will allow) is somehow subject to the Church’s policies .. and furthermore, that the College of Cardinals has juridical authority over him.”
This is exactly what went through my mind before I read this piece Louie. The Cardinals do not have authority over a true pope.
Let’s see ……..He is a Pope when he wants to be, a Bishop when he wants to be and a poor humble pastor smelling his sheep when he wants to be. When will he be the representative of Jesus Christ on earth? That is the question.
Some clerics believe it or not are recommending in com boxes that people read Ch 13 of the Apocalypse.
and as proven above ………..
Gang is and always was just an ugly TROLL !
Mr. Verrecchio: “Has Michael Matt finally concluded the obvious; namely, that Jorge Mario Bergoglio has – after numerous admonishments from theologians, priests, bishops, and cardinals – plainly condemned himself by his notorious heresy”
Comment: What do you mean by numerous admonishments? Francis has received NO canonical warnings, or “solemn warnings,” which is the form of admonishment he must receive before he can be declared a heretic by the Church.
And even after receiving the required solemn warnings and refusing to amend, the papal office does not become vacant until the Church declares it so.
Father Gianfranco Ghirlanda, former rector of the Gregorian University, studied the past millennia of canonical tradition concerning the loss of papal office. Such an extensive study by a canonist of his caliber is quite rare, and hence his findings should carry great weight. This is what he wrote about the topic in an article published in 2013 by Civiltà Cattolica:
Fr. Gianfranco Ghirlanda: “The vacancy of the Roman See occurs in case of the cessation of the office on the part of the Roman Pontiff, which happens for four reasons: 1) Death, 2) Sure and perpetual insanity or complete mental infirmity; 3) Notorious apostasy, heresy, schism; 4) Resignation. In the first case, the Apostolic See is vacant from the moment of death of the Roman Pontiff; IN THE SECOND AND IN THE THIRD FROM THE MOMENT OF THE DECLARATION ON THE PART OF THE CARDINALS; in the fourth from the moment of the renunciation.”
He went on to explain that the Cardinals do not depose the pope, but only declared the fact of his heresy. It is “from the moment of the declaration on the part of the Cardinals” that the see becomes vacant, NOT BEFORE.
In the case of Francis, there have been no solemn warnings and no declaration from the Cardinals. Hence, he remains pope, as did Paul VI, John Paul II and Benedict XVI before him.
So weird. These Catholics that advocate recognize and resist are the ones always expounding on the idea that we’ve had bad Popes before. The Church survives them. This is exactly the kind of crime and sin that is so unfortunate in a Pope but can happen because they are men. They do remain the Pope, they commit crimes and sins, and they do protect the teaching of the Church. Bergoglio just isn’t the Pope; he massacres the teaching of the Church. What can be done? IDK, sometimes when people are brainstorming they throw out a bad idea, which they did.
This is a very uncheery thought but it goes down nicely w/a little Apocalypse 13. The Church follows in Christ’s Passion, so She does go into the tomb. The tomb, because She’s crucified and DIES and is buried. Are we able to wait the three days w/faith and hope or do we start making stuff up to take Her place. Me, I’m not following any made up garbage; I’m going to stand here and wait and pray. I don’t see a way to get a Pope if there isn’t one now, I think this is it.
Melanie: “These Catholics that advocate recognize and resist are the ones always expounding on the idea that we’ve had bad Popes before. The Church survives them. This is exactly the kind of crime and sin that is so unfortunate in a Pope but can happen because they are men. They do remain the Pope, they commit crimes and sins, and THEY DO PROTECT THE TEACHING OF THE CHURCH.”
Comment: Where did you get the idea that all the bad popes of the past protected the teachings of the Church? Pope Honorius was condemned by the Church as a heretic for NOT protecting the teaching of the Church, and for agreeing with the heretic Sergius. Here is one of the condemnations of Honorius by the 3rd Council of Constantinople:
“After we had read the doctrinal letters of Sergius of Constantinople to Cyrus or Phasis and to Pope Honorius, as well as the letter of the Pope Honorius to Sergius, we find that these documents are quite foreign to the apostolic dogmas, also to the declarations of the holy Councils, and to all the accepted Fathers of repute, and follow the false teachings of the heretics. Therefore we entirely reject them, and execrate them as hurtful to the soul. The names of these men must also be expelled from the holy Church … We anathematized them all. And along with them, IT IS OUR UNANIMOUS DECREE THAT THERE SHALL BE EXPELLED FROM THE CHURCH AND ANATHEMATIZED, HONORIUS, FORMERLY POPE OF OLD ROME, because of what we found in his letter to Sergius that IN ALL RESPECTS he followed his view and confirmed his impious doctrines…TO HONORIUS THE HERETIC, ANATHEMA
Not only did Honorius follow “in all respects” the heresies of Sergius and embrace doctrines that were “quite foreign to the apostolic DOGMAS” and “to the declarations of the holy Councils,” but he imposed silence on St. Sophronius, the Patriarch of Jerusalem, who was defending the true doctrines that these Monothelite heretics denied. That doesn’t sound like a “bad pope” who was defending the faith to me, yet Pope Honorius remained pope until the day he died.
As the case of Honorius proves, the “bad popes” of the past were not limited to men who were immoral, but included popes who agreed “in all respects” with the heretics and who imposed silence the saints who were defending the truth.
I have read about the case of Honorius and I do not believe that he taught heresy. I believe in the infallibility of the Roman Pontiff as have Catholics before me.
In a conference given after his return from Vatican I, Archbishop John Baptist Purcell of Cincinnati related the following question raised at the Council:
“The question was also raised by a Cardinal, “What is to be done with the Pope if he becomes a heretic?” It was answered that there has NEVER BEEN SUCH A CASE; the Council of Bishops could depose him for heresy, for from the moment he becomes a heretic he is not the head or even a member of the Church. The Church would not be, for a moment, obliged to listen to him when he begins to teach a doctrine the Church knows to be a false doctrine, and he would cease to be Pope, being deposed by God Himself.”
Infallibility only prevents the possibility of error when a pope is defining a doctrine to be held by the entire Church. It does not prevent him from erring when he is not defining a doctrine, which is 100% of the time for most popes, including Francis.
But you said the bad popes of the past might have committed “crimes and sins,” but they protected Church teaching. Did Pope Honorius protect Church teaching when he agreed in all respects with the heretic Sergius and silenced St. Sophronius? Of course not. That’s why he was condemned as a heretic by the Church.
Most Popes are fallible 100% of the time. I’m embarrassed for you guys when you keep repeating this. So you and I don’t believe in the same religion and I don’t know that there’s any place to go from there.
Then, according to you, the Fathers of Vatican I are in error because they say the popes have never been heretics. In fact, Pope Honorius was condemned for negligence. He should have done more to suppress heresy, but he was not guilty of teaching heresy himself.
Subscribing to a newspaper won’t make up for refusing to go to Mass on Sundays.
Ignatio, Pope Francis has been warned repeatedly by Louie Verrecchio, Michael Matt, Christopher Ferrara and others, and via several petitions by self-styled Traditonalist leaders. That’s worth like a millon formal warnings from actual Church leaders.
Melanie, I’m sorry to see you thoughtlessly parroting the nonsense others parrot from extraordinarily questionable sources like novusordowatch. It appears the non-Mass-attending self-styled saints in this combox have helped you to exit the Church and stop going to Mass. You should consider how serious this is before you condemn the Novis Ordo Mass and those who attend. Ignatio actually knows what he/she is talking about.
Yes, as soon as a modernist sees NOW, they assume it must be false.
Too bad that the article actually quotes a pre-Vatican II imprimatured book written by a priest who was later appointed as Archbishop of Quebec by Pope Leo XIII and created Cardinal by Pope Pius X.
You call novusordowatch an “extraordinarily questionable source”.
Now how about acting like an adult and providing evidence for what you say?
NOW didnt start their website last week,,,,theyve been around a while.
As we all know here, and as LV has pointed out in the article, a Pope has NO earthly judges and CANNOT be removed by a bunch of Cardinals (I personally doubt if any of them are even valid priests to begin with, but it wouldnt matter regardless).
A pope removes HIMSELF from office via his heresy. The Cardinals, if they gathered, would simply be making that fact official.
Also, The Remnant has become a joke site. I dont know why any Catholic would even bother going there anymore.
Ignatio confuses two distinct situations: a faithful cleric who honestly errs when teaching the faithful, and a heretic or apostate cleric who willfully professes an alien faith. Bergoglio is not erring – he is professing an alien faith.
There comes a time when the refusal of Ignatio to deal with the reality of Bergoglio professing an alien faith will be adjudged to be willful on his part. Ignatio compounds his problem by coming on this website and trying to persuade others that Bergoglio is only making mistakes instead of professing heresy. Since someone else brought up the reality that we will all be judged at some point – if you are wrong about Bergoglio, and the Almighty concludes that given your apparent intellect, you should have realized by this point in his purported papacy that he was a heretic and apostate; that you should have withdrawn your obedience from him; that you should have avoided him; are you prepared to accept this judgment? What defense will you offer?
Here here Rich !
Melanie we ignore the two Trolls ,Blunder and Gang.
They are here to attempt ,to their stupidity, Mr Verrechio and anyone else who has seen read and knows more then themselves. Irrelevant TROLLS.
Again , there are clerics including a retired RC Bishop pointing to Apocalypse 13.
Read the Scriptures , Read Marie Jule JaHenney whom even Fr Ripperger recommends. Read the full message of LaSalette , which speaks of the changes in the Mass and Sacraments. We ARE and have been living it.
Ignatio: Where in the law of the Church is the procedure for administering a solemn warning to the Pope set forth?
Thanks for injecting some sanity to this website’s comment box.
And thanks for this, too.
Sedevacantist, for starters. Has an entire page dedicated to how the “real” 3rd secret of Fatima was revealed on a CD decades after the apparitions. Right. Promotes the writing of Fr. Paul Kramer, whose many prophecies that failed to come true litter YouTube. I can’t believe people fall for this transparently fake nonsense.
You also ignore the requirement to go to Mass on Sunday. Stop trying to convince this poor woman to leave the Catholic Church. It’s not trolling to point that out.
I hope people listen. Most here seem to be embracing an alternate reality where an obvious loon like Pope Michael could actually be taken seriously.
Typo correction………’,……to their stupidity , they attempt to discredit Mt Verrechio and………….’
Why is the question? If they do not like what they read here, why return to mock the blog host and the posters?
The ONLY time I have seen this in person was when a homosexual diocesan Chancellor was sent in by a Bishop to get five persons to sign the property deed of a monastery over to the Diocese. Members of the KoC or “Tarnished Knights of Columbus”, who are basically the stupid answer to Catholic Freemasons , bullied the Traditional Catholic parishioners after Mass who loved the Latin Mass, trying to get them out even though the monastery offered the TLM as a mission church approved by the Diocese and the Diocese advertised it as such. BUT the Bishop went back on the deal AFTER the grateful parishioners poured money into the property and repaired it.
Then in came the Diocesan Chancellor…….along with his KoC stupid thugs who were clueless as to their own cleric’s sexual orientation. They got the deed for the Bishop and the known “disordered” priests took over for the Bishop along with an entire new congregation of mainly grateful Hispanics and old Italians. All clueless.
It was sad. Oddly ,shortly thereafter, two presidents of the local KoC, one after another died.
My point? Gang and Blunder speak exactly like those KoC clubbers.
It’s all about money property and power . That is why a poll was being taken informally in the com boxes of the previous post here.
Ignatio, come on man, tell us the rest of the story. You know it, the part where Pope Leo II corrects the council and removes all the parts where Honorius is condemned for heresy. What Ignatio has failed to tell us is that a Council is worthless and useless UNLESS the Pope ratifies the documents. But this fact does not fit his narrative, so he conveniently left it out for you, Melanie.
Louis, you asked us to share the message about The Catholic Inquisitor on social media. I shared your Catholic Inquisitor promo video on my YouTube channel and it garnered over 1000 views over the weekend. Hopefully you got some more subscriptions out of that. Here is where I posted it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuaJUlObMJE
You havent made a single valid point. Fr Kramer?? Im sure he’s been mentioned there but PROMOTE? Uh, no.
Louie, “A New Voice for Truth” will be a great subtitle for this publication. I’m hoping it wont be too long before you announce that the print edition is in the mail and the E-edition is ready to go. Will your publication be accepting Letters to the Editor? I’m sure many readers will be happy to comment, although I hope these comments will be screened to avoid certain trolls. God bless!
TomA, whoever told you Leo II “corrected” the council by removing the condemnation of Honorius was not telling the truth. Leo not only confirmed the entire council, including the condemnation of “Honorius the heret,” but he personally anathematized Honorius himself when doing so. Here is the account taken from the Catholic Encyclopedia:
Catholic Encyclopedia: “St. Agatho died before the conclusion of the council. The new pope, Leo II, had naturally no difficulty in giving to the decrees of the council the formal confirmation which the council asked from him, according to custom. The words about Honorius in his letter of confirmation, by which the council gets its ecumenical rank, are necessarily more important than the decree of the council itself: ‘WE ANATHEMATIZE the inventors of the new error, that is, Theodore, Sergius …AND ALSO HONORIUS, WHO DID NOT ATTEMPT TO SANCTIFY THIS APOSTOLIC CHURCH WITH THE TEACHING OF APOSTOLIC TRADITION, BUT BY PROFANE TREACHERY PERMITTED ITS PURITY TO BE POLLUTE’.” http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07452b.htm
Melanie: “Most Popes are fallible 100% of the time. I’m embarrassed for you guys when you keep repeating this. So you and I don’t believe in the same religion and I don’t know that there’s any place to go from there.”
Comment: I agree with you that sede-vacantists and Catholics believe in a two different religions, and two different Churches. Catholics believe in the Church founded by Christ and the doctrines it teaches, and sede-vacantists believe in a “church” of their own imagination, which has never existed.
But if you want to know what the Church founded by Christ teaches concerning Papal Infallibility, there is somewhere to go from here. You go to the teaching of the Catholic Church, which is readily available to all. I would recommend beginning with this article on infallibility from the Catholic encyclopedia: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm
But by far the best recourse is the book “The Gift of Infallibility,” which contains the four hour speech delivered by Bishop Gasser to the Fathers of The First Vatican Council. The speech provided the council Fathers with the Church’s official explanation of Papal Infallibility, before their vote on the dogma. It is the most authoritative, thorough, and precise explanation of the doctrine that is available.
If you read the speech what you will realize is that, according to the teaching of the Church founded by Christ, papal infallibility only protects a pope from erring at the moment he is defining a doctrine, not before and not after. And because most popes never define doctrine, it follows that, according to the teaching of the Catholic Church, “Most Popes are fallible 100% of the time.”
TomA, here is an excerpt from Fr. Chapman’s book, “The Condemnation of Pope Honorius,” which contains Leo II’s ratification of the council and his anathema of Honorius, along with Fr. Chapman’s commentary. It also discusses the two other general councils that declared Honorius a heretic.
“24. THE CONDEMNATION OF POPE HONORIUS IS CONFIRMED BY NUMEROUS PONTIFFS AND BY TWO ECUMENICAL COUNCILS.
“The confirmation of the sixth Council by Pope Leo II is contained in a long dogmatic letter to the Emperor, dated May 7, 682. The central paragraph is as follows:
‘My predecessor, Pope Agatho of Apostolic memory, together with his honorable Synod, preached this norm of the right apostolic tradition. This he sent by letter to your piety by his own legates, demonstrating it and confirming it by the usage of the holy and approved teachers of the Church. And now the holy and great Synod, celebrated by the favor of God and your own has accepted it and embraced it in all things with us, as recognizing in it the pure teaching of the blessed Peter, the prince of the Apostles, and discovering in it the marks of sound piety. Therefore the holy and universal sixth synod, which by the will of God your clemency summoned and presided, has followed in all things the teaching of the Apostles and approved Fathers. And because, as we have said, it has perfectly preached the definition of the true faith which the Apostolic See of blessed Peter the Apostle (whose office we unworthily hold) also reverently receives, therefore we, and by our ministry this reverend Apostolic See, wholly and with full agreement do consent to the definitions made by it, and by the authority of blessed Peter do confirm them, even as we have received firmness from the Lord Himself upon the firm rock which is Christ…’
“St. Leo goes on to speak of the heretics condemned at the synod:
‘And in like manner we anathematize the inventors of the new error, that is, Theodore, Bishop of Pharan, Sergius, Pyrrhus, Paul and Peter, betrayers rather than leaders of the Church of Constantinople, and also Honorius, who did not attempt to sanctify this Apostolic Church with the teaching of Apostolic tradition, but by profane treachery permitted its purity to be polluted.’
“It has been sometimes said that St. Leo in these words interprets the decision of the Council about Honorius in a mild sense, or that he modifies it. It is supposed that by “permitted to be polluted” Leo II means no positive action, but a mere neglect of duty, grave enough in a Pope, but not amounting to the actual teaching of heresy. If Leo II had meant this, he would have been mistaken. Honorius did positively approve the letter of Sergius, as the Council pointed out. Further, the merely negative ruling of the typus had been condemned as heresy by the Lateran Council.
“As a fact the words of Leo II are harsher than those of the Council. He declares that Honorius did not publish the apostolic doctrine of his See, and he represents this as a disgrace to the Church of Rome itself, as a pollution of the unspotted. This no Eastern Bishop had ventured to say.
“The anathemas on Pope Honorius have been again and again continued. A few years later he is included in the list of heretics by the Trullan Synod, a Council whose canons were not, however, and could not be received by Rome and the West. But the seventh and eighth Ecumenical Councils did the same, although the eighth Council formally declared that the Church of Rome had never erred. It is still more important that the formula for the oath taken by every new Pope from the 8th century till the nth adds these words to the list of Monothelites condemned : ” Together with Honorius, who added fuel to their wicked assertions ” (Liber diimius, ii. 9). Unquestionably no Catholic has the right to deny that Honorius was a heretic (though in the sense that Origen and Theodore of Mopsuestia were heretics), a heretic in words if not in intention.”
Comment: Now Tom, since you constantly proclaim that Catholics must either accept anything and everything a pope has taught, or else declare that he lost his office for heresy, surely you do not deny the teaching of Leo II, the Third and Fourth Councils of Constantinople, and Nicea II, which condemned Honorius as a heretic, do you? If you practice what you preach, you must either accept that Honorius was a heretic, or else reject all the popes who taught it.
Can anyone here provide a quote from Francis that demonstrates his understanding and belief of true Catholic dogma and teaching?
Not even remotely a K of Anything.
Yor average response is a 500+ word anecdote. The answer to my question is one word: “yes” or “no”.
Do you or do you not go to a Catholic Mass every Sunday?
I’m guessing no. So you’re not Catholic. That’s ok. But it’s not trolling to ask.
Pray the Rosary daily with hope and trust.
The Sorrowful Mysteries have been recommended by saints and Blesseds for this time of betrayals and confusion .
Diito for St Cyprian’s post
Excuse me Blunder Boy?
You’re correct that we do not attend a service in a Diocese where the Bishop has persecuted punished and lied about a priest who called the police and reported a fellow pederast caught in the act.
Melanie can read and does, I am positive you don’t after admitting on the precious thread only Protestants read the Bible…….
Do you? When was your last Confession? were you Confirmed? how old?…………….give us a break here Troll , just maybe you belong to the local Lodge.
Ask the Trolls.
What a mess………
“New FrancisCardinal alleged to have a concubine and children. Well, at least it’s a woman!
The latest potential Bergoglian scandal is breaking. Adelante la Fe is reporting that one of the new Cardinal elects of Pope Francis, Bishop Toribio Ticona, Titular Bishop of Timici and Prelate Emeritus of Corocoro in Bolivia has a concubine and children.
On Twitter, Edward Pentin is reporting that he has requested comment and confirmation from the Vatican.”
A Catholic who does not attend Mass, but does condemn the Pope, the Bishops, all Priests and laity, and denies the legitimacy of the Catholic Church and Her Sacraments. I believe the word for that is “apostate”. Beam in your own eye, sweep.
And you’ve lead at least one person (Melanie) out of the Church. I’m not saying I’m any better than anyone else. But I’m sure not telling Catholics to leave the Church and
you shouldn’t either.
Go on Twitter. Follow @Pontifex. There is one available every single day.
This never happened before. No Pope, or Cardinal or Bishop – certainly not during the days of the Borgias – ever had a secret family and certainly never raped or murdered anyone. Clearly a sign of the end times.
The fact that The Google says otherwise? Obvious Masonic plot.
Well Ignatio, I will add that book to my Summer reading. I find it a little strange that I was born and raised in a Catholic home, went to Catholic school, and I’ve tried to read solid Catholic literature fairly regularly. Yet, instead of having been Catholic all this time, I’ve been a sedevacantist evidently, and I had never even heard of that religion until the last decade, oh and I actually thought we had Popes. It takes quite a good bit of academic discipline studying theology to become a Catholic, evidently. And so you and Bergoglio are Catholics, right? You guys must be wicked smart, I’ll give you that.
#1 I never answered your personal question as to where I go to Mass . I do not know who you are o where you reside Therefore, I did not respond to your personal questions.
I have NEVER told Catholics to leave the Church ,you on the other hand, told them ONLY Protestants read the Bible.
#2You sir have NO CLUE what Church you belong to.
Eat your words Troll
Ignatio: Where in the decrees of the Church has the Church condemned the “error” of sede-vacantism? With regard to this question, I’m not looking for your application of some decree that doesn’t name sede-vacantism, but which you conclude should be applied to the sede-vacantism situation. I’m looking for you to identify a specific Church decree that names the error of sede-vacantism and condemns it.
You see that is the role of the Church. It is for the Church to define doctrine and condemn errors. If the Church has not condemned the error of sedevacantism yet, and the current doctrine of the Church isn’t clear on the point, who are you to come on this web site and declare and define that those who hold the sede-vacantism position have adopted an alien religion and severed themselves from the one true Church of Christ? People like you frequently declare that so-called sedevacantists usurp the authority of the Church when they declare the seat of Peter vacant (I don’t admit that this is what most alleged sedevacantists do) – but if sedevacantism is not a defined error yet, who exactly are you to come on here and claim that it is? Aren’t you usurping the authority of the Church? Do you commit mortal sin by doing so?
This is not an academic question. For instance, for a portion of the history of the Church there were those who held to the doctrine of Gallicanism. It was not until the Council of Vatican I that aspects of this doctrine were condemned. So it was only after Vatican I that those who held to certain aspects of this doctrine could be said to do so to their condemnation. There were other situations similar to this where even Saints “got it wrong” and held positions on certain topics that the Church later rejected.
There is a huge chasm between arguing that those who hold to a certain position should be condemned, and arguing that who hold to a certain position are already condemned.
In these days of mass communication devices we are supposed to believe that Borgolio has no clue that he hired a flamer like fr James Martin as one of the Directors of Communication OR that he hired homosexual monks to design the Vatican Square Nativity display or that Paglia had a homoerotic floor to ceiling mural painted in his basilica by a famous homosexual artist in Italy. He had no clue that Barros was infamous for sodomy despite the letters from Bishops in Chile begging him not to consecrate the man to the Bishopric. He was unaware or thought it fake news that Moniignore Ricca was caught red handed at the airport with a suitcase of kiddie porn even though the Papal Nuncio booted him out of the country for frequenting gay bars and he was caught fornicating with a guard in public. He was unaware of the serious very public pederast scandals of Cardinal Daneels who accompanied him onto the balcony when he was elected .He did not know he was giving an award to a famous abortionist. He is clueless about the population control activities of the UN…..
Yes go to Pontifex and read “his” tweets upholding Faith and Morals !
Here is a Tango Mass hosted by Jorje Borgolio.
Faith, morals and reverence on display.
FYI for those who read how Blunder mocked the fact the disease was on the rise.
When Joseph Scambria heard that Borgolio told a victim of clerical sodomy who then believed himself to be a homosexual he said he thought,”My God they are killing us.”
HIV is on the rise again and there are now superinfections resistant to antivirals.
Look it up since you mocked my statement on another post.
Now about Fatima and how Blunder blundered by his statements that none of these prophecies came true. Our Lady told Lucia that when she saw the strange lights in the sky war would erupt and that it was a punishment from God. Lucia recognized it when she saw the aurora borealis which dipped very low in the hemispheres prior to WW2.
Blunder if you think we are not living in the time of the chastisement , you better start looking at the statistics of properties being sold off due to the massive amounts of pedophilia and clerical sex abuse settlements. Next month a Grand Jury report for six Diocese in PA will be released. Even though statutes of limitations have expired priests are actively being arrested.
Instead of asking people of they go to Mass on Sunday which certainly varies with local and the types of Masses being offered, many are outright scandalous, you should be asking if people pray the Rosary daily . Do You?
Also in the Catholic Encyclopedia:
“It should be noted that he calls Honorius “the confirmer of the heresy and contradictor of himself”, AGAIN SHOWING that HONORIUS was NOT CONDEMNED by the council as a Monothelite, but for approving Sergius’s contradictory policy of placing orthodox and heretical expressions under the same ban. It was in this sense that Paul and his Type were condemned; and the council was certainly well acquainted with the history of the Type, and with the Apology of John IV for Sergius and Honorius, and the defences by St. Maximus. It is clear, then, that the council did not think that it stultified itself by asserting that Honorius was a heretic (IN THE ABOVE SENSE) and in the same breath accepting the letter of Agatho as being what it claimed to be, an authoritative exposition of the infallible faith of the Roman See. THE FAULT OF HONORIUS lay precisely in the fact that HE HAD NOT AUTHORITATIVELY PUBLISHED THAT UNCHANGING FAITH OF HIS CHURCH, in modern language, that he had not issued a definition ex cathedra.”
So, Pope Honorius was not a heretic in the sense we think of when we think heretic. He was guilty of silence, of not proclaiming the Truth when he should have done so. Basically of negligence. Pope Honorius was not a MANIFEST heretic who TAUGHT a false religion/doctrine to the UNIVERSAL CHURCH unlike the post Vatican II “popes”. For those who use Pope Honorius to prove that true popes can be heretics in this latter sense: apples and oranges.
Again, the question of what happens when a pope becomes a heretic came up at Vatican I and the Fathers of the Council replied, IT HAS NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE.
It is interesting to see those who consider themselves faithful Catholics use the case of Pope Honorius the way the enemies of the Church use to use the case of Pope Honorius.
How is it possible to get rid of a heretical Pope? Is there a process?
There is no process because the Pope cannot be a heretic. It is an oxymoron. If the person who claims to be Pope is a heretic, then the See is vacant and a new Pope should be elected. But no one seems to want to do that. The modernists like their heretic pretender and the traditionalists are too scattered to unite behind a plan of action.
Good points showing Bergoglio’s deliberate enabling and promotion of homos.
Ignats, please get your Catholic facts correct. He was condemned by a council as a heretic, but the Pope changed it to a condemnation of negligence. Now if you want to keep parroting anti-catholic agitprop about heretical popes, go right ahead. You are in “good” company with Gallicans, protestants, and other enemies of the Church who spout the same lies you are spouting to attack the de fide dogma of papal infaillibility.
“Cardinals should immediately remove Francis”
They most certainly must remove the imposter pope for the OHC&A Church can only have one successor to St. Peter at a time, not two. Two ‘popes’ cannot both have the Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven & declare infallibility when speaking ex cathedra. Only one can be the Vicar of Christ. It’s beyond time for a Council to be called to declare which one – PF or BXVI – is the true & sitting pope & which is the Marxist imposter.
If BXVI has properly resigned in accordance with Canon Law then he must hand in his papal regalia & leave the Vatican for some other destination. He cannot ditch one half of his papal duties. It’s a shame that he thought he could (or was made to think he could). The Pope is answerable to God – yes a Catholic God – since His Son, the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity founded the OHC&A Church on St. Peter & the First Apostles. It is the only way to get to Heaven & one must never leave it even in its dying breath. We must never disbelieve that Jesus has reneged on His promise to be with His Church until the end of time or has transferred to some distant catacombs which would amount to deceit. His Church must be at all time visible.
Our Lady has promised that the consecration of Russia will take place & Her Triumph will follow which will effect a complete restoration, but only when all seems lost. These facts have been made known to us, but the imposters in the Vatican don’t want us to believe them. It is human to believe that the CC in its present corrupt & sodomitical state is not the same Church as Jesus founded, but it is. These events of the End Times have long been forecast & Jesus Himself said we must endure – those who persevere until the end will be saved (Matthew 24 : 13) Douay-Rheims.
Rephrased question: How is it possible to get rid of the heretical man whom the world sees as The Pope? The College of Cardinals will never declare Bergoglio a Heretic. Therefore, there is no process. Did I get that right?
“Process” that word cracks me up. When something is taken by force/subterfuge/infiltration, it usually has to be retaken by a forceful counter-insurgency. That’s the process. It’s not that traditionalists are “scattered.” It’s that they do not constitute a true Ecclesia Militans. Catholicism is a fighting faith, against the World, the Flesh and the Devil. Hiding out in scattered redoubts in Switzerland, Brazil, and the U.S. for 50 plus years without a single “Alamo moment” or a single “trad” martyr is completely demoralizing and completely disregards the Lord: “Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword. For I came to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And as a man’s enemies shall be they of his own household.” Sounds like multiple opportunities for active, combative strife to me. “Antipope” isn’t a title. It’s a criminal status that requires forceful incarceration/removal.
Melanie, there are many deceived people who claim the Catholic mantle who think that the only time you can be absolutley certain that a Pope is speaking truth is when he is binding the faithful with an extraordinary solemn ex cathedra decree. What they fail to tell you is that the ordinary magesterium is just as trustworthy and all Catholics must assent to it as well as the extraordinary pronouncements. But this fact does not fit their goal of resisting a pope on certain matters and only assenting to those they themselves deem Catholic. Most of the Catholic Faith was never pronounced ex cathedra and was simply taught by the ordinary magesterium. According to the logic of resisters like Ignatio, we can deny dogmas like the Ressurection but must assent to Immaculate Conception since Ressurection was never officially taught ex cathedra. This confusion between infaillabilty and magesterium is purposely promoted by resisters otherwise they would have to admit that they must assent to V2, ecumenism, religious liberty, and all of Frankie’s magesterial teachings. Yes, Melanie. Frankie has declared his heretical tome Amoris Laetitia as magesterial. So Blunder, Ignatio, and Ganganelli should stop worrying about who goes to what mass and start worrying whether they have submitted their will and intellect to that of their “holy father.”
Thank you Lenny B!!!
They deny the dogma of infallibility and then tell me that I am not Catholic but a sedevacantist. That I just made up a religion in my own imagination and coincidently hundreds of past generations did the same. Now, I have lost my patience and my assumption of good intent. I think that they are liars and heretics and I will avoid them as such.
Impressive list, thank you but surely you know that Catholic Church teaching specifically states that should a Pope openly preach heresy he automatically ceases to be Pope. Period.
There is a list of Francis’ appalling heresies 10 yards long!
Apparently he was just as bad as a Prelate in Argentina and Catholic Church teaching also states that a heretic may NOT be elected Pope.
Cardinals. Archbishops, Bishops, priests and learned Catholic scholars have ALL publicly rebuked Francis . The fact that he studiously ignores all of them doesn’t mean their reprimands have disappeared……….. that is Francis’ mentally ……….”kick it around till you lose it!”
Catholic presentation of “Papal Imposters” for discernment .
For Catholics ,by Catholics.
“Roughly one in every seven Popes was an anti pope.”
All the “bad popes” of the past were Catholics. Francis is NOT. That’s what makes the present papacy different.
My God – Francis announced that :-
* God couldn’t be God if it wasn’t for MEN; he needs man for His very existence:
* There is no Blessed Trinity…..no bunch of twigs [ I assume that’s the shamrock!]
* Jesus became Sin, Evil and the Serpent on the Cross
* Removed Our Blessed Lady and St John from the foot of the Cross on the postage stamp commemorating Luther’s 500 anniversary and replaced them with Luther and his right hand man.
* Exhorted people not to accept the words of Jesus in the New Testament……………………..the list goes on.
Adam Weishaupt “We will infiltrate that place [the Vatican], and once inside, we will never come out. We will bore from within until nothing remains but an empty shell”.
Dear Melanie, your posts are always worth reading, my friend. All the warnings we’ve had so far from Our Lady of Fatima, the Saints and the chosen Catholic mystics of the Church have all led us to this point. We are now living it.
Sweep makes the best, most hopeful sense when he refers to the Rosary – it – along with the brown scapula, miraculous medal, prayer to the Holy Spirit, St Benedict medal and the wonderful prayer to St Michael plus the Sacraments are all the hope, love and protection we need in the coming storm. God bless you. Let’s pray for each other.
Yes, ock. “Mission Accomplished”
Just remember , Borgolio plans on canonizing PPVI on Oct 14th of this year.
Take note of his history here.
Catholics and Protestants read the Bibe. You and Protestants believe you can interpret it however you wish.
I am quite certain that I belong to the Catholic Church.
No, I said that none of Fr. Paul Kramer’s made-up prophecies came true. In some cases, he made up things and attributed them to an allegedly unreleased Fatima secret. Look up his Fatima Center YouTube videos.
That part of Revelation where it talks about the six Dioceses in PA must have been really confusing for 1700 or so years.
The Church in North America and Europe is 32% of the global Catholic population. Even assuming that each and every one of these people was a complete apostate (which they are not) it doesn’t stand to reason that God is going to rain down fire on the other 68%. You’re not an active Catholic now, so please stop trying to convince people to leave my Church.
Seriously, LennyB you are so sane, thank you, thank you! This situation is worse than if a psychotic maniac came into your house while you’re at work and starts repeatedly raping your wife and torturing some of your kids, killing some of the kids, destroying everything you own, setting the place on fire. And THEN you come home and say, “Well, golly gee sir, this situation is just unacceptable, you are most certainly going to hear from my attorney. Meanwhile, I’m going to stay at the Raddison. I expect this situation to be rectified, right away. In fact I may even write a letter to the editor about this gross negligence with my family and property. Yes indeedy.”
Nobody is denying Papal infallibility. Some are using a flawed understanding it to convince themselves – and, apparently, you – that abandoning active participation in the Catholic Faith is OK. It’s not. Go back to Mass. Talk to a priest about your concerns. Don’t look to comboxes for spiritual guidance.
Thank you so much God’s Servant First, you are right. I will most certainly keep you in my prayers.
Michael Matt has already discovered his loophole for not assenting to Montini’s fake canonization. You have to hand it to the resisters. Very clever and they can even sound convincing to those ignorant of the Catholif Faith. Lots of big words and quotes from cherry picked theologians, but always at the end of the day they have to deny one article of the faith in order to keep their heretic on the throne. And what is so ironic is the fact that they dont even like the heretic, but they cant admit the clown aint Pope. Yet as soon as a Pope dies and before a new one elected, they have no problem being sedevacantists. Unless of course one of their heretics resigns but doesnt resign and really mucks up the works.
Already told you I go to Mass every week. Confirmed, should probably go to confession more often. Practicing Catholic. Not a Mason. Nor a troll.
No Blunder, you admitted it was a Novus Ordo, so you don’t go to Mass every week. Yours is an assembly of the people of god, gathered together to offer bread and wine as a symbol of praise and thanksgiving. You may think it is the unbloody sacrifice of Calvary but most of your sect thinks its a symbol. Your sect has absolutely no unity of faith whatsoever when it comes to mass, salvation, and other religions. And now your sect is in the verge of normalizing adultery and sodomy. And you want Melanie to stay in such filth? Where is your charity?
Now on “Fr” Kramer, I’ll agree he is bizzare. But you cannot use his eccentricities to paint all sedes. He wasn’t a real sede just like he was never a real priest. He though Benny the Abdicator was still pope. That is the big problem with Fatima and the 3rd Secret Industry. They think all these imposters since V2 are Pope because the consecration of Russia must be done to save the world. They forget one vital point about apparitions that are approved by the Church. The Church approves that the apparitions occurred but does not guarantee the message. The seers in these case have no special charism of infaillability. The seers relayed what they think they heard and saw. Their messages are not inspired writings like the Gospel. Here again you blunder, Blunder when you think sedes are obsessed with Fatima. We are not. If we were we would never claim a vacant papacy because it would mean no consecration to hold out hope for. We leave that to resisters.
Ana, where to start with your numerous errors.
1. You say the Church must be visible at all times and not transferred to some distant catacomb. Well, guess the Church wasn’t visible for the first several hundred years when it existed only in some hidden catacomb.
2. Sr Lucia SAYS Our Lady said…. Sr Lucia is not infaillable nor is her recollection of the message. The fact that an apparition occurred was approved by the Church. The messages, whether secret or not, are not de fide, nor necessarily accurate. Maybe they are. None of us knows for sure.
3. But you save your biggest whopper for last when you say that the Church founded by Christ is the messed up conciliar church. How can that be when they no longer profess the Faith handed to them? The Church has had corrupt and debauched Popes and cardinals many times in Her past, yet always was the Catholic Faith professed. Bergolio and Co. could be boy scouts and angels , models of virtue and piety. But because they profess a faith different than handed to them, they are not Catholic. It has nothing whatsoever to do with their personal behavior. Only with the faith professed. That is why there is no Pope, because there is no one on the Chair of Peter professing the Catholic Faith.
Melanie watch the online movie Papal Imposters I linked to.
A Catholic Deacon and his wife emailed it to me this morning.They
were aghast. Unlike you Melanie I lived it. From whne out pastor taught our seventh grade Catechism class and began to tell us what was being discussed and decided on during Vatican Two, to the present day. I lived it . I cringe when I read that Bishop Sheen or the laity should fight for the Church because I did speak out to Bishops and priests ,starting with my own pastor at age twelve or thirteen when he told us they were discussing during Vat 2 the non existance of a real entity called Satan , because he is only evil in the heart of man………and seminarians will no longer be taught the Rite of Exorcism. ( see how that one turned out) to My own pastor denying the Real Presence in the Tabernacle (“God in the Box” , while pointing to the altar, and stating ,” God is only in man’s heart” ).
It must get pretty crowded !
(Our cross dressing pastor added that we should not pray to “God in the Box”.)
Right, it was/is the usurpation or expropriation of the Catholic Roman See by members of the inimical religion of modernism that is the synthesis of ALL heresies as Pius X declared infallibly in Pascendi. What’s done is done. The citadel was breached from within and without by the deadliest heretical contagion of all time. What do traditional Catholics do aside from realize that they are outnumbered? You can take back the Vatican institution/the physical Roman See or you can relocate the See like Saint Peter did from Antioch to Rome. No traditionalist Catholic organization that maintains the Tridentine Rite has every attempted either. The SSPX (worldwide in scope) could easily stop recognizing this usurpation and unite the traditionalist Catholic world. Why not? Are they controlled opposition? Why couldn’t Bishop Fellay with 500 SSPX priests camp out day and night in St. Peter’s demanding via bull horn and tweeter the removal of the Antipopes Bergoglio and Ratzinger for their subversion of the Catholic Faith? What would they lose other than an opportunity to inform the world that these Antipopes are not Catholics but heretics?
Yes you did in another post. Just like you said you do not read the Bible because you are not a Protestant and make up your own interpretations.
You had NO clue Bible rading is an Indulgenced Prayer according to the Church or that the comments on the bottom of the pages reiterate Catholic official interpretations of passages until I told you and then you fumbled a back track.
Mission accomplished is right. The V2 institution is now just an EU sock puppet.
You belong to something other than the Catholic Church. Everyone here that reads your posts eventually sees that. You have no idea where I attend Mass.
Eat your words Blunder Boy.
I definitely will Sweep. You know, yrs ago, when my children were very little, I researched Lifeteen because they had that for the kids at my Church. Concerned, I wrote my Pastor that my children wouldn’t be participating in this program founded by the sodomite and pederast Mr. Fushek and I wanted to be assured that this wouldn’t interfere w/them receiving Confirmation. He assured me that Dale wasn’t involved in the program anymore, so it wouldn’t be a problem. He actually said “Dale,” like he was his old pal. I could go on and on about letters I’ve written and I am sure we’re far from alone. These sons of guns just ignored us and barreled right along.
No Blunder says that is all “conspiracy theory” …….
Gotta love those Jebbies who have a long history destroying the Church.
“After Pope Clement XIV’s suppression of the Society of Jesus in 1773, Weishaupt became a professor of canon law, a position that was held exclusively by the Jesuits until that time. In 1775 Weishaupt was introduced to the empirical philosophy of Johann Georg Heinrich Feder of the University of Göttingen. Both Feder and Weishaupt would later become opponents of Kantian idealism.”
“On 1 May 1776 Johann Adam Weishaupt founded the “Illuminati” in the Electorate of Bavaria. He adopted the name of “Brother Spartacus” within the order. Even Encyclopedia references vary on the goal of the order, such as New Advent saying the Order was not egalitarian or democratic internally, but sought to promote the doctrines of equality and freedom throughout society; while others like Collier’s have said the aim was to combat religion and foster rationalism in its place.[19″
Now we have a Jebbie Pope promoting equality of sodomite cohabitation with the institution of marriage .
What was the purpose of the Miracle of the Sun if not to verify the seer? And the miracle was predicted months in advance. Our Lady said that it was “so that all may believe.” Believe what? The Catholic Faith? No, it was so that all may listen and believe the message of the seer. Subsequent events down through the years have only increased the veracity of the message. There is no good reason to be skeptical. One could say “no one knows for sure” about anything under the sun, no pun intended.
Benedict’s idea of entertainment.
Well, I can tell you why SSPX doesn’t do that, it’s because they are themselves not Catholics but heretics. They deny the dogma of Papal Infallibility. Unfortunately, I believe what’s done is done too, we’ve already stood by like a bunch of dumbfounded idiots and let them kill the Church. She’s dead and I just await Her Resurrection now.
One of the advantages to foregoing Catholic education, according to Fr. Bentz, is that campus ministers don’t have to worry about things like “Catholic identity.” In fact, Fr. Bentz says he has found “greater freedom to serve the students” at Boise State than he did serving at Jesuit institutions.
The reason is disturbing:
“B.S.U. is not a Catholic university, so we spend no time worrying about Catholic identity, whether preserving it, reforming it or retrieving it for the university,” he wrote. “Gone are the days of being expected to be on anyone’s side about a production of ‘The Vagina Monologues.’”
“Oddly, Fr. Bentz suggests it’s easier for a ministry to be Catholic at a secular university. At Jesuit universities, campus ministry must support “whatever spiritual path (the student) might be following,” he wrote. But at secular institutions, the Catholic student center doesn’t have to worry about being “all things to all students,” which “makes for a very Catholic-focused approach to the ministry.”
Perhaps the Jesuits could try evangelizing Catholicism at Jesuit universities? Just a thought.”
“Yet as soon as a Pope dies and before a new one elected, they have no problem being sedevacantists. Unless of course one of their heretics resigns but doesnt resign and really mucks up the works.”
Part of the whole plan to continue to fool faithful Catholics into believing that the Novus Ordo sect is actually the Catholic Church.
The Catholic Faith is not revealed from appatitions. The Church deems some worthy of belief but not required.
This was very well done, Sweep. There’s a Masonic Lodge squatting in the Vatican. There is no doubt. Thank you for sharing this.
The more you know the more disgusted you get. My hatred for the novus ordo religion blazes white hot. They are more dangerous to the Catholic Church then the muslims ever were.
Once you see it, you can’t un-see it.
Yes Rich, the NO has destroyed millions of souls and families. It destroys the Catholic Faith and with it society.
All very good questions LennyB.
The ONLY two people who embrace “an alternative reality ” are you and Gang .
You have NO idea what kinds of Masses are offered in the various Diocese. Frankly from your comments here i do not think you would have a problem with a Dignity or Rainbow Mass, or even a Hoop de Doo Mass .According to you they are all part of the True Faith. Your attempts to take a poll here,
as if that proves anything ? YOU DO NOT know where people reside or what is available to them !
Blunder , the moniker fits.
EXACTLY , Tom !
The biggest clue that the SSPX gave up the fight is that the “conciliar” church is now referred to as the “official” church. The word “official” means having authority. If that doesn’t say it all, then I don’t know what does. The New Order “church” has no just authority because the evil Modernists who invented it, are the enemies of Christ.
The irony is that even if Bergoglio did a consecration, the pope still wouldn’t have done the consecration! 😛
What poster here has EVER advocated for that guy? Grasping at straws, Blunder, is never a good look. C’mon man.
Thank you vatican 2.
The hits just keep on coming.
Ya know My2cents, until quite recently I thought they were well intended but mistaken but I wonder now. Maybe conspirators figured: we’ll just take away the Mass from these Catholics and if any people really throw a fit about it, they can look to this SSPX and we’ll pretend we disapprove. Then those people can have their Mass but they will have a Christian sect without a Papacy. Neither is Catholic so they have a pretty wide net that way. Many people assume that if you are deprived of the Mass you aren’t Catholic anymore but fail to see that many people became Protestant, like the Anglicans so that they could still go to mass and have a job and live ofcourse. But, what if those Catholics said, “No, we’re not going to your fake mass?” Then they would have remained Catholic, likely without a Mass to attend.
Blunder ,enjoy your Dignity ,rainbow ,modernist contemporary, inclusive, celebrations.
Whenever you see the words “modern” “contemporary” or New Order…….avoid it like the plague.
“Modern” was always the cue word for communism.
You can see it in their statues buildings and art in the former soviet
countries and they will tell you now how much they hated it.
You all have tons more insight into Catholic history and thought, but I find it hard to believe the Novus Ordo can be considered Catholic anymore, and with all we’ve seen, I believe Bergolio has put himself outside the papacy, if he was validly elected at all, because of his heresy. To me it does seem that one cannot destroy the faith by heresy and continue to be the pope. If this was any other time Catholics would have stormed the Vatican by now. We are all so corrupted by the culture, past generations would consider us appalling and they’d be right I guess. What this man has said and done is truly appalling. Apparently there is no mechanism to remove him, and even if there was, we probably don’t have three men on the inside who would have gumption enough to do it. I really intensely dislike the VII church, the USCCB and the Leftist politics. We are outside it now. We have attended the Latin Rite for a few years and there is no going back for us. Look at Ireland to see what happens to a culture when the people are angry at the Church over time. The Irish people have done the unthinkable. There’s no excuse, but apparently the hypocrisy of clerics diddling little boys and playing leapfrog with each other in seminaries and chanceries has a cost. Millions of babies in Ireland will die mainly because the Catholic Church has utterly failed thanks to the men who work with all diligence to wreck the faith.
Get your ticket now Blunder. Your Pope Francis is hoping you will come to his World Meeting of Families!
Too too late Blunder .You said you do not read the Bible because you are not Protestant………..you apparently are Catholic in name ONLY because you are clueless about the Catholic Faith.
Oh yeh , letters petitions etc don’t mean a thing to them. Life Teen ,Theology on Tap are all the same idea .Evangelizing by being one with the youth rather than elevating mind body and soul to be one with Jesus.
Funny how all these youth ministries flop in the end. The souls of the youth , like all souls ,want to be inspired to learn things of God not to watch priests act like fools in some long ago pop psychology theory of “connection”.
Actually there are so many starving souls looking for the same teaching and preaching that inspired the saints and martyrs of antiquity. They really do recognize the Holy Ghost in a priest vs things like the Alpha Programs and Encounters.
Abortion worldwide happened because the v2 religion usurped, for all intents and purposes, our Catholic Church in Rome. The fact that abortion is actually legal in this world is because we (Catholics) dont currently occupy Rome.
This comments section should make it quite clear to any rational person considering Trad Life that you’re going to be surrounded by absolute lunatics.
The Traditonal Latin Mass is great. The theology and customs are sound.
The crowd who flocks to it…inexplicably poison.
Since you refuse to attend any Mass, it’s sad to see you attacking Catholicism like this. Sad and offensive, as a Catholic myself.
If you actually buy this, I need to let you know that I have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to offer. There’s a large bridge for sale that connects Manhattan and Brooklyn. And boy do I have a deal for you…
Communists always called True Catholicism “poison”
It is a pity indeed…….
“Vatican advances recognition of Chinese CPA
The May 24, 2018 issue of L’Osservatore Romano, the Vatican newspaper, published on its front page a photo-spread of Sheshan Sanctuary, above left, one of the main churches held by the Catholic Patriotic Association (CPA), the Chinese organization controlled by the communist government.
At the end of a general audience Pope Francis directed these words to the Chinese pilgrims who were present there:
Tomorrow, May 24, is the feast of the Blessed Virgin Mary “Help of Christians,” specially venerated at the Sanctuary of Sheshan, near Shanghai, China.
This occurrence invites us to be spiritually united to all the Catholic faithful who live in China. We pray for them to Our Lady so that they can live the faith with generosity and serenity, and know how to make concrete gestures of fraternity and reconciliation in full communion with the successor of Peter.
Dear disciples of the Lord in China, the Universal Church prays with you and for you so that, even in the face of difficulties, you can continue to conform yourselves to the will of God. Our Lady will never fail to give you her help and will take care of you with her maternal love. (L’Osservatore Romano, May 24, 2018, p. 8)
When we analyze the words we placed in bold, we see that Francis is telling Catholics of the heroic Chinese Underground Church who do not accept the CPA to “fraternally reconcile” with it and “spiritually unite” to it. He himself gives an example of this union by accepting that CPA Marian sanctuary as perfectly valid. He presents the abandonment of decades of fidelity to the Faith as a manifestation of “generosity” and of obedience to “the will of God” to which all must conform.
It is an act of betrayal that places our brothers and sisters of the Underground Church in a terrible crisis: They resisted the communist government because they wanted to be faithful to the Catholic Faith and the Pope. Now, the conciliar Popes are telling them to give up that fight and merge with the government-controlled organization.
These words are the follow-up of another still more expressive gesture made by Francis. On May 14, 2018, he received a group of CPA bishops in an official visit at the Vatican, honoring them as if they were the true representatives of all Chinese Catholics, see first and second rows below.
These are words and acts that are making the recognition of the communist CPA a consummate fact. So, we have the “merciful” Francis, in the manner of a despot, imposing by way of the facts the acceptance of Communism on the faithful Chinese Catholics.
By the fruits we know the tree… ”
I’m lost. You appear to be Cornelia Fereira off anti-psychotic medication. If your conscience has lead you to Omnivacantism/HomeAloneism, so be it. I won’t judge. But it’s wrong for you to try to get others to join you in.not attending weekly Mass.
The snakes have returned to Ireland and Saint Patrick turns in his grave as the Irish have done to themselves what Great Britain had failed to do for centuries.
Sweep, you need to take a deep breath and think about how it’s going to look when St. Peter asks you about leading people out of the Church.
Same goes for the proprietor of this blog.
You’re both basically taking advantage of the disaffected, unstable fringe, and telling them what they want to hear (that #notmypope somehow alters reality, universe of one…)
Schedule some time with a mentally stable priest and tell him about your issues. It can only help.
You are correct about ONE THING…….You are ‘lost”.
That’s all you do here is TROLL
That’s right .You’re “GUESSING”
You wonder if the Eastern Orthodox have a bunch of forums where the lunatics in their religion go on about “modernism”. I know there is a group of them called the “old calendarists” who went into schism when the Orthodox started using the revised Julian calendar but other than that I don’t know.
I think the main reason Catholicism attracts the loons is due to the prestige and power of the Papacy as an institution. It drives them nuts that 99.999 percent of the world recognizes Francis as the Pope and there is nothing they can do about it except vent in forums. I wonder if there will be a group of them around in 40 years telling us that there’s nothing wrong with not having a Pope for 100 years.
Go to Confession yourself Blunder.
I dont attack Catholicism my friend….I just abhor the fake v2 faith that the masses MISTAKE for Catholicism.
Do we have to have a Pope?
Not according to the sedevacantists who believed the last pope died 60! years ago this coming October.
Sorry read that wrong. Yes, Catholicism requires a Pope according to Vatican I.
It requires that we HAVE TO HAVE a pope? At all times?
Vatican I says perpetual successors which I would grant doesn’t necessarily rule out a rather long interregnum. But not a 60 or 100 or 200 year interregnum where apostolic succession fails.
I knew about interregnums. I didnt know that they couldnt last 60, 100, or 200 years. I come here to learn. Thanks.
By the way, sedevacantists of 30-40 years ago agreed with this. Of course, they expected the situation to resolve itself by now.
Im only 48. I never knew about the time-limit on interregnums.
The irony is that all who post here are not in union with Bergolio anyway. Pope or Anti-Pope, one would have to become a total relativistic modernist to be in union with Frankie. Even the Blunders and Gangs of this forum fail that test. The resisters simply pay lip service to the notion of union with their Roman Pontiff. A pagan universalist unitarian is in union with Bergolio, not anyone in this combox.
Rich, might I recommend,
No one here can dispute this easy read or it’s accuracy.
Tom , funny you should say that about the pagan Unitarianist. I have a cousin who years ago would tell my sister to tell me not to talk about the Blessed Mother or the Rosary when I visit her mother, my aunt ( not enough courage to tell me to my face).
The cousin left Catholicism and joined a Unitarian church and her mother would “get on her back” if I spoke about Our Holy Mother.
You are correct in my opinion, simply because she likes Borgolio and has said even evolution is in keeping with Catholicism now.
Our founding pastor in an Eastern Catholic Byzantine Mission parish, who traveled many times to the Soviet Union with Bibles and holy cards, always followed and detained by the then KGB on his trips, told me Roman Catholics miss the mark when they worry too much about church legalisms , Eastern Catholicism is more concerned with the Spirituality of being a Christian while the West is more concerned with Christ’s humanity. He built the first Catholic Church in Russia after the change in their politics.
I believe he was correct. The Novus Ordo is filled with katholics who know nothing of God or Spirituality because they focus on man made church laws and not on God’s laws.The old Baltimore Catechism had it right with the answer to the question ,”Why did God Make Me?” Ans: “To know love and serve Him in this world so I can be with Him in the next.” You can neither Serve Him or Love Him UNLESS you Know him first. Once one has the correct perspective and attends the NO churches, they realize how it is destroying the Faith in our Trinitarian God Head.
Tradition is foremost along with the Gospels for Eastern Catholics and Orthodox alike. Eastern Catholics are only concerned with changes in their Divine Liturgies which some Eastern Catholic Bishops have been testing out because of influences in the USNCCB from the RC Bishops. They are also disgusted by the infiltration of sodomites in their clerical ranks. The Orthodox on the otherhand, refuse communion to known active sodomite parishioners and that is causing a problem with some politically correct brainwashed Americanized parishioners.
Anyone who does not realize there is a definite LGBTQ agenda attacking all Churches is blind. Borgolio is working in tandem.
So maybe a non-religion example will help those who have decided that the Catholic Church is no longer the Catholic Church. I hope at least one of you watches sports.
Say I’m a loyal Cleveland Cavaliers fan and season ticket holder. After end of the 2014-2015 season, however, I’m so upset by the outcome that I declare that the Cavs are no longer the Cavs. I insist that the true Cavs exist only as a remnant, scattered thoughout the city. The man whom the entire world acknowledged to be Lebron James therefore cannot really be #23, especially after what he did (or, rather, failed to do) in the finals that year. Among my like-minded friends, some think there is no Lebron, others say the last true #23 was Jordan; some say he still is, and others, through careful study of The YouTubes, identify someone else as the “real” Lebron. A small white man in Kansas crowns himself King James with the aid of his parents.
I cancel my season tickets. As the finals begin, I stand in the parking lot and lament that the fake Cavs have control of the arena. After being politely asked to stop bothering other fans, I loudly declare that it must be a Golden Deep State plot that has fooled the entire world into following this farce. When questioned further, I cite the highly dubious prophet Stephen A. Smith’s musings on collage baseball.
Does this make any sense? If it doesn’t work in basketball, why would you think it would work in the Church?
The fact that you use a sports analogy just further illustrates your ignorance.
Catholics used to think something like the Great Western Schism could never happen too.
There is no support for your belief that there is some limit to the length of an interregnum.
Because the Church is a Divine Institution. Your attempt at creating analogy where none exists is lame. Apples and Oranges is the phrase most often used to describe your effort. But keep trying. Keep telling yourself that there has to be a magical hermuenetic of continuity out there that will shut up all those nasty sedes. If one existed, don’t you think someone would have discovered it by now. Its only been 50 years now.
It doesn’t require that the office be continuously occupied else there would be successors already designated when one Pope dies. But that is not how it has worked. There is an interregnum between Popes. Vatican I did not set a time limit so why do some feel that 20-30 or 50-60 years are unacceptable? Why not 100-200 years? God’s ways are not man’s ways. He did reveal to us a time when men would believe a lie. A lie like a non catholic can be head of the catholic church. Its such an absurd statement that its amazing so many are blinded and cannot see such basic common sense and logic. Some guy in Kansas calls himself Pope and speaks like a Catholic and the world calls him a nut job. But an obvious marxist heretic wears white in Rome and everyone thinks he’s Catholic. What fools. If you guys think there is a Pope, at least pick one that is Catholic. David Bawden would appreciate the financial support.
Exactly Tom. Although “Pope” Michael is not pope he is at least Catholic!
Really what it comes down for many (and I have been known to say this before)…. is anything, but sedevacantism!
Yes Gang, 2 Vermont is correct. Please cite a direct quote as proof to your statement on that particular legalistic viewpoint.
Sweep are you familiar with Abbe Roca (1830-1893) and his “divine synarchy” [a term coined by Roca to signify rule by his hoped for occult “Catholic” church under a Pope converted to “scientific Christianity”?
@2Vermont – you’re right, I seem to have forgotten the writings of Church Father Dorkus Uncoordinatus regarding how sports are dumb and the big meanie jocks get all the girls.
@TomA – the Church also has a visible, human, terrestrial part that can’t simply vanish, according to its own teachings. If a situation isn’t reasonably possible in secular life, it’s not likely to be possible in the life of the institutional Church. Or are you just disagreeing because you’re a Steph Curry fan?
Yes BLunder, visibility is an issue and as a sede I do not deny a visible church nor can I answer where the Church is. I simply do not know. But what we do know is that the entitity that proclaims to be the Catholic Church cannot be the Church for it contradicts what was taught by what we all ageee was the Catholic Church. I am not trying to prove the Church exists here or the Church exists there. I say the Church cannot be led by those who are not Catholic. To prove your point that the conciliar church is the Catholic Church, you would have to convince me that the faith professed by V2 and the conciliar church is the same Faith professed by the Catholic Church prior to 1958. Good luck with that task. It cannot be done and we all know it. That leaves only one logical conclusion which you and the resisters refuse to accept. PS- I have no idea who Steph Curry is.
Lenny , when I saw the Borg invited Katie Perry to speak on transcentendal meditation I actually thought he just might be considering this as a viable incorporation into his church that is all but devoid of the spiritual sense of union that is so much a part of the Tridentine and Divine Liturgies.
This , I believe is why we so much of the youth are looking to any form of gnosticism which is akin to wicca , or outright satanism. The soul naturally longs to be a part of a sacred mystery ,not a sixties agape party.
correction above “……we see so much of the youth……….”
The least stupid thing this video asserts is the Siri theory – and that’s pretty stupid.
Guy turns down Papacy because of personal threat. On a piece of paper. Handed to him by one of just 60 people he knows really well. With the Swiss Guard – basically a huge SEAL team – and the world’s media at his disposal. Also the armies of most countries. And somehow the only people who know are madmen and sensationalist (but entertaining) novelists and YouTubers.
Also all the Popes since V2 were gay.
The Devil – as Pope Francis has pointed out repeatedly – is quite real and danger to all of our souls. Why do you feel compelled to invent fictitious sources of evil?
The “unchanging” Mass: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tridentine_Mass
I am going to Trad harder than any of you and adhere to the Mass as it was in 1569, before all those Trent Modernists got their filthy Trenty fingerprints all over it.
I always love your posts, Tom.
The term you mention is related to Buddhism . This is totally different from anything taught in Eastern Catholicism and Orthodoxy.
The ancient Philokalia best describes spiritual direction of the Church of the East .St John Cassian applied some of the teachings from the Philokalia into his monastic Order.
When one embraces error, all kinds of screwball results take place. In their fanatical stand against sedevacantism as traditionally understood, they conflated it with the need to prop up any Pope whomsoever no matter how heretical. A total failure of intellect and conscience when it came to understanding that Bergoglio was a different cat entirely and needed to be treated as such. Instead the Remnant doubled down on its R&R talking points and lost all credibility with me. They became Michael Voris light.
So now they have come full circle in seeing the Roman Pontiff as some kind of US President that can be impeached by a “Congress” of Cardinals for some bad policy or another. This is deplorable. This is the fruit of their error. One gets banned for saying Francis has lost his office via heresy, but you get published for stating the Conciliarist heresy of the 15th Century verbatum with a heavy dose of Americanism thrown in.
If you knew anything about Canon Law you would know that no one can give the Pope a Canonical warning.
There is no need for a Pope who is a public and manifest heretic. He has already deposed himself. That is Dogma and not subject to appeal.
Due to the Lateran Treaty he is also the Head of State of the Vatican and will never be removed regardless, since noone is going to force “regime change” on a man who rules as absolute monarch. The Vatican City State is a UN recognized country. This is something ignored by those living in a legalist fantasy land that some group of Cardinals can remove Francis,
Get over it….your legalistic scenarios are deluded fantasies. Francis remains as Vatican Head of State regardless, so you will have to deal with that fact.
The Aggiornamento was conceived and remains steeped in heresy. Francis himself is a manifest heretic. If you think that religion is the same as the Catholic Faith much less the Catholic Church you are deluded. Most of the folks in the pews at your average parish reject your beliefs. They have no idea what a “Mass”is much less a mortal sin. A small clique of self appointed “conservatives” does not change basic facts. You live in a fantasy world.
Sedevacantism is essentially an American belief system. You won’t find much Sedesim in Europe or elsewhere.
What is it about the American frame of mind which feels that Sedism is the only obvious answer to the current situation? Could it be that Sedeism is just a variant of religious liberty, in which private judgment is given top priority?
Sedeism reminds me of a religious sect which seeks to impose its ideology on others. And there MANY religious sects in the U.S. More than can be counted.