The Strange Case of Archbishop Nienstedt – Part Two

Comments (191)

1. Sorry but you still haven’t given any credence to – or even bothered to acknowledge – Monsignor Vigano’s rebuttal of the charges that he shut down the investigation into the Neinstedt abuse. He presented written proof of his actions and explained his actions step by step. The actions of his accusers are totally incredible yet you dismiss them. Louie , this is SO unlike your usual investigative material. I’m so sorry but I am not impressed.

2. I agree with Gods Servant. This provided no refutation of Vigsnos response on this matter. Louie, you should have posted Viganos reply first. It was basic justice for Vigano to request the investigators to question the accused before continuing the investigation. It would have be basic justice to present viganos side before proceeding to further blacken his name

3. This is the plain moral truth. One must be very careful to be very cautious, thorough and just when dealing with such important and terrible matters which affect, inter alia, a person’s good name, etc. As the Faith and natural reason tell us. Archbishop Vigano’s testimony and evidence grounding same, ought to have been dealt with before republishing this article. Natural justice. Lord have mercy on us.

4. Why? After 8,644 words or 54,366 characters does this article falls so short on a thorough and complete analysis of the matter. The author’s deliberate ommission of Archbishop Vigano’s defence and explanation of this matter raises serious concerns about the intention to discredit the only credible Priest, so far, to come forward and shed light on the depth of the problem. However, we should expect the Archbishop to be attacked for his honesty. How about if we pray for the safety of Archbishop Vigano because the truth will soon be known.
   “Let’s shoot the messenger and this will go away.”
   You forgot to mention this:
   Viganò issues new statement, documents to clear his name of false charges:
   ROME, August 27, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) — Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, whose extraordinary testimony implicating Pope Francis and several senior prelates in covering up Archbishop Theodore McCarrick’s alleged sexual abuse of seminarians and priests, today issued a new written statement, rejecting as “false” certain accusations that are now being used to discredit him.
   Archbishop Viganò has also released supporting documents to prove his innocence.
   The accusations date back to a 2016 New York Times report, alleging that, as U.S. Nuncio, Viganò “quashed” an independent investigation into sexual misconduct on the part of Archbishop John Nienstedt, who was found innocent by police authorities.
   The report specifically alleges that, during an April 2014 meeting at the Nunciature in Washington D.C., Viganò ordered two auxiliary bishops of the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis to halt the investigation into Nienstedt. The report further alleges that Viganò “ordered church officials to destroy a letter they wrote to him protesting the decision.”
   The New York Times based its report on a memorandum written by Father Dan Griffith, then-liaison to the lawyers conducting the inquiry, and delegate for the protection of minors in the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis. Griffith wrote that the order to call off the investigation and destroy evidence amounted to “a good old fashioned cover-up to preserve power and avoid scandal,” the New York Times said.
   These allegations against the former U.S. Nuncio have now resurfaced, and are being used to discredit or call into question the credibility of his testimony implicating Pope Francis and several senior prelates in the McCarrick abuse cover-up.
   But in his two-page written statement, dated August 26, 2018 and published here below, Archbishop Viganò insists these accusations are “false,” presents his account of the events associated with the allegations, and provides convincing evidence, based on official documentation (including several letters here below), to prove his innocence.
   Vigano’s statement and the supporting documents also raise questions about why the Vatican has never publicly cleared his name.
   What really happened?
   In his written statement, Archbishop Viganò recounts that he met with Archbishop Neinstedt and two Auxiliary Bishops — Mons. Lee A. Piché and Mons. Andrew Cozzens — on April 12, 2014, at the apostolic nunciature in Washington, D.C., to discuss the ongoing investigation into the Archbishop. Father Griffith, he notes, was not present.
   At that meeting, several affidavits were presented to him, one alleging that Nienstedt had “had an affair with a Swiss Guard during his service in the Vatican some twenty years prior.”
   Viganò explains that “these affidavits were collected by the firm, Greene Espel, who was retained by Father Griffith on behalf of the Archdiocese to investigate Archbishop Nienstedt.” He adds that the firm “belongs to the group ‘Lawyers for All Families,’ who fought against Archbishop Nienstedt over the approval of same-sex marriage in the State of Minnesota.”
   The former U.S. Nuncio then notes: “Private investigators from the Greene Espel firm had conducted an inquiry in an unbalanced and prosecutorial style, and now wanted immediately to extend their investigation to the Pontifical Swiss Guard, without first hearing Archbishop Nienstedt.”
   According to Viganò, at a certain moment in the meeting, he suggested that the bishops “tell the Greene Espel lawyers that it appeared to me appropriate that Archbishop Nienstedt be heard before taking this step – audiatur et altera pars – which they had not yet done. The bishops accepted my suggestion,” he writes.
   After the meeting, Bishop Piché phoned Father Griffith from the airport, saying the meeting was positive, and there was promise of a good resolution on the horizon.
   Despite this, the following morning, Archbishop Viganò says he received a letter at the Nunciature signed by the two Auxiliary Bishops, “falsely asserting” that he “had suggested the investigation be stopped.”
   In comments to LifeSite, Viganò said that, immediately after reading the letter, he called Bishop Pichè and said: “What is this? I never said to stop the investigation. I proposed that it would be appropriate to first interrogate the Archbishop. Please remove the letter from the computer and from the archdiocesan archives.”
   In his written statement, Viganò attests:
   “I never told anyone that Greene Espel should stop the inquiry, and I never ordered any document to be destroyed. Any statement to the contrary is false. However, I did instruct one of the auxiliary bishops, Lee A. Piché, to remove from the computer and the archdiocesan archives the letter falsely asserting that I had suggested the investigation be halted. I insisted on this not only to protect my name, but also that of the Nunciature and the Holy Father who would be unnecessarily harmed by having a false statement used against the Church.”
   In comments to LifeSite, Viganò said the letter “distorted” what he had said in the meeting, and put him and the U.S. Nunciature in a “very dangerous situation.” He said he was also “very concerned about protecting the Pope,” as they had put into the archives something that was “false and dangerous.”
   After this, Viganò said he “didn’t hear anything,” until the November USCCB general meeting in Baltimore, and he “didn’t know if anything had been done.”
   At the USCCB assembly, Viganò said the two auxiliary bishops, Pichè and Cozzens, presented him with a report, telling him they had also given it to Cardianal Marc Ouellet, Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, during a recent visit to Rome.
   Archbishop Viganò reviewed the report in their presence, and saw that “it still contained the false statement.” He therefore instructed Piché and Cozzens to write to Cadinal Ouellet, at the Congregation of Bishops in Rome, to have the statement corrected, and said he was going to do the same.
   LifeSite has obtained both of these letters. The letter from the two auxiliary bishops to Cardinal Ouellet may be viewed here, and Archbishop Viganò’s letter to the Cardinal may be viewed here.
   Segueing in his statement to 2016, Viganò writes: “The very day the news appeared in the New York Times, on July 21, 2016, the Holy Father asked Cardinal Parolin to phone the Nuncio in Washington, D.C. (Christophe Pierre), ordering that an investigation into my conduct be opened immediately, so that I could be reported to the tribunal in charge of judging abuse cover-up by bishops.”
   That same day, he adds, “I informed the Vatican Press Office in the persons of Father Lombardi and Mr. Greg Burke. With the authorization of the Substitute of the Secretary of State, then-Archbishop Becciu, Mr. Jeffrey Lena – an American lawyer working for the Holy See – went to the Congregation for Bishops where he found documents proving that my conduct had been absolutely correct.”
   These documents include the letter from the two auxialiary bishops to Cardinal Ouellet requesting the correction.
   Viganò further attests that, “Mr. Lena handed a written report exonerating me to the Holy Father. In spite of this, the Vatican Press Office did not deem it necessary to release a statement refuting the New York Times article,” he says.
   He also notes that, when the investigation ordered by Pope Francis was completed, “the Nunciature also responded to Cardinal Parolin with a detailed report, which restored the truth and demonstrated that my conduct had been absolutely correct.”
   “This report is found in the Vatican Secretariat of State and at the Nunciature in Washington, D.C,” he writes.
   The former U.S. Nuncio concludes, saying: “On January 28, 2017, I wrote to both Archbishop Pierre and Archbishop Hebda (who had succeeded Nienstedt), asking them to publicly correct the Griffith memorandum. In spite of repeated emails and phone calls, I never heard back from them.” A follow-up email, dated January 21, 2018, detailing Viganò’s repeated attempts to contact Hebda, may be viewed here.
   Who made the mistake? Was it Father Griffith? Or did he write his memorandum in good faith based on what he thought had happened? This is unknown, but Griffith’s actions are suspect, as he chose a group of lawyers to investigate Archbishop Neinstedt who were fighting against him in the Minnesota gay-marriage referendum.
   Here below we pubish Archbishop Vigano’s written statement. Emphasis not added.
   ***
   Statement by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò regarding the Archdiocese of St. Paul-Minneapolis
   Accusations against my person appeared in the media – in July 2016, when I had already left my mission in Washington, D.C. – following the publication of a memorandum written by Father Dan Griffith, the then delegate for the protection of minors in the Archdiocese.
   These accusations – alleging that I ordered the two Auxiliary Bishops of Minneapolis to close the investigation into the life of Archbishop John C. Nienstedt – are false.
   Father Griffith was not present during my meeting at the Nunciature with the Archbishop and the two Auxiliaries on April 12, 2014, during which several affidavits containing accusations against Archbishop Nienstedt were handed to me.
   These affidavits were collected by the firm, Greene Espel, who was retained by Father Griffith on behalf of the Archdiocese to investigate Archbishop Nienstedt. This firm belongs to the group “Lawyers for All Families,” who fought against Archbishop Nienstedt over the approval of same-sex marriage in the State of Minnesota.
   In one of these affidavits, it was claimed that Archbishop Nienstedt had had an affair with a Swiss Guard during his service in the Vatican some twenty years prior.
   Private investigators from the Greene Espel firm had conducted an inquiry in an unbalanced and prosecutorial style, and now wanted immediately to extend their investigation to the Pontifical Swiss Guard, without first hearing Archbishop Nienstedt.
   I suggested to the bishops who came to the Nunciature on April 12, 2014, that they tell the Greene Espel lawyers that it appeared to me appropriate that Archbishop Nienstedt be heard before taking this step – audiatur et altera pars – which they had not yet done. The bishops accepted my suggestion.
   But the following day, I received a letter signed by the two auxiliaries, falsely asserting that I had suggested the investigation be stopped.
   I never told anyone that Greene Espel should stop the inquiry, and I never ordered any document to be destroyed. Any statement to the contrary is false.
   However, I did instruct one of the auxiliary bishops, Lee A. Piché, to remove from the computer and the archdiocesan archives the letter falsely asserting that I had suggested the investigation be halted. I insisted on this not only to protect my name, but also that of the Nunciature and the Holy Father who would be unnecessarily harmed by having a false statement used against the Church.
   The very day the news appeared in the New York Times, on July 21, 2016, the Holy Father asked Cardinal Parolin to phone the Nuncio in Washington, D.C. (Christophe Pierre), ordering that an investigation into my conduct be opened immediately, so that I could be reported to the tribunal in charge of judging abuse cover-up by bishops.
   I informed the Vatican Press Office in the persons of Father Lombardi and Mr. Greg Burke. With the authorization of the Substitute of the Secretary of State, then-Archbishop Becciu, Mr. Jeffrey Lena – an American lawyer working for the Holy See – went to the Congregation for Bishops where he found documents proving that my conduct had been absolutely correct.
   Mr. Lena handed a written report exonerating me to the Holy Father. In spite of this, the Vatican Press Office did not deem it necessary to release a statement refuting the New York Times article.
   The Nunciature also responded to Cardinal Parolin with a detailed report, which restored the truth and demonstrated that my conduct had been absolutely correct.
   This report is found in the Vatican Secretariat of State and at the Nunciature in Washington, DC.
   On January 28, 2017, I wrote to both Archbishop Pierre and Archbishop Hebda (who had succeeded Nienstedt), asking them to publicly correct the Griffith memorandum. In spite of repeated emails and phone calls, I never heard back from them.
   August 26, 2018

   ________________________________________

5. https://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/N035_Vigano.htm
   Four points only…….

6. List of pedophilia priests in Italy (posted 2008)
   https://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/a01t_PedophiliaItaly.html

7. Except, it’s homosexuality.

8. Melanie, in the last post you asked several questions. I really cannot give you any answers other than the conciliar crowd in Rome who adhere to V2 and the NO cannot by reason be the Catholic Church. To call this crowd Catholic is a heresy since it denies what the Church Herself taught about Herself. Maybe all we truly have left is the Rosary. So pick it up and pray it. For your salvation and your families. This crap about Vignano et al is just that, crap. Who cares? I most certainly do not. The sooner the NO sect implodes the better.

9. Both evil……

10. After reading several of Mrs. Engel’s articles as well as her excruciatingly long, prolix and convoluted “The Rite of Sodomy”, I have come to the conclusion that her works are much like the writings of Vatican II: lengthy, nearly void of useful content, and based on a superficially orthodox but actually false system of values and beliefs.

11. Thank-you for this. The New York Times is not credible in the least. I thought it was common knowledge that they are a tribe of liars.

    Louie, what have you got against Vigano?

    What is true is that it never pays to be a whistleblower.

12. Let’s not forget JP2 and Cardinal Law.

13. Interesting hypothesis from Novus Ordo Watch; I hope Vigano is telling the truth but Catholics don’t fire the Pope for making horrible staffing and disciplinary decisions, anyway. I’d think they should recognize a non-Catholic pretending to the throne. Mr. Verrecchio, maybe you could recruit Mr. Derkson to write for you instead of that shady character, Benedict Carter? https://novusordowatch.org/2018/09/word-of-warning-vigano-testimony-drama/ “To conclude this post, since we are to be ‘wise as serpents’ (Mt 10:16), it befits us to ponder a hypothetical scenario, a scenario we might very well see materialize in the coming days or weeks, depending on how things progress with the Vigano affair: Suppose that Vigano lied in his testimony, at least with regard to Francis himself. What would this mean?

    One of the most powerful ways to enhance one’s own credibility and generate sympathy from the masses is to orchestrate a very serious accusation against oneself that is afterwards uncovered as a lie. People naturally sympathize with someone who has been publicly demonstrated to be the victim of vicious slander. With regard to the Vigano testimony specifically, if it were to be proved false, it would confer on Francis and his cabal, in the minds of men, a status of victimhood and moral uprightness. It would also immensely weaken any opposition against him, whether it be concerning church governance, doctrine, or anything else.

    It would behoove us, therefore, to keep in mind, just as a possibility, that the entire campaign against Francis is a ploy — a ploy to trigger sympathy for Francis and to root out his opponents by identifying them in this way and then removing them from their positions. It is noticeable that most of those who side with Vigano are those who oppose Francis already on other grounds; and those who side with Francis also generally agree with his open Modernism.

    Under this hypothesis, Vigano could himself be part of the plan or not. In 2013, he was considered part of Francis “magic circle” of advisors and a “great enemy of Ratzinger” (source). This may just be the opinion of a single journalist and may not mean much. But then again, it might. Regardless of whether this is all a big game being played, the end result could be the same: Francis’ enemies would have revealed themselves by coming out against him, and he could remove them all essentially for a “treason” of sorts, and the world would applaud him or at least show sympathy for his action.

    This would ensure three things: (1) It would be a warning to any future “traitors” never to cross him; (2) Francis could appoint countless new “bishops” after his own heart to fill the vacancies created by his bulk removals; and (3) any potential objections against Francis and his henchmen would forever be dismissed from the get-go as just another baseless conspiracy set up to bring him down. The result would be that Club Francis would, effectively, have become untouchable, and Bergoglio would emerge looking like a saint, a hero, incredibly powerful. This additional power boost would come in very handy for Francis and allow him to kick his revolution into even higher gear. And higher gear is surely what he is aiming for — considering his advanced age, he knows he doesn’t have decades left on this earth.”

14. Why did Vigano wait so long to out the Pope?
    He was living a lie chumming around with McCarrick and Wuerl and he knew it. I never trusted guys like this.
    He knew all the perverts in the Curia for a long time but he played the game until they stepped on his toes which was right after the VatiLeaks trials .
    Then he was punished and sent to the US, while pleading he wanted to stay in the EU because of his sick sister and she just told the Press he never visited her at all after her stroke.
    So catholics are all falling for the enemy of my enemy is my hero and friend?
    Damned stupid . Let’s just make Vigano Pope !
    Thug crowd mentality just like what I read in the previous combox.
    Where’s Aljr and his friend Herve weighing in on this?
    Poster sweepoutthefilth was right all along. I learned much from his posts.

15. Sadly, many “traditional” Catholics seem to have forgotten that the prospect of conversion—even at the last hour—is at the core of the Gospel.

    “When therefore they were come, that came about the eleventh hour, they received every man a penny. [10] But when the first also came, they thought that they should receive more: and they also received every man a penny. [11] And receiving it they murmured against the master of the house, [12] Saying: These last have worked but one hour, and thou hast made them equal to us, that have borne the burden of the day and the heats. [13] But he answering said to one of them: Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst thou not agree with me for a penny? [14] Take what is thine, and go thy way: I will also give to this last even as to thee. [15] Or, is it not lawful for me to do what I will?”

    Matthew 20:9-15

16. Because no one, in their right mind, would go down the rabbit hole known as sedevacantism.

17. I think it is safe to say that there isn’t one single NO priest or bishop alive who did not know the Church was infested with sodomites and kept their mouths shut out of fear or because they too are sodomites. This means that there is not one NO prelate with any credibility left to conduct any investigation (if one is even possible), nor is there even one NO prelate left who can make any credible accusation against another prelate. They are ALL guilty of cover up. Therefore as the two NO camps hurl accusations against each other, it will only confirm the absolute moral bankruptcy of the the conciliar church to the world. Trad Catholics should be dissassociating themselves as fast as possible from the NO sect and telling the world that these sodomite enablers are not the Church. Sadly, for decades trads made the theological mistake of recognizing apostates as Catholics, so I don’t expect many to admit their error at this point. Look for more convoluted reasoning from the RR camp to explain away the nonsense that is sure to follow.

18. Dear Fleur – I think people confuse Pedophilia, which is the sexual abuse of young children – male and female- [who may be homosexual, lesbian or just plain evil heterosexuals] with Pederasty which is the sexual abuse of boys and young men, almost certainly by all by homosexual men.

19. “We see now through a glass in a dark manner; but then face to face. Now I know in part; but then I shall know even as I am known.”

    -1 Cor. 13:12

    Contrary to St. Paul, rabid sedevacantists—having rejected the mystery of iniquity in this fallen world—see all things very clearly. They’ve got it all figured out. They’re exactly the type who ran away scandalized in John ch. 6. Sad.

    “Jesus said to them: If you were blind, you should not have sin: but now you say: We see. Your sin remaineth.”

    -John 9:41

20. Are you a Sola Scriptura Protestant who picks and chooses verse out of context to make a point?
    It seems like it by your posts.

21. A more interesting theory is why sedes and other hardline trads (Louie?) distrust Vigano. Might the Holy Spirit be working through Archbishop Vigano rather than Derkson?

22. Sr. Lucia (the real not the fake) said in her interview with Fr Fuentes on Dec 26, 1957 that God was giving 2 last remedies: devotion to the Immaculate Heart and the Rosary. In ordinary times, the Sacraments are THE remedies. Read between the lines in that interview very carefully (available on YouTube). That interview took place EXACTLY 10 months to the very day of the “elevation” of John XXIII to the “Papacy”. She stated that the terrible chastisement was “imminent”. The Chastisement and the reason even St Bernadette cried out, “Penance, penance, penance!” after receiving the secret she took with her to her death, can only be the ECLIPSE of the True Church by this counter-church of Satan which eveyone insists is Christ’s Church which needs “renewal”.

23. Tom A. You are saying that Vigano is not credible because he is Novus Ordo and you don’t like anything associated with the Novus Ordo. But the facts remain despite your prejudice. If Vigano speaks the truth and there is no GOOD reason to doubt him than we are bound by charity to believe him.

24. Al is this the way you define Catholics who post on this blog ?
    (Sad traditionalists who are forgetful and rabid sedevacantists)
    Then you quote Scripture as if you are the only all knowing Catholic. You do not sound like a Catholic in a your comments on any of these blog posts. Instead you sound like a hate monger and a protestant.
    A clear instruction given to all by Jesus Christ you may want to think on.
    “A new commandment I give to you, that ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all know that ye are disciples of mine, if ye have love amongst yourselves.”

25. “Learned much from his posts…”
    That’s funny. If you truly read her posts you would conclude rightly that she is an elderly woman (with too much time on her hands) with which she right–click–copies –pastes to the point of shear lunacy causing all kinds of diabolical disorientation to the unwary on this combox.

26. No John314, its rather simple. While many trads are getting all excited about all the immorality that is rampant in the NO sect and believe that the exposure of this immorality can lead to some sort of cleansing of the Church, others realize that this current crisis still does not address the core issue that trads have with the NO sect and that is V2, the new mass, and other theological issues. While we all want Bergolio gone and the TLM brought back to every parish, this goal will not happend with moral or immoral modernists in charge. Vignano may indeed be brave and sick of the filth in his church, but the guy is still a NO V2 ecumenist and does not hold the traditional Catholic faith. So its troubling to see so many trads put this NO V2 advocate on a pedastal solely because he dropped a dime on our common enemy, Bergolio. Trads who do this are putting their emphasis on morality instead of theology.

27. I am not in any way questioning the veracity of the charges he has leveled against Bergolio. In fact, I am inclined to believe him wholeheartedly. But what difference will it make to rid ourselves of Bergolio only to get another modernist?

28. John314, what I am saying is that pratically every NO prelate was and is aware of the abuse crisis so that anyone blowing the whistle now can simply be accused of some ulterior motive (whether true or not). Trads must thread careful here since we naturally want to believe any bad press about Bergolio that arises. In order not to fall into any trap, we should be cautious in accepting Vignano’s accusations. Remember, this crisis is basically a civil war between the two wings of the modernist NO V2 adherents. Trads have no true friends in either camp.

29. Oh my dear. Sr. Lucia says this, she gets REPLACED and then so does the Church. Well, there you go. Thank you A Simple Beggar. I believe Sr. Lucia and our Blessed Mother.

30. FdL , and you have the wisdom of what ?
    So much wisdom that people here have to explain and define pederast pedophile and homosexuality to you. Sounds like diabolical disorientation to me. haha

31. John314, what I am saying is that pratically every NO prelate was and is aware of the abuse crisis so that anyone blowing the whistle now can simply be accused of some ulterior motive (whether true or not). Trads must thread careful here since we naturally want to believe any bad press about Bergolio that arises. In order not to fall into any trap, we should be cautious in accepting Vignano’s accusations. Remember, this crisis is basically a civil war between the two wings of the modernist NO V2 adherents. Trads have no true friends in either camp.

32. Exactly my point. Its critical the distinction be made in reporting, but that’s largely not the case.

33. Troll.

34. Wow ! Just brilliant.

35. In honor of sweepoutthefilth’s departure, someone needs to accuse MarkS of being sweepoutthefilth in disguise, as this was something she was wont to do.

    On the topic of this article, I must concur with the majority here that it is largely conjecture, invective, and, while an engaging narrative in its own right, is more Dan Brown than Denziger. You quickly get the sense that it takes a few small facts (like, there is a diocese in Michigan) and strings together unsubstantiated, sometimes invented connections to reach a foregone conclusion and tell a story. It is heavily colored by the assumption that virtually all priests are gay pedophiles and by a hatred for Opus Dei. The last part is entirely focused on indicting that organization and a slew of other wealthy Catholics, some named, some unnamed. It contains allusions to unnamed people as supporting facts, which should immediately raise red flags. Professor Q alluded to this not being a search for truth, and that is correct, though I won’t go so far as he did in questioning the writer’s motivations. In the first part, one of the more striking pieces of “evidence” was the “concern” of a couple of priests over him staying overnight while visiting, which really is proof of literally nothing at all.

36. You can’t hide behind your new moniker, sweepinthefilth
    (“MarkB” my foot).
    As there is this certain telltale sign which reveals you, plain as day.
    Anyone here with eyes to see and ears to hear, will pick up on it too.
    How pathetic of you, especially where you actually PRAISE yourself sweepinthefilth (under MarkB).
    And your instigating attacks on Alphonsusjr today– also quite revealing.
    But all this is not surprising since you were asked to stop posting, more than once and you blatantly refused to comply–so you resort to this.

37. I could not agree with you more, Herve, on all accounts.

38. Well that is one concise synopsis. You’re welcome, Melanie.

39. MarkB is definitely sweep. Sad!

40. Well well, looky here…sweepouthefilth attempting to fool us all with her new name “MarkB”
    And this PATHETIC last sentence where you actually give ADULATION to your sweepinthefilth–self, sheds a whole new light onto your disgraceful behaviour here.

41. “I learned a lot from him.”

    Referring to herself in the masculine while taking on a new male name is disturbing.

    MarkB/Sweep – The novena to Our Lady of Sorrows starts Thursday and could be quite profitable.

42. Thanks for sharing this article.

    I wonder if The saying, “if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail”, applies in the case of Engel’s reporting on this. Certainly, Vignano’s statement defending himself seems credible.

43. I like TIA, but they can be off balance from time to time. Given that article posted above from Lifesitenews, I’m guessing they would change their position.

44. @Herve:

    I agree I did go too far in impugning the author’s motives and not just her credibility. That is rash judgment, and I apologize for it.

    In extenuation, I submit that reading 1000+ pages of the same sort of guff (which is what “The Rite of Sodomy” is – don’t waste your money on it when you can get the complete Church Fathers for half the price) can make one a bit curmudgeonly.

45. Aleteia is Opus Dei? I thought OD pretended to be conservative. Aleteia has to be the most pointless pile of fluff on any “catholic” website.

46. AJR, There is definitely a “rabid” quality to TomA’s advice that isn’t representative of all Sedes. However, TomA’s comments often have the dead end smell of purist isolation and “missionary self-gagging”: “Trad Catholics should be dissassociating themselves as fast as possible from the NO sect and telling the world that these sodomite enablers are not the Church. Sadly, for decades trads made the theological mistake of recognizing apostates as Catholics, so I don’t expect many to admit their error at this point.” So, TomA, tell me about all those “abjuration” rites that take place at independent Sedevacantist chapels when those baptized in the Novus Ordo sect (Apostates) show up for Mass? Do they sign an oath that they have abjured and confessed the four heresies of V2 (ecumenism, the right to religious liberty, collegiality and denial of EENS) before receiving the Eucharist at any Sede chapel? Or are you on the road to the “Home Alone” apostolate?

47. Lenny, do you abjure the four heresies in V2 or do you accept them? Do you posit that those four heresies were promulgated by Holy Mother Church, thus blaspheming the Spotless Bride of Christ? What is your explanation of how a “Catholic” council could promulgate four heresies? What is your explanation of how a “Catholic” Pope can promulgate a protestant “mass?” How on earth do you explain the Catholic Church feeding her children poison for 60 years? If it makes you feel better you can keep besmirching sedes. It just shows us that you have no answer other than ridicule.

48. God Bless you ASB. You have pointed out one of the many ways that Satan works on the faithful to blind them to the simple, unvarnished truth. Most people on here are so busy sniping, nitpicking, and sharing unimportant details and sometimes unfounded statements while you [and Melanie] have pinpointed the most important things:……. Our Lady of Fatima’s warnings and promises and her messages relayed through Sister Lucy! As you say the REAL one and not the impostor. It’s also eye-opening to read several of Fr Luigi Villa’s Chiesa Viva articles. [The life of Fr Villa, Black mass in the Vatican, Pope Paul VI and most profane – the new diabolical occult “church” dedicated to St Padre Pio! They are indeed the stuff of nightmares.

49. Don’t let your hero worship for Sweep blind you to the truth. He used to be sound and balanced but it seems that he’s begun to “lose it” more often lately. Here’s an idea for you – READ about Monsignor Vigano for yourself and then make an adult, informed judgement. He has been a thorn in the side of the sodomite Lavender Mafia for years! Everyone except Francis and his rabble swear to Vigano’s integrity, honesty and courage. Why do you think he was demoted? God bless GSF

50. Sorry , this is intended for Mark B aka Sweep [who I thought was a man!]

51. TomA, Come on, I abjure them. I do not. Both violate the law of non-contradiction. The standard notions of sedeplenaism or sedevacantism do not apply because when Antipope Montini signed The Dogmatic Constitution of the Church on 11/21/1964, through chapter one, section 8, paragraph 2 of that document he instituted a New Church and a New Religion which has far surpassed the Protestant Reformation because of its very theft of the Chair of Peter . It is a schismatic church whose head can no longer be the Vicar of Christ. It is a situation without precedent, and there are traumatized men of good will (those who still attend Motu, FSSP, ICK & SSPX Masses) who need help to understand this situation without precedence. I know you know that leaving the Novus Ordo sect can be a painful but liberating event, but your tone is often so negative and despairing, for example: “Look for more convoluted reasoning from the RR camp to explain away the nonsense that is sure to follow.” It makes one wonder if you would be unhappy if the RR camp DIDN’T try to explain it all away!

52. Yes.
    Absolutely.
    The Lord uses whomever He wills.

53. Lenny B:

    Without a true Pope is it impossible to publicly Abjure one’s heresy, have all censures removed AND be admitted to the Sacraments. PERIOD!

    THIS is one elephant in the room that everyone ignores.

    So should anyone of such obvious GOOD WILL stay home, rather than possibly commit sacrilege and break Church Law, why is that a position that you and others so arrogantly put down and demonize? I seem to smell some sulfur…

    You should be more concerned about yourself and your own position.

54. I also agree with the Bard’s remarks. There is value in someone drudging through and making readable court documents as Mrs. Engel has done. However, her report is not good enough in something of such a serious and delicate nature. Admittedly, it would be a costly and time-consuming venture to plumb the truth of these matters from top to bottom, but there needs to at least be real interviews with the people involved. Without doing this on-the-ground work, repeating court stories and putting them into a narrative form may be no better than taking war-time propaganda and considering it as impartial evidence.
    Watching this play out as a spectator on the ground, “they” were out to get Bishop Neinstedt for his stern efforts to get the diocese — and even the state — brought back to a kind of moral and liturgical sanity (albeit of a Novus Ordo kind). Whether or not some portions of the allegations against Neinstedt are true, I’m not so sure that will be deciphered simply by scouring a Minnesota justice department website.

55. LennyB, you try and wake Catholics up your way and I’ll try to wake them up my way. If it sounds negative, oh well. It needs to be shocking to wake folks up from their stupor. As for RR apologists, they do great harm to the Catholic Faith by teaching confused Catholics that it is OK to resist the Holy Roman Pontiff. The teach confused Catholics that a Catholic Council in union with the Pope can promulgate heretical documents. Don’t you see what a contradiction follows from completely disobeying Francis but then including his name in the Canon? And this crisis is not just about Francis, its about the enitre NO establishment. It is NOT the Catholic Church and I am tired of hearing people associating false teachings and heretical documents with the Catholic Church. That is blasphemy and it is heretical to hold that such heresies can come from the Catholic Church.

56. A Simple Beggar:
    Of course I can’t “publicly” abjure it. I haven’t ignored that “elephant” at all. In fact, In Caritas and Teresa have asserted the preeminence of this Pachyderm at great length and concern for my eternal salvation several times. Nevertheless, they realized that as a “traditionalist” I remained under censure belonging to a “false sect”. As for your sulfur remark, I assume you would agree with their assessment, if not, I recommend you check your pants.

57. Well it looks like all the worms have crawled out of the dung heap to discredit not only myself but Mrs Engel’s authorship and the gentleman Mr Benedict Carter.
    I suggest you all order the ‘Catholic Inquisitor ‘ .I am sure Alphonse Jr gets several copies since he claims he ,”… has contributed thousands to this blog.”
    Now I do not know if Fleur aka Skilts can read , as evidenced by her complaints concerning links I have posted in the past, but she should at least make an attempt at it too. I am sure Herve aka Blunderass, would never shell out for any informative material.
    Do you all think you exhibit the best catholicism has to offer?

58. LennyB:

    It is CHURCH LAW that prior to receiving (true) Sacraments one must publicly abjure their heresy, and then have their censures removed by a TRUE Pope.

    Have you done so? Then what do you think you’re doing? YOUR OWN WILL.

    The same goes for Sedes, sspx, trads whatever you call yourselves: have you had your censures removed from your beloved Benedict, or Francis, or pick-your-Pope? No. Therefore you are committing sacrilege each and every time you receive a “sacrament”.

    THAT is the COLD, HARD TRUTH.

    Tom: There are FEW who want the Truth and only GOD can remove blindness, but that requires repentance first and then to request it of Him. No mere man or woman can remove blindness from anyone simply via words.

    Lenny: You are nothing (as am I) and irrelevant. God first served.

59. LennyB, you have me a bit confused. Sorry if I can’t follow. I take it that you reject V2, and you consider Montini an anti-pope. So far so good. So let me ask you point blank, who is the current sitting Pope?

60. You forgot to heap praise in MarkB.

61. Wow. The division in this thread is intense. Even LennyB (a material-formalist sedevacantist) is attacking TomA (an absolutist sedevacantist). Sad. More proof that there is no current pope.

62. TomA: “I am not in any way questioning the veracity of the charges he has leveled against Bergoglio. In fact, I am inclined to believe him wholeheartedly. But what difference will it make to rid ourselves of Bergoglio only to get another modernist?”

    Exactly. This is what many do not (refuse to?) see.

63. @A Simple Beggar, please understand that your statement may frighten people. If you could please quote the Church Law on the procedure of abjuring heresy or at least provide a reference to it, that would be very helpful.

64. @A Simple Beggar,
    Where do you receive your ‘true Sacraments?’ Who is your pope?

65. Like others who comment here, I believe that Vigano’s testimony is totally credible. While I’m sure that there are aspects which could be criticized, the bottom line is that this expose is causing a shake-up in the church hierarchy from the very top down to the most obscure priest. However even if you remove every worm from a rotted apple, the apple is still rotted. The V2 “church” cannot be purged until it is totally demolished and, by Divine Intervention, the Holy Roman Catholic Church is restored throughout the entire world. In the meantime. perhaps innocent children will be spared the agony of this vile abuse. I am thankful to Vigano for coming forward and revealing to the world the ugliness of this rot.

66. Ursula, I totally understand, and this is another way to know that thing in Rome is the church of Satan. They changed everything, took requirements away or relaxed them. It scares me, but it’s true, so I made a private abjuration (God does not require the impossible) and hope for mercy.

    I will get back to you on this with what you’re looking for. Please be patient for a moment.

67. 2V: My intent was not to attack TomA but to question his “tone” which led A Simple Beggar to presume that TomA was a Home Aloner/Catacomb Catholic who believes “we commit sacrilege every time we receive the sacraments” at Sede Chapels.

68. @simple beggar,
    You do not have to reply……I re-read it and now understand where you stand.
    God save you!

69. Umm lenny…a simple beggar is the homealoner

70. LennyB, fair enough. My tone has certainly been attacked before. My intent is to defend Holy Mother Church from being blasphemied.

71. I saw nothing wrong with your tone Tom. I suspect that a lot of folks had an issue with St. John the Baptist’s “tone”.

72. I know that. ASB and I had our back and forth as well.

73. Im sorry to say 2VT, but many trads would be happy with another Ratzinger. I really am starting to think that most of the trads are just Latin Massophiles. Give them their Latin Mass and and they are happy to squat in their Latin Mass ghetto that the modernists carve out for them.

74. More rot:

    https://miami.cbslocal.com/2018/09/04/priests-arrested-miami-beach-sex-acts-in-car/

75. Lenny:

    I Presumed NO such thing. I know Tom’s position so nice try – you’re wrong. And I didn’t make the rules about the reception of Sacraments by heretics, THE actual CHURCH did. Diabolical disorientation, pride and arrogance at its very best. Congratulations.

76. Oh btw it was funny to see and hear the squirming and annoyance when I asked a Sede priest THE simple question about jurisdiction. He didn’t want to be there. Odd isn’t it? You’d think he’d LOVE to explain it all to a newcomer. Liars. Wolves in sheep’s clothing all. Thieves and robbers. Heretics.

    Call me in a derogatory tone a “home aloner” (actual Catholic), a term which comes from the Sedes who unsurprisingly have their own perv issues, and from now on I call it like it is: you’re a HERETIC.

77. Thanks 2VT, it appears even many trads are repelled by blunt direct talk. They have all been conditioned “not to offend.” Yet Jesus came to divide. He rather us be hot or cold. Lukewarm gets vomitted out. Its not the first time I have been told I was too blunt or harsh. Won’t be the last either.

78. From Poland: We do not have a true Pope, we do not know where any priests and bishops are who have not apostasized and were ordained or consecrated by Pope Pius XII, and we cannot publicly abjure our heresies and have our censures removed by a true Pope, therefore if we want to save our soul at this critical end-time juncture, we must know where the Church is NOT and wait for God to act. The Faith comes before Sacraments! This is the true teaching of the Church and was always taught, along with the fact that we must know from whence our pastors come, to make sure they are true priests.

    A doubtful Sacrament is NO Sacrament – again – CHURCH TEACHING!

    All honor and glory to Christ my Savior, for allowing me to be persecuted by you heretics for the sake of His Truths!

    God save you!

79. Bears repeating:

    So should anyone of such obvious GOOD WILL stay home, rather than possibly commit sacrilege and break Church Law, why is that a position that you and others so arrogantly put down and demonize? Get behind me, Satan.

80. ^^^Perv should read “HOMO”.

    “And thus not only was their DOCTRINE Satanical, but their life too was diabolical.”

    -St John Chrysostom

81. While I am not a home aloner, I do respect their position and their willingness to suffer barbs and slings from fellow trads who ridicule them. They have a very valid point on authority which I do not believe can be definitively solved until we have a True Pope. I do hold to the absolutist position but do not discount the material-formal position. In my opinion, either of these positions is tenable to hold without doing grave violence to the Magesterial teaching of the Church regarding Herself. I do see any position that allows a heretic such as Montini or Ratzinger and certainly Bergolio to be called a Roman Pope, as extremely offensive to Church teaching on the Papacy. Just read Pastor Aeternus and everytime it mentions “Holy Roman Pontiff” substitute “Bergolio” in the text. See if you could read the entire document without barfing or busting out loud laughing.

82. Thank you, Tom. Whether you knew it or not or I agree with you or not I actually like you as a person.

    The position I take is the safest and most obedient position to take. God could NEVER fault anyone for safeguarding themselves against idolatry, disobedience to His Church Laws, and invalid or illicit Sacraments. We cannot say that God did not foresee the current circumstances and failed to leave explicit instructions via His Vicar on earth. No. This is a grand test of OBEDIENCE and HUMILITY. Satan has covered all of the “escape routes” via the different groups. He’s MUCH SMARTER than all of us put together! That’s why we have to follow without fail or flinching, HOLY MOTHER CHURCH in ALL things. It’s really THAT simple.

    This is absolutely the most difficult , humble and humiliating position to take – it’s not fun! I’d LOVE to go get me some “sacraments”, too. No thank you. I’d rather DIE than risk committing such sacrilege. God will not forsake me for that. Impossible. FEW are saved. I’ll go with the few and avoid the crowd, like we have here.

    May God have mercy on us all.

83. And with all those nice words A Simple Beggar thinks TomA is a heretic too.

84. Actually 2VT, I think ASB thinks I commit sacrilege going to a traditional chapel and getting sacraments. I am not sure if he thinks I am a heretic. Sacrilege is not a heresy.

85. Sigh, if only I had the time and even the inclination to stalk replies and leave short, smart answers…

    What I or anyone else thinks is neither here nor there to me. Holy Mother Church speaks on what constitutes heresy and it is SHE to whom I submit. Truth is Truth. It’s black and white. We are either a Catholic or we are a heretic. Choose your side, as Sr. Lucia basically said in her final interview.

    Good night.

86. What does it matter? Either one alone will damn your soul and I don’t wish that on myself or anyone else.

87. A Simple Beggar, please don’t forget to find the reference to the Church Law on the requirement to make a public abjuration of heresy (which those of us growing up in the Novus Ordo would no doubt have committed to a greater or lesser degree) and to have the penalty removed by the Pope before being admitted back to the Sacraments. Or perhaps someone else (Lenny B, Tom A, 2Vermont or In Caritas) could help?

88. Hello Ursula,

    I’m dealing with some personal issues right now so I do apologize. I haven’t forgotten at all but was going to put some things together for you tomorrow. As this is distressing to you I can direct you to the following document which has some references, I believe around page 39 or so:

    http://www.jmjsite.com/thetruechurch-allchapters-onecolumn-finalinlettersize.pdf

    When I speak of heresy it’s just as you say: we have all had ties to the Novus Ordo sect (a non-Catholic religion) whether born into it or not, and that is what I’m referring to when I say “heretic”. It seems most are blind to this fact and therefore my statements go right over their heads and somehow they don’t apply the term to themselves. That’s exactly how blindness works and it’s terrifying.

    Now objectively speaking, those of good will who are prepared to follow the Truth at all costs are only in error, not heresy, and can possess the supernatural gift of Faith, per St Thomas Aquinas. (I sense your good will and you’re the only one who has responded in this way or even at all to this topic I have already here brought up a number of times.) Nevertheless that does not remove the requirement to abjure one’s heresy.

    Now as we do not have or know of any true bishops or a Pope, God will not require the impossible, so we can make the Abjuration privately with the intention of doing so publicly along with the rest of the steps should the opportunity arise in the future. We need to also make a perfect act of contrition as well.

    The French Revolution was a type of our times, and true Catholics stayed home rather than break Church Law by attending the usurped, FReemasonic, government-controlled Masses and sacraments. They, too, were taunted and hated and literally spit upon. For guidance please search “YouTube they have taken away my Lord Fr Demaris” and listen to an exiled French priest counsel by letter the faithful Catholics on how exactly to conduct themselves under the circumstances.

    Never stop asking questions. Everything hinges on our not being any further deceived by anyone. Good night.

89. A Simple Beggar: “Sigh, if only I had the time and even the inclination to stalk replies and leave short, smart answers…”

    No, you just like to insert uncharitable comments into your long-winded posts.

    TomA: “Actually 2VT, I think ASB thinks I commit sacrilege going to a traditional chapel and getting sacraments. I am not sure if he thinks I am a heretic. Sacrilege is not a heresy.”

    Well then I’m not sure why he would call LennyB a “HERETIC”. You’re both “sedes”.

90. Ursula, keep in mind that A Simple Beggar’s view is not consistent.

    On the one hand he promotes the idea that a pope is necessary in order to give a public abjuration of error, but on the other hand he doesn’t believe that a pope is necessary to first officially condemn the Vatican II church as a “non-Catholic sect”.

    So he takes it upon himself to condemn all those who attend or previously attended (and have not made a so-called “private” abjuration of error) that church as non-Catholic heretics.

91. Firstly, let me note that I was correct: sweepoutthefilth was indeed unable to control herself and has returned.

    Let me explain this very clearly. To level chargers of child molestation is a very grave matter. Morally speaking, abusing a child is up there with murder. So if you make this accusation, especially publicly and in print, you damn well better have ironclad proof.

    These two articles use vague accusations and innuendo to smear Nienstedt, with the larger goal of using Nienstedt to smear Vigano. “He put is hand on my neck and so he was grooming me” is absurd to offer as “proof” of anything. So is stuff like “two priests were concerned that he stayed overnight when he visited”. So are any of the stories about sweepoutthefilth’s anonymous “cross-dressing monsignor”.

    Nienstedt was investigated by civil authorities. They didn’t charge him. That’s an actual fact.

    People are objecting to rumormongering, plain and simple. You have proof, go ahead and present it. You have rumors, “testimony” that the cops and DAs found too weak to act upon, you do not twist them to suit the pre-ordained conclusions of your hit piece.

    It’s that simple.

92. I dont know 2VT. There are many things I disagree with about the dogmatic sede home aloners. But I give them some slack since they hold the Catholic Faith. These are trying times. We have the teachings of the true Fathers, Doctors, and Popes of the Church to guide us but there questions that we may never know until a true Pope once again reigns. I also give slack to confused/decieved Catholics who are trying to make sense out of Bergolio and are just now investigating their faith. But I have very little patience for RR apologists who have studied this issue yet still deny dogmatic teachings on the Papacy. A Pope simply cannot teach heresy. It is impossible, but sadly the RR crowd says he can. Its asinine to hold such a foolish position.

93. Isn’t that a problem ‘off balance’, for every so-called ‘learned Catholic’?

    Truth is a narrow path, paved with many temptations………competition, and pride…..a cause for ‘division’ among us.

94. Wonderful to read you again, Dearest A Simple Beggar,

    Those precious few perfectly miserable souls, as is becoming more existentially evident, almost by the moment now, who Almighty God in His true as infinite mercy, has allowed to receive his grace of perseverance in obedience with humility, are simply true Catholics, in the neo-catacombs of today, not unlike those in the earliest days of the Holy Church. Those with the arrogance who somehow believe that they deserve the holy Sacraments, at any and all costs, while at once they defy the Apostolic Constitution of Pope Paul IV in 1559, as “Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio”, the authentic as properly understood teaching of the Holy as only Vatican Council in 1870, and the election law of Pope Pius XII, in 1945, as “Vacantis Apostolatus Sedis”, is unutterably stunning to bear witness to. They also deny the divine as prophetic revelation of the holy prophet Daniel, as our Blessed Lord and God Himself affirmed in Matthew 24:15, while they deny the prophetic warning of Saint Paul in 2 Thess 2:7-11, and of course the list goes on, as Jesus the Christ warned us in Matthew 7, that the fruits of the wolves dressed as sheep (Bishops in this context) are poisonous as an evil tree cannot bear good fruit. With that, He gave us the command in Matt 7:20, “Wherefore by their fruits you shall know them.”
    So that you are aware, it’s my hunch that “Ignatio” is “J. Peters” of old. Same stale machinations of fallible theologians whom he oft quotes out of context, as he assembles his self deprecating arguments. God have mercy. Lastly, it was the Council of Trent which taught that the Sacraments are necessary for our salvation, “or at least the desire to receive them”. May Almighty God continue to bless and keep you and yours’, A Simple Beggar. In caritas.

95. Ursula, beware of ‘deceivers’, who’s soul is in total ‘darkness’……pray and watch.

    “ask a man: ‘are you a saint?’ If he answers in the affirmative, you can be very sure that he is not.” (Fulton Sheen)

96. Poland: And now you show the darkness of your own soul and the depth of your pride. I am no saint and I don’t even know whether or not I am in a State of Grace (are you?) I am trying to work out my salvation in literal fear and trembling.

    You quote Sheen? He was in love with Vatican II. He is an apostate.

    There is no Pope and at this juncture I do not know a living priest who has not apostasized, has jurisdiction and from whom I can receive valid and licit Sacraments.

    Get behind me Satan.

97. 2Vermont: I’m not even going to reply to all that you said which you are wrong about, except for your comment about a Pope and Vatican II. Of course a valid Pope would condemn Vatican II and the entire organization as non-Catholic, possibly at some point if we are not nearing the Judgment already. I never said such a thing. Please stop typing.

98. Dear Ursula,

    I need to state that the Pope is necessary in order to remove censures for heresy by the fact that all jurisdiction comes through and from the Pope, and currently there are no (publically known) bishops possessing jurisdiction from a valid Pope.

99. Fr Rueda’s book about the Homosexual network in the Catholic Church is infinitely superior

100. Ursula:

     Please read these prophecies carefully in the light of what has been presented (and this is not an endorsement of the source):

     http://marienfried.com/catholic%20teachings/prophecy%20of%20apostasy.html

101. Please don’t beat up on Randy Engel, or especially Louis, for this unfortunate report. I continue to believe that Mrs. Engel will acknowledge any and all factual deficiencies in her original story, and I’m convinced she was misled but acting in good faith. The demands of creating a new publication like the Inquisitor are bigger than we can imagine, so please have some charitable forbearance. However, I do hope Mrs. Engel will respond to these new developments posthaste.

102. What is one to make of Nienstedt promoting the anti-sodomite work of TFP?

     Living a double life?

     http://www.seraphim.my/silentscream/defending_a_higher_law.pdf

103. Thank you, Gods Servant. I’m sorry but ASB doesn’t always register lol.

     It is quite simple, isn’t it? May God guide and protect you.

104. Given the state of the church and papacy, I think that all are prone to be off-balance on certain issues from time to time, but nothing that I’ve seen that would contradict doctrine/dogma.

105. Dear Simple Beggar,
     I think I know now what you are talking about: Reserved Sins, which include apostasy, heresy, schism, abortion (and some rarer sins)… Indeed frightening if there are no bishops with jurisdiction.
     But like you said God does not abandon us, and I would like to include a link to a talk on making a Perfect Act of Contrition which you also mentioned. It’s a very good talk on this subject by a Benedictine monk and very consoling in these darkest times. Practicing Perfect Contrition will help to stay in a state of grace and will be invaluable at the hour of death especially if there is no priest available: https://novusordowatch.org/2017/11/perfect-contrition-key-to-heaven/

106. A Simple Beggar:

     “2Vermont: I’m not even going to reply to all that you said which you are wrong about, except for your comment about a Pope and Vatican II. Of course a valid Pope would condemn Vatican II and the entire organization as non-Catholic, possibly at some point if we are not nearing the Judgment already. I never said such a thing. Please stop typing.”

     You believe you can condemn all of those who attend the Novus Ordo church or those who used to attend the Novus Ordo but never made a “private” abjuration as HERETICS because of their current or past association with a “non-Catholic sect”. No pope has officially condemned the Novus Ordo church as a non-Catholic sect. In one breath you say a person can’t attend the mass of traditional clergy because there is no pope approving of it and in another breath you condemn all of these folks as heretics without a pope. At best you are a hypocrite.

     I happen to agree that the Novus Ordo church is a non-Catholic sect. Where you and I (and most others) disagree is that I (we) don’t CONDEMN other traditional Catholics (laity AND clergy) who recognize the same thing ….as bad-willed heretics.

     TomA: As long as the home-aloners take it upon themselves to condemn a whole group of Catholics as heretics, I can not get behind them.

107. Ursula, in certain circumstance, jurisdiction is supplied extraordinary to priests for the salvation of souls. There is also the principal of epikeia to consider when determining the licitness of sacraments.

108. 2VT, I also cannot agree with the blanket condemnation some home aloners hurl at those who believe they have a duty to preserve the priesthood and offer sacraments to the faithful. It seems they like to pick and choose which canonical laws they believe are still valid and which ones are no longer in effect. In this time of apostasy and interregnum, we have Divine Law and Tradition to guide us. There is no longer any authority that binds the faithful to any discipline.

109. Yes, it is true. Deo Gratias!

110. 2Vermont: Your assessment is again incorrect, I don’t condemn anyone and the Church Herself condemns the Novus Ordo religion. We are called to discern Truth from error and call out error for what it is. I, too, was part of the NO as I am not old enough to recall anything else. I, too, have to sit and hope that one day I can be received back into the true Church, prior to receiving Sacraments. I, too, was poisoned by the heresies and bought into them for a time because I didn’t know anything else. Objectively speaking, I, too, until received back into the Church am to be categorized as an heretic. As Ursula states, if that isn’t to be possible then God knows my heart and God will provide. So just stop it. The Truth only hurts those who are in error.

     Thank you so much, Ursula, for the link. I have made a number of Perfect Acts of Contrition and it is a teaching of the Church that no one is to dare say that it doesn’t suffice if there is no other opportunity to confess. I have a great old book on the subject if you’re interested I can grab the title for you so you can obtain a copy.

     Tom: I believed in supplied jurisdiction for a time and even attended an independent and finally a Sede chapel, but as I knew this subject of jurisdiction was of such paramount importance, I would not stop searching and praying for answers, and I found all the proof that I need that it is simply not true. Epikiea, for one, is NEVER to be utilized with respect to anything touching on the Sacraments. This is a fact and I can prove it.

111. Thanks Tom, maybe there is still hope, can you perhaps provide a reference? As far as I know sede priests and bishops do not believe they have jurisdiction, not sure about the SSPX.

112. Tom: The Authority that binds the faithful are the Church laws that were in place as of 1958. We are not in a state of anarchy. And to say that God couldn’t foresee the present circumstances and make clear provisions is dead wrong. We are called to be obedient at this time, not make our own rules, do our own thing for “sacraments”. If I thought for one minute that the Sedes provided valid and licit Sacraments, via priests who have jurisdiction in any way, I would be the first in line.

113. Ursula, Please be sure to see my response just above,

114. ASB, my criticism is for those who think they have the only valid way of dealing with this apostasy. I am sure if I went back and re-read some of my posts, I too would be guilty of sounding authoritative. My point about epikeia is that the principal does exists and no one alive right now can judge another if he or she applies it to a given situation. Some folks think that epikeia gives them the jurisdiction to set up parishes and schools (SSPX), while some think we can only take basic measures (home aloners), While you and I do not see eye to eye on all the aspects of practicing our faith in this time of apostasy, I consider you an ally and fellow Catholic.

115. ASB, if I truly thought I was commiting sacrilege by recieving a sacrament or participating in a liturigical service, I too would refrain. Also, if one even has the slightest doubt about a sacrament, one is duty bound to abstain. It is for this reason that I will never set foot into a NO occupied building.

116. A Simple Beggar:

     I am not going to STOP speaking the Truth about your beliefs.

     THE CHURCH has not officially and formally condemned the Novus Ordo sect because of the very fact that there is NO POPE to do so. Yet YOU and your fellow home-aloners think you have the right to make blanket condemnations as if it has done so. YOU take it upon yourself to call Catholics in good faith “HERETICS”.

     Anyone with eyes can see your beliefs are hypocritical. Need a pope to abjure errors and give and receive sacraments. Don’t need a pope to condemn a whole group of people and call them heretics.

117. Dear Ursula,

     TomA is simply wrong about, “supplied jurisdiction”. No Holy Roman Pontiff, no supplied jurisdiction, period and end. The power of jurisdiction was commanded by Christ Jesus to Blessed Peter in the Keys to loose and bind. All jurisdiction flows through him, as the Holy Catholic Church has always taught. There is no jurisdiction whatsoever to be had without the Vicar of Christ present on the earth. When TomA suggests this to be true, he is either making it up himself or borrowing the profound error from someone else. A Simple Beggar is correct. I implore your reading of infallible Papal teaching on these matters in “Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio”, the Apostolic Constitution of Pope Paul IV in 1559 during Trent and “Vacantis Apostolica Sedis”, as the election law of Pope Pius XII, 1945, each and both preparing us for this time, infallibly. Pope Pius XII infallibly taught, that in an interregnum, no one, as NO ONE, can act as the Holy Roman Pontiff, which means there are NO BISHOPS which can be consecrated, for instance, as an act which can only be approved by the Holy Roman Pontiff, period and end. This is simply infallible evidence pointing directly to the time in which we find ourselves, the Great Apostasy, the Rebellion. I pray this helps as our very eternal salvation rests on humble as obedient submission into the One True Church without attention to any personal cost. Amen. In caritas.

118. Tom, thank you. You’ve always been respectful and kind in any debate (that I have seen) and I have really appreciated that about you. We are allies insofar as we sincerely seek the Truth.

     I have to disagree on multiple ways of dealing with the apostasy. When all is said and done, few are saved, not the many, and there will be found to have been a correct path and then the incorrect and deadly ones. The thing we can’t do is judge others definitively because there are those few of good will – as you have said yourself – sitting in the various positions and as I once was. However, I sat wherever I was, always asking questions and knowing that I’d leave it all behind in a heartbeat if I found out I was wrong (and I did – 4 times).

     An observation I’d like to make is this: the one difference between you and me, is that if the shoe were on the other foot and you told me that you had proof that Epikiea cannot be applied to anything touching on the Sacraments, I would ask to see that proof straight away. I’d just have to know – is it true? This is so important, is it true??? Could I be wrong? And if I am wrong, I only want the Truth, at any cost! See that is my position. I live for the Truth, and the Truth is Jesus Christ. I don’t care who hates me – knock yourselves out – I have a soul to save. I have no problem whatsoever being wrong – TRUTH is everything!

     What I observe in this combox are people who seem to not really want to get to the bottom of anything – the truth of the matter- but who simply want to be right, and hold onto their position for dear life, but not for the sake of the Truth but simply to be right. And so it goes, around in circles day after day, the same arguments, the same nastiness and biting remarks. No progress. Would you agree, Tom?

119. In Caritas, I simply said that the principal exists. I made no claim as to its application in any given circumstance.

120. Thank you again, Tom. You said:

     “Also, if one even has the slightest doubt about a sacrament, one is duty bound to abstain.”

     That is all that I am doing, in obedience. The nasties can hate. They couldn’t possibly be more irrelevant to me.

121. Hello again TomA,

     The “principle” only exists when the Vicar of Christ exists, period and end. In caritas.

122. ASB, if you were convinced that my soul was in danger, it would be your Christian duty to warn me. That is why I am always open to charitable debate from others who demostrate a true concern for salvation of souls and not simply to win arguments.

123. Dear TomA,

     He IS warning you and you apparently don’t even see that. The deception is a pious one, as I was not long ago there myself. When you fully assent to the teaching of “Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio” and “Vacantis Apostolica Sedis”, without exception, as the infallible teachings leave none, then you will know with certitude that what you are attending is simply masterful stagecraft, but that which will take you to Hell. I pray this helps. In caritas.

124. Dear 2Vermont,

     As A Simple Beggar continually reminds, Christ has not, because He cannot, abandon His Mystical Body and Bride, the Holy Catholic Church. You are blind to the reality that Popes have indeed condemned the false church of the Antichrist, which is all dressed up Catholic, while controlling all of the true Church’s former real estate holdings and including of course the Vatican, while it is the abomination of desolation. You do not know the true teaching and this speaks as res ipsa loquitur. Read and pray for discernment: “Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio” and “Vacantis Apostolica Sedis”. Do you not believe that Almighty God is apart from time and space, as He created them, ex nihilo? This false church was long ago condemned in time and space and that condemnation fully as completely applies to the here and now. Lastly, Christ commanded in John 14: “If ANY man is to come after Me, he must first deny HIMSELF, take up his cross, and follow Me.” When Jesus the Christ commands that we must deny ourselves, that of course includes denying everything that we passionately hold onto that is error, or we will be damned. I pray this helps. In caritas.

125. Tom: That is correct and another of my main concerns – souls. The thought of even a mass murderer going to hell disturbs me greatly. I have literally cried and begged on behalf of people I knew only indirectly that were in danger of dying. It’s why I come here now again and even bother, at a great cost to myself at times. I try to just put it out there, without being harsh. I admit I have been harsh lately at times when I felt it was called for, when I sense a certain “spirit” at work. There is a time and place for harshness, especially in this battle in which we find ourselves, against principalities and powers and lies, and with the stakes being so very high.

     The one thing I have to constantly remind myself is that only God can remove blindness. We don’t do the convincing, we only present facts to be considered. I clearly remember when certain concepts either went right over my head or I was just plain not ready to hear it and rejected things as false in pure ignorance. Something I or we have to say may just happen to fall on ears that are ready at that very moment to hear what we have to say, by God’s Grace. In those moments we are simply instruments used by God to help fill the Kingdom of Heaven.

     That being said I’ll probably soon go away again at least for a time, lol. This does take a certain toll on me and I really do not have a lot of time for it.

126. Tom: To address the warning part. When one even does try to warn anyone here, even gently, it only results in the downright nasty and vicious attacks which I have received even without having directly warned anyone. LOL. That beloved, mind-control V2 mantra: “Judging!” But alas and again I agree with you.

127. 2VT, you have succintly expressed my concern with some of the things ASB and IC have stated.

128. Vermont:

     You are DEAD wrong and merely spewing out the “party line” and NOT the teaching of Holy Mother Church.

     1) Do you know what the Four Marks of the Church are? Do you even know why we are taught them?? We are taught them so that WE can IDENTIFY THE CHURCH! Yes, OURSELVES! The Novus Ordo V2 sect does NOT possess the 4 Marks!

     2) Do you even know the story of the Japanese who went without priests for 200 TWO.HUNDRED.YEARS. Once a missionary finally showed up, do you know what they asked him? They asked him, “Who is your leader in Rome?” Then they asked something regarding the Blessed Mother which I cannot recall right now as my blood pressure must be through the roof. These people preserved and handed down the TRUE Faith for 200 years. We are responsible for knowing our Faith so well that WE can identify where the CHURCH is NOT. There is no teaching that says we have to wait for a council to tell us that the entity we belong to is a false church. How do you think this apostasy happened in the first place? It was a punishment for sin and happened because Catholics no longer knew their Faith and didn’t care. Had they known their Faith they wouldn’t have gone along….and those who did know their Faith DID NOT and hence did NOT apostasize.

     3) Catholics have the right and the DUTY to know FROM WHENCE THEIR PASTORS COME.

     4) Catholics were ALWAYS taught that “The FAITH comes BEFORE Sacraments”. In fact, Vermont, St. John Vianney taught just that as well. (Not expounding on these last two, I already have mentioned them elsewhere anyway).

     5) The true Catholics of the French Revolution did not wait for a council or Pope to tell them that in order to remain CATHOLIC that they needed to STAY HOME, yet that’s exactly what they did, and suffered greatly for it from people JUST like you who call themselves “Catholic”. The FAITH came BEFORE SACRAMENTS!

     I could go on…and on…but I’m tired. You are 200% WRONG. Just stop. You’re not interested in the Truth. Carry on then with the counter-church of Satan leading you by the nose into the pit. I can’t cure your blindness, only God can CHOOSE to remove it if you only would somehow MERIT that action.

129. Vermont: You OBVIOUSLY failed to read a previous reply of mine to yours, by your current accusations (calling people heretics). I address just this subject, so either you didn’t read it or you lack reading comprehension skills. Stop.

130. Allow me to add the fact that Jesus said, “MY SHEEP KNOW MY VOICE.”

131. +St. Michael is the ‘Vicar of the Most High and the Prince of His people,” ever prepared to render assistance. The Fathers of the Church are of one mind in teaching that St. Michael is the guardian angel and protector of the Catholic Church.
     +Time and again, in centuries past, St. Michael came to rescue when dreadful wars and persecutions threatened to destroy Christianity. He it was who, at the command of Mary, Queen of Angels, came to the assistance of Constantine the Great in the fourth century…….he said: “I am Michael the chief of the angelic legions of the Lord of hosts, the protector of the Christian Religion……”

     +Later, St. Michael proved himself a powerful protector against the invasions of barbarian hordes. The Greek Emperor Justinian I erected six churches in his honor, in grateful recognition of this assistance. In the fifteenth century when it seemed that the Turks would conquer all Europe, St. Michael, at the command of the Blessed Virgin, again championed the cause of Christianity, and a glorious victory was gained over the infidels.

     +St. Joan of Arc, the Maid of Orleans who in the fifteenth century saved France, ascribed her vocation and her victories to St. Michael. Three times he appeared to her and informed her that she was called to deliver her country. And he still wages incessant war with the archfiend Satan, in the great kingdom of God upon earth, THE CHURCH.

     +Pope Leo XII, realizing by divine enlightenment the present and future struggles of the Church against the power of hell, felt convinced that through the intervention of St. Michael, hell would be conquered, and the Church restored to peace and liberty. He therefore composed a prayer in honor of the warrior Archangel……..

     +The Church has special need of St. Michael’s powerful protection in our times. On all sides she is assailed by strong and bitter enemies. The terrible crimes which have been committed in recent times and are still being committed against the Church, both in her sanctuaries and her members, surely are instigated by the devil. No human mind could be base enough to conceive and put them into execution.

     +We know that the gates of hell shall never prevail against the Church, for our Lord has promised to be with her till the end of time, but we must do our part in defending her cause. God might have cast the revel angels down to hell by a single act of His will, but He chose rather to send against them His armies of loyal spirits, under the leadership of great St Michael. So, too, in the present critical times, He could confound the enemies of the Church by merely willing to do so. But He will, rather, that we should cooperate in her defense, under the leadership of the great captain of the heavenly hosts. THE CHURCH STILL EXISTS……. UNTIL THE END OF TIME!

     +O Mary Immaculate, great Queen of heaven and earth and our gentle advocate, we beg you to intercede for us. Amen.
     +O glorious St. Michael, guardian and defender of the Church of Jesus Christ, come to the assistance of this Church, against which the powers of hell are unchained. Make haste, therefore, O invincible Prince, to help the people of God against the inroads of the lost spirits and grant us the victory. Amen.
     +O Glorious St. Joseph, we implore at this time thy powerful aid for the entire Church Militant. Amen.

132. If you don’t mind, and I’m not trying to be difficult, how do you know when you have found the Truth?
     It seems like we are in a time when one cannot know it…at least I cannot know it.
     How do I find it when there are convincing arguments on both sides of a question?

133. To the home aloners: Has the Church taught infallibly that in the instance of a hierarchy who refuses to elevate a faithful Catholic to the papacy in one or more elections that a bishop who recognizes the papal usurpers as usurpers cannot consecrate new bishops independent of the usurpers? I am not looking for your citation to a general teaching that you argue covers the present situation; I am looking for a citation to a SPECIFIC TEACHING covering the EXACT SITUATION described above that has been taught in such a way that it is BINDING ON THE FAITHFUL.

134. In absence of an authoritative declaration on these matters what remains for each one of us is persistent prayer for guidance to the truth. “Lord that I my see!” (Lk 18;41). Good advice given to me years ago at a time of discernment was to daily recite aloud the Veni Creator Spiritus. Also, our holy guardian angels can be great helpers in this struggle to do the right thing. Here is an absolutely amazing true story from the early 20th century which illustrates the role of our guardian angels to guide and protect us, especially suitable for our ever more decadent times: https://www.traditioninaction.org/Cultural/C058_Modesty.htm
     Not to forget that Got made us to live in these times as they are most conducive to our salvation. Scriptures tell and saints wrote about and even wished to live in (St Thérèse of Lisieux) our times. St Louis de Montfort said the greatest saints would be those of later days.
     Tout est grâce – Everything is grace.

135. Thank you, Ursula, dear sister in Christ.

136. Dear St. Cyprian,

     Firstly, as difficult as it may be, will you please cease in your jingoistic use of pejorative terms as, “you home aloners”, particularly as it is existentially evident and to be known with divine certitude, that anyone who adheres to that thing which calls itself the “Catholic Church”, which blasphemes Almighty God in His Blessed Triune nature, as it blasphemes Jesus the Christ in His divinity, as it denies the Credo, in “Lumen Gentium”–16, in a deceitful as tacit denial, period and end, is patently outside of the Catholic Church. This has utterly cataclysmic repercussions, as of course then, anyone who assents to Roncalli–Bergoglio, as “Pope” of the Catholic Church, as it cannot both be the “Catholic Church” and not be the “Catholic Church”, in respect to what the Catholic Church, as founded by Jesus the Christ in Apostolic Succession actually in Truth is, is in utter apostasy and doesn’t even know it, which means they are actually as literally outside the Holy Catholic Church, where there simply is no salvation, deFide, as you are well aware.

     As Christ Jesus commanded, “You will know them by their fruits.” As He commanded that an evil tree CANNOT bear good fruit and a good tree CANNOT bear evil fruit. These commands all with the fore warning to them in Matthew 7:15: “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.” “Archbishop” Lefebvre was an apostate, as he signed onto the so called, “Second Vatican Council” documents, period and end, as this thing itself does indeed speak as clearly. As an apostate, he in an ipso-facto understanding, left the Catholic Church, latae sententiae, (sentence already passed). With the latae sententiae excommunication, the prelate also receives, “infamy of law”, which renders him incapable of rendering a valid or legal ecclesiastical act, as ordaining priests or consecrating Bishops, period and end.

     Now to answer your query. Pope Paul IV, in, “Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio” (http://www.dailycatholic.org/cumexapo.htm), made it pristinely as patently clear under any and all circumstances, as law, and as law thus without exception, as if there is exception, as Saint Thomas Aquinas teaches, there is no law, full stop, period and end. Pope Paul IV infallibly taught, in his Apostolic Constitution, that whenever a prelate, as in this case Lefebvre, commits heresy, he does not only lose the privilege of his ecclesial office, whatever that office is, but he can NEVER EVER AGAIN in his ENTIRE life, regain that office or a lesser one, period and end, as he has incurred, “infamy of law”. He is then relegated to the quiet monastic life to beg Almighty God for his salvation unto his death or handed over to secular authorities for prosecution, whatever the case may be. He is then known to be an ongoing existential danger to the faithful for the rest of his life and therefore must be separated from them. To return to the Catholic Church, he must abjure his heresy to none other than the Holy Roman Pontiff, full stop, period and end. No Holy Roman Pontiff, no capacity for a prelate to abjure publically, as A Simple Beggar has been generally speaking to of late, in my reading of him.

     You see St. Cyprian, Holy Mother Church has long ago spoken in Her divine voice, as proffered only as singularly, by the true Vicar of Christ in this hideous world. In this case, Pope Paul IV, in 1559 and during the Council of Trent thus. All those who opine that a true Pope must declare all of this illicit and only a true Pope can, are perfectly blinded to the reality that a true Pope already has, as Almighty God is infinitely apart from the time and space which He gave being to, ex nihilo. When you couple Cum Ex with, “Vacantis Apostolica Sedis”, we have all we need to know with certitude where Holy Mother Church simply CANNOT BE, as A Simple Beggar has also recently written about. This all requires perfect submission in humility with a filial love of Almighty God and His true Holy Church, inviolable in Her Truth and splendor. I do pray this helps. In caritas.

137. One more aspect to your query, St. Cyprian,

     If there is a Bishop alive today, who is “hidden”, as in publically he is not known to be a Bishop or if he is known, a paltry few know, as it is existentially evident that this fact is not publically known to be today, who was validly consecrated under the Papal Jurisdiction of Pius XII in 1958 lets say, and before his death on Oct. 9 of that year, and he did not sign onto “VCII”, did not recognize the false popes as true Pontiffs, fully rejects the false church and all of its false teachings, false sacraments, etc., I believe he would retain the Apostolic privilege of offering Holy Orders validly and licitly now, and certainly if he was given this authority privately by Pope Pius XII prior to his death, and finally if the ordinates were properly tonsured, etc., as the Church has always done. That said, and I’ve noted that it is my personal belief, we know with divine certitude that this same, “hidden Bishop”, could not today, nor since the death of Pope Pius XII, validly or licitly consecrate even one Successor of the Apostles as Bishop, as according to the infallible Papal election law of Pope Pius XII, “Vacantis Apostolica Sedis”, defining what can and cannot be done as well, during an interregnum, without time limits. Pope Pius XII, in 1945, ordered with his Apostolic Authority, that anyone who would attempt “ANY” act that only the Roman Pontiff can perform, as in authorizing the consecration of a priest as Bishop, is “NULL and VOID”, as it had NEVER occurred. Amen. In caritas.

138. A Simple Bear: “1) Do you know what the Four Marks of the Church are? Do you even know why we are taught them?? We are taught them so that WE can IDENTIFY THE CHURCH! Yes, OURSELVES!”

     Great, then please identify it!

     Since we know ‘by faith’ that the true Church with four marks is visible society, and that the visible Church with four marks will never be overcome by the gates of hell, please tell us where the visible, indefectible Church is today.

     And because the visible Church with four marks is a hierarchical institution, please explain how the Church did not defect if the visible, hierarchical institution at the time of Pius XII was the true Church, while THE SAME visible hierarchical institution that existed a month later, after the election of John XXIII, was a false Church. If that had happened, the gates of hell would have prevailed. If you disagree, tell me why I am wrong.

     And don’t give me Tom A’s line that it’s a “mystery”. The only mystery is how anyone can hold the absurd position without realizing it is contrary to the faith.
     The position is almost as absurd as trying to convince Catholics that to be a “true Catholic” today, they have to sit at home on Sundays, while publicly declaring themselves to be excommunicated heretics with no way of having their excommunication lifted, since there’s no pope! You know, I almost used that very argument against Tom A a few months ago, since that’s where the “logic” of sede-vacantism leads, but decided not to.

     The “logic” of sede-vacantism also leads to the conclusion that the gates of hell have prevailed against the Church. The reason most sedes don’t realize it is because they are ignorant of the nature of the Church and what “the gates of hell shall not prevail” means. They don’t realize that the promise of Christ applies to the institution itself, which will never cease to exist or undergo any substantial change, but instead will remain, with its divine constitution, exactly as Christ founded it until his Second Coming.

     Let’s see how you will do when put to the test. Since you say the true Church can be identified, show us where the visible, hierarchical institution, with four marks and a hierarchy consisting of bishops who received their jurisdiction from the Pope, can be found today. And it better be the identical institution that existed on the day Pius XII died, in 1958. If you can’t identify it, you’ve either succeeded in proving that Christ is a liar, or that your own position is false.

139. In Caritas, it seems you are implying that an illicit sacrament is also invalid. Once a man is ordained a Bishop, he never loses the power to consecrate a deacon, priest, or bishop. Even if he loses all his offices and the faith itself.

140. This is a madhouse. A complete madhouse. I’m out.

     “He who continues in anger, strife, and a bitter spirit has a taste of the air of hell.”

     -Philip Neri

141. Ignatio, the four marks are One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic. When you look at the NO conciliar mess, do you see One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic? I see a conciliar mess split into conservative and liberal wings. I see an unHoly mess teaching false doctrines. I do see a universal organization, however it teaches a false religion. I also see a loss of Apostolicity with the destruction of proper form for Holy Orders. So you also are in a conundrum to prove that the conciliar mess you call the Catholic Church also bears the four marks of the Church. There is nothing Holy about the NO and V2 and even you know that. So ipso facto the propagators of NO and V2 cannot be the Catholic Church. I cannot point you to the four marks. I do know Christ cannot lie nor decieve us. I cannot reason as to the current state of His Church but just as I can reason that Baptists are not Catholic, I can reason that Novus Ordites are not Catholic.

142. Also Ignatio, if Holy Mother Church gave us the heresies of V2 and the NO, then again, the gates of hell prevailed according to you. I don’t blame you for coming up with a myriad of questions that sedevacantism entails, but it is the only answer that solves the bigger question of Holy Mother Church teaching evil doctrines to Her children. You do have to accept “mystery” or else you are stuck blaspheming Holy Mother Church by accusing Her of feeding Her children poison. The only other answer is that there must be a hidden Pope somewhere. Someone here has advanced that idea. I forget who. But it doesn’t matter because the only thing that can ontologically be known with certitude is that Holy Mother Church could not have given Her children V2 and the NO. Therefore those who promulgated such evil held no office in the Catholic Church. To believe otherwise is to deny the Vatican Council and Christ’s own promise.

143. Hello Tom,

     Not without a Papal Mandate from a valid sitting Pope.

     Regarding hidden bishops, In Caritas, even if those you speak of are now all dead (even though God has given man up to 120 years), it seems God has made an extraordinary provision nevertheless in order to preserve Apostolic succession. See John ch 21:20-23. It is St. John, who appeared at Knock, wearing the Bishop’s mitre, on a very important and official day connected to the LaSalette apparition (“The Church will be in eclipse.”)

144. Exactly, Tom. Hardly unity in belief, in the Faith. And I see two forms of worship, one returning us to the Tower of Babel while suppressing the true.

145. Again, exactly. And the gates of hell are the mouths of heretics. No, the gates of hell have not prevailed over Christ’s pure and spotless Bride, but they reign over the counter-church of Satan.

146. ASB, so you are in essence saying a Bishop is not a Bishop durring interregnums. All power is lost because there is no Pope. Does this apply to confessions and baptisms also. I know a priest only has the power to confirm if given from a Bishop and then he no longer has it. But a priest has not attained the fullness of ministry yet. A Bishop has. He has all the power he needs. The Pope does not give power to the Bishop in the manner the Bishop does to the priest. The Papacy is an office not a higher level of priesthood. Can you produce pre V2 authoritative sources to confirm your position?

147. Hello Tom,

     This has been proven and provided here in the past ad nauseaum and it’s crystal clear. There is not to be anarchy but obedience during an extended interregnum such as this. I can, but not right now. I’d have to get back to you or maybe In Caritas can take over.

     Have a good afternoon :).

148. Tom: I should have at least said that of course a bishop is still a bishop, if licitly and validly consecrated prior to the death of Pius XII.

149. Tom: In Caritas has already provided one citation in the above reply to Cyprian.

150. Hello TomA,

     As A Simple Beggar wrote, not without Papal Jurisdiction. You are suggesting that which you simply do not know, at best your opinion, and at worst with utter doubt. Again, as I suggested to St. Cyprian, pray for discernment and read the election law of Pope Pius XII, circa 1945, the first year of his Pontificate, if my memory serves (“Vacantis Apostolica Sedis”), whereby he explicitly provides the law for an interregnum and further he binds us, to the reality as truth, that in an interregnum, all laws of governance in place at the moment of the last Holy Roman Pontiff’s death remain FULLY as completely in force until the next Pope is validly elected, period and end, and therefore as I have written to you before and A Simple Beggar again now, there is frankly no opportunity for chaos, as it is infinitely impossible that there could be, any chaos present in the true Mystical Body of Christ, His Bride, the Church, as “chaos” is the signature of the Enemy. I pray this helps. In caritas.

151. I agree!

152. Good idea.

     Everyone *thinks* his way is the right way and has his own “proofs”, but nobody *knows* what position is TRUE.
     I quit.
     I’m following you out the door.

153. Wonderful TomA,

     You are in this writing “speaking” clear truth as Truth. God bless you TomA. As Jesus the Christ, Son of the Living God, allowed one of His own, as Judias Iscariot to betray Him with a kiss that He simply did not, as He could not refuse, as He is the Author of divine prophecy, so also has He allowed the human hierarchy of His One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church to betray Him as Judas, as He is the Author of divine prophecy (Daniel 9:27; 2Thess2, for instance). He cannot refuse our willful assent, that which is in filial love of Him and that which hates Him with the malignant animus of Lucifer himself. The Church is as it can only remain, unto the end, One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic, as you beautifully write. The Apostolic piece is in “interregnum”, as the Church has lived Holy Saturday now since Oct. 9, 1958. Please pray for us Pope Pius XII. Amen. Alleluia. Almighty God’s Will, not ours as the infinitely as perfectly miserable creatures that we are, be done. In caritas.

154. And too soon at that, for I was going to reply to you later on your question of how to know the truth. I am working.

155. Ignatio: IT is in eclipse. Eclipsed by the false church to which you adhere. Eclipsed as the Mother of God stated it would be, by way of passing along a message from God Almighty Himself.

     It is visible in its members who hold entirely the true Catholic Faith, and there is at least ONE living visible non-apostate, licit and valid bishop on earth at this very moment. Count on it. Christ promised this and He has delivered.

     Many prophecies, including those of Our Lady of Good Success, speak of a few “hidden” souls preserving the Faith….”hidden”. She also speaks of the Sanctuary light going out, as did Pius XII. What exactly is it that the Sanctuary light indicates, Ignoratio?

156. “After this many of his disciples went back; and walked no more with him.” Jn 6:67. The hard truth often repels many and they simply leave for it is too inconvenient.

157. He who is silent in the face of lies is complicit.

158. So true, Tom. The Truth is a sharp sword which hurts only those in error.

159. The other fallacy in Ignatio’s position is that simply because I cannot point to the visible Church nor can I explain how Christ is keeping His promise to be with us all times, that this some how proves his premise by default that Bergolio the heretical non-Catholic is Pope of the Catholic Church.

160. I took a lunch break and walked back in.

     It’s not the hard truth that repels me, Tom A. I really like your posts and the way you “speak” plainly. I like how ASB speaks plainly, also.
     I just want to know which hard truth you both speak is the correct truth and how does one *know* that one is correct so that I can follow it.
     I don’t know how to tell which one is correct.

     To FSSP or not to FSSP.
     To SSPX or not to SSPX.
     To SSPV/CMRI or not to SSPV/CMRI.
     To Independent or not to Independent.
     To stay home or not to stay home.

161. If you get a chance, I’m finished pouting, and I’m still interested.

162. And that is along the lines of what St Thomas Aquinas talks about when discussing who possesses Faith. Those who rely on reason alone hold only a mere opinion in accordance with their own will, not Supernatural Faith.

163. Hi Georgianne,

     I can give you an idea and I can do that later tonight, I hope, if I can behave myself. I am on a short lunch break now. What we need to arrive at is a position of moral certitude. I went through ALL of the positions you list. I literally went into HELL and back. It was horrible.

164. (Horrible in the final stages….then I surrendered.)

165. I am sorry if I misread the intention of your post. I can tell you that I am just as confused as you as to what to do. I only know one thing with certitude based on traditional church teaching, and that is that conciliar church is not Catholic.

166. LOL :). That’s okay. It’s all part of the journey of those who truly, desperately want the Truth.

167. That is where I started, Tom, in 2015. Then I sat where I was for months when I knew I needed to act, until God literally kicked me out. No joke. But I went on to another “escape route”, and then yet another, and the problem I realize I had was that I was trying to figure it all out on my own and never once did I ask GOD to guide me.

168. Georgianna: Begin a serious novena to St Joseph immediately. Pray the Holy Cloak Novena (30 days). He will NOT fail you in your request.

169. Thank you for this – I will also start straight away with the Holy Cloak Novena to St Joseph.

170. You’re welcome, Ursula. It’s simply beautiful. It takes some time but this situation warrants a bit of sacrifice.

171. ASB: Please point me to this post. I am willing to admit I was wrong, if I was.

     All I remember you saying is that it is the Church that condemns the Vatican II sect, all those (past and present) associated with it as heretics, including those traditional clergy and laity who have personally abandoned the false religion. That you aren’t condemning them all.

     But it seems that you are merely interpreting Church documents, etc and coming to that conclusion YOURSELF. In other words, YOUR opinion. Until we get a true pope, there has been no such “Church condemnation”.

172. ASB: “just like people like you who call yourself Catholic”.

     Yep, those of us who are traditional Catholics but do not agree with the home-aloner’s conclusions “just call themselves Catholic”. And I’m supposed to believe that you don’t judge trads heretics.

     TOMA: I hope you realize that these folks don’t consider you Catholic. Stay away. Far away.

173. Yes, Tom, the Vatican II sect can not possibly be the Catholic Church. I await Ignatio’s response to how the former exhibits all four marks.

174. ASB: “It is visible in its members who hold entirely the true Catholic Faith, and there is at least ONE living visible non-apostate, licit and valid bishop on earth at this very moment. Count on it. Christ promised this and He has delivered.”

     There are only 2 living bishops left from Pius XII’s time (and they’re pretty darn old), so who else could possibly be this bishop you speak of if the traditional bishops are not licit in your opinion?

175. TomA: “Once a man is ordained a Bishop, he never loses the power to consecrate a deacon, priest, or bishop. Even if he loses all his offices and the faith itself.”

     Correct. This is why the Catholic Church has always recognized the Orthodox bishops as VALID bishops. Therefore, it is false to say that papal mandate is needed for a consecration to be VALID.

176. 2V: that is simply false. Have you read the document above mentioned by IC?

177. 2V: I speak of bishops who did not apostasize into the V2 sect.

     I state this at least twice somewhere here or in the last 2 of Louie’s articles and very briefly:

     At Knock, St John appeared wearing a bishop’s mitre. Never before has an apostle been depicted wearing a mitre. That very day coincided with a big official day connected to LaSalette (“the Church will be in eclipse”).

     Now read John Ch 21:20-23. Surprise. Just when all seems lost (as Our Lady has stated) there we will always have our necessary valid and licit Bishop, providing the necessary Apostolic Succession. God will not be outdone, and we as dumb little sheep are no match for Satan and his voluminous and myriad deceptions.

178. But when those two men die, who are these bishops who are licit and valid? where are they? What pope gave them the papal mandate that you say they must have?

179. Dear 2Vermont,

     If you have a true zeal for Truth, you must not come to foolish conclusions, as what you just wrote is simply foolish. You know not what you write and this thing itself speaks. Please read and pray for discernment, “Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio” and “Vacantis Apostolica Sedis”. This has explicitly nothing to do with A Simple Beggar’s “opinion”, rather it has to do with divine certitude, through the acts of true Vicars of Christ, period and end. If you study these 2 infallible Magisterial documents, you will know that nothing that appears to be the Church, including Her Sacraments, can be valid as true, no matter who opines to the contrary, and what vestments or miter they wear, as they are nothing more than laymen as you and I, period and end. They are the most greatly deceived, the vestment wearers, as they actually believe that they have had their ontology marked with Orders. I do pray this helps. In caritas.

180. Sorry I’m confused – what 2 men? Are you speaking of Novus Ordo Bishops consecrated prior to the death of Pius XII.

     Did you read the Scripture, and as it relates to Knock, and the circumstances we find ourselves in as proposed to you here?

     A Papal mandate is required in order to consecrate new bishops. So therefore if we do not have a Pope that we know of, there can be no new Consecrations, and those who have been illicitly or invalidly consecrated have no office, jurisdiction or power to do anything whatsoever. That’s why it’s so critical to make sure we get this right (with God’s help), because if the Sacraments we receive are invalid or illicit, they are sacrilegious and hence ineffective, including Confession.

181. Speaking of Divine certitude, I hope you, In Caritas, acknowledges that nothing, absolutely nothing, that is divulged in any apparition is to be considered as part of the deposit of faith, necessary to hold for salvation.

182. Yes of course I am aware of that, however, we ignore them at our own peril. Sr. Lucia stated that Our Lady complained that not enough people were paying attention to her message, and hence the “imminent” chastisement of V2 and the false church was the result. Fatima is actually in a superior category to the others, there is a term for it which I can’t recall. They are definitely helpful in putting together the pieces of the puzzle. Ultimately though the Church and Scripture holds all of the answers, of course.

183. Hi TomA,

     Certainly TomA, what you say is true. The private apparitions, approved by the One True Church prior to 1958, are just that, private. They are primarily for those few souls they involve and given to the rest of us in divine assistance, as Almighty God so Wills, for our salvation. As you say, they are not part and parcel with the Deposit of Faith. That said, they can never contradict divine Revelation nor Holy Tradition, as you know. Why do you ask this of me? In caritas.

184. Georgianne,

     I apologize, but I’m just not going to be able to get to this tonight. My eyes are burning and I can’t seem to formulate my response at the moment. As I said the time leading up to the attainment of certitude was extremely painful for me and maybe that’s part of it. Give me some time and I’ll get my head together on this subject. I hate to leave you hanging though so in the meantime….

     In Caritas,

     Should you have the time and inclination, would you mind giving Georgianne some simple insights on how you arrived at moral certitude in our given situation and position? How one is to know they have found the Truth? With your background I’d be interested to hear your response myself. Her question is above if I’m messing it up. And by the way, it’s great to see you again as well. Please pray for me…I need prayers. Thank you and God bless you.

185. Yes, Georgianne, there is a Catholic Church! https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1130072770502684&id=304612506382052

186. ASB, re-read my post just above this one. I am asking you what bishop(s) this is. There are currently 2 bishops left who were consecrated by Pius XII. Where/Who is this bishop you speak of that is the visible Church if not these two bishops? Are you suggesting that Pius XII secretly consecrated another man as bishop ? And why would this man remain silent and essentially invisible to the world amidst the destruction ? Why would this man not ordain new priests to provide Sacraments to the Church (since you believe there can be o other valid sacrament by any other bishop)?

187. Edit: The “o” should read “no”

188. Good morning Georgianne,

     A Simple Beggar asked that I offer some insight on how I arrived at this place of certitude in knowing the truth as Truth of where the true as Holy Catholic Church is and is not, today. Sorrowfully, for Johnbilbee’s sake and all but all of those who believe themselves to be truly Catholic, what he offers you is simply Lucifer’s pious deception, which holds all of the metaphysical accidentals but holds in truth as Truth, no metaphysical substance of the One, True Church, therefore as being cannot both be and not be, at the same time and under the same respect, that thing that he is offering you simply cannot both be the true Catholic Church and not be the true Catholic Church, at the same time, in respect to what the true Church actually is, as TomA pointed out yesterday: One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic. While that pious deception that Johnbilbee shows you appears holy and Catholic, we know with certitude it is not “One”, as it is one of many, and most importantly, it lacks Apostolic succession with metaphysical certitude and not simply opinion. How can we know this to a point of staking our very lives for this belief? Simply by knowing what Pope Paul IV taught infallibly in, “Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio” in 1559 during the Council of Trent, as his only Apostolic Constitution, and in the election law of Pope Pius XII in 1945, “Vacantis Apostolica Sedis”. Please pray for the discernment of the Holy Ghost and study these two infallible documents, which render us having not only metaphysical but divine certitude in what we give our willful assent to. The documents show that Johnbilbee’s, “sacraments”, are abominations of desolation, giving only the sensible as outward appearance of truth but in deception, as in truth as Truth, they can only be devoid of all things Christ Jesus, with divine certitude. Amen. Alleluia. I fervently pray this helps. In caritas.

189. Hi 2V,

     Before I answer I was asking who the 2 bishops you speak of might be. Are you referring to known living bishops consecrated by Pius XII who are members of the Novus Ordo sect? I assume that’s the case.

190. Well yes, ASB, I would agree with you that that would be the assumption. But, if there are no validly consecrated bishops by Pius XII who are not part of the Vatican II sect, what bishop do you speak of?

     And if there is some other Pius XII bishop out there somewhere why doesn’t he explicitly ordain more priests, consecrate more bishops, and provide the licit Sacraments you believe do not exist among the traditional clergy (knowing he has a papal mandate from Pius XII)?

191. Hi 2V,

     I’m just seeing your reply now, I went looking for it, but I’ll have to get back with you over the weekend.

Comments are closed.