In the post Michael Voris almost gets the SSPX I promised to provide an example demonstrating why it is an abuse of authority to require anyone to sign a statement affirming that Vatican II, in its entirety, is an integral part of Catholic tradition.
That example is given in the video below. It was made while the blog was down, so those who didn’t find it via Facebook may not have seen it.
At any rate, it’s longer than most (17 minutes), but it’s meticulously presented for a reason. I’d encourage you to watch it to the end where you’ll see two things; one, a challenge to Michael Voris, and secondly, a bit of personal, though relevant, information about myself.
Well, Louie, another valuable contribution to teaching the truth.
I’ve become pretty sick of the whole mess we are in, and therefore will no longer read any blogs (including The Vortex) about our poor Church. Except yours. You are always fair, knowledgeable, and interesting. No personal invective, no slamming or defamation – you have integrity.
Thanks for this video. I think I will start studying the VII texts as you have (as a penance for Lent) to see just what they do say – good exercise in learning the Faith.
Thank you, Louie, for this personal, heartfelt and faithfilled video.
I have challenged fellow Catholics to answer the question: “What are the GOOD fruits of Vatican II?” The response is usually a blank stare and some meaningless stammering. “By the fruits, you will know them.” Ecumenism is the new god of Vatican II.
I’m not taking issue with your overall premise of unfair treatment of the SSPX, nor that having to sign a statement that “accepts VII in its entirety without exception or qualification as an integral part of the Catholic Faith.” (did I get that correct ?). I am a bit skeptical about whether that is what was required to be signed as it has been my understanding that the actual documents were never released—but maybe I missed the leak.
However, I don’t believe you made your case by this specific example in the manner that you made it.
You pulled a concluding sentence out of context from the paragraph that recounted the Church’s roots from the faithful Jews. So the footnote that you mention lends weight that “His cross Christ ….reconciled Jews and Gentiles making both one in Himself” should be interpreted according to St. Paul.
It isn’t for two paragraphs that the document starts to talk about the rejection of Christ by the Jews. Four paragraphs later it states “Although the Church is the new people of God, the Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God.” That’s a pretty solid juxtaposition of the Church as the new people of God against the modern Jews as people of God.
I’m not claiming it’s a good document. Nor would I defend how it’s been interpreted. I just don’t think you made your case by that example in the manner that you made it.
I don’t make a judgment about the SSPX because it’s too complicated for someone such as myself who lacks authority and competence to do so. If you really want to put Voris and Niles back on their heels over making judgments about proper jurisdiction in the Church, I have a better historical example: St. Vincent Ferrer. I don’t offer this as an apology for the SSPX, but merely as a warning to those without authority from pontificating about jurisdiction.
The same priest that Voris linked to concerning “ecclesiastical porn” gave a sermon on St. Vincent Ferrer and stated that Ferrer received special universal jurisdiction–full powers of a legate a latere Christ. He received that jurisdiction from the anti-pope Benedict XIII (but only later confirmed by the Council of Constance and Pope Martin V—according to the priest). So, for a time anyway, Ferrer was operating under the jurisdiction granted by an anti-pope. “Vincent was one of the most resolute and faithful adherents of Benedict XIII, and by his word, sanctity, and miracles he did much to strengthen Benedict’s position.” (source ). I find it disturbing that a saint like that could get wrong something so fundamental as who is the real pope. By supporting Benedict XIII, Ferrer was attacking the pope the Church recognizes about as strongly as one can–that is, he’s not the pope!
This is pretty decent historical example for why people like Voris and Niles need to exercise greater humility—even some humility—about issues like the SSPX and toward those like The Remnant and CFN that won’t condemn the SSPX to Voris’ liking.
Secondly, they reference “some cardinal” that says the SSPX is in schism. That use of anonymous sources is a typical secular media technique to prevent the reader from independently verifying the facts. It’s time they’re called out for that. I’ve got “some cardinal” that came out publicly and said cohabitating couples and those in adulterous civil relationships are not living in sin. I doubt Voris and Niles would accept that cardinal as a reliable source. For all we know they got their assessment from “some cardinal” named Kasper.
Rats. My source link to the Catholic Encyclopedia didn’t format correctly. But the link works from the following text.
‘The Way, the Truth and the Life, no man cometh unto the Father, but by Me.’ Words the Modernist have spent mouldy decades trying to outwite. Not gonna happen. We must reject any teaching that ‘affirms’ the unnecessity’ of baptism. Baptism in Christ is essential, this is so simple. Vatican II teaches that the unbaptised are saved – the fact that those unbaptised may happen to be Jews is simply the lever to make the necessity of baptism ‘outdated’ – if unbaptised Jews are saved and on the same ‘path of salvation’ as the Baptised, then, really, what’s the need? This is the great danger of raising Judaism to any sort of equality with the True Faith, it (post-Prophetic Judaism) has, is and will always be used as a weapon against Christ. ‘He who rejects me rejects Him Who sent Me.’ To call Nostra Aetate ‘The Foundation Document, the Magna Carta’ of the ‘dialogue between the Church and the Jews’ is very telling. The Magna Carte was a document effectively stealing the power of monarchy. Nostra Aetate along with the rest of the evil documents have one overall aim, to steal the ‘rights, function and authority’ of the Church – and where to these theives want to place the stolen treasures? Pope Pius IX complained that Churchmen of his day were subscribing to and teaching against the Church’s ‘rights, function and authority’ in pursuit of liberalism and universalism. Rabbinical Judasim is the ‘natural’ enemy of Christ. Judasim ‘in our time’ rejects God (he who rejects Me rejects the Father). It awaits the ‘messiah’ who can only be the ‘antichrist’. Once again VII has lands on the side of Christ’s enemies. Witness how the Novus Ordo ‘popes’ spend and have spent their days attacking the True Church’s ‘rights, function and authority.’ The lord of ‘Nostra Aetate’ is belial, not Christ.
PS. Everything said in my comment above stands almost without any need for change with regards to Islam. It too rejects Christ and thereby rejects the Father, it too awaits its ‘messiah’, it too has been used as a lever by those New Ordo clergy who want to obstruct or destroy the ‘rights, funtion and authority’ Christ’s Bride by raising falsehood. True Popes warn against the evil of putting Truth and error on the same level. To do so ‘spreads in the souls of the faithful the poison of denial and error.’ (Pope Leo XIII)
What Louie has pointed out in Nostra Aetate is the very deliberate spreading the poison of the denial of Truth and the poison of the promotion of error.
Leo XIII also said, ‘When an organism perishes and corrupts, it is because it has ceased to be under the action of the causes which had given it its form and constitution.’ This is why the Novus Ordo ‘church’ is degeneration and corruption in it teachings, worship and disciplines, because it has ‘ceased’ to be under the Grace of the True Church.