In the Encyclical Satis Cognitum, Pope Leo XIII proposed:
We have thought it most conducive … to describe the exemplar and, as it were, the lineaments of the Church. Amongst these the most worthy of Our chief consideration is Unity. This the Divine Author impressed on it as a lasting sign of truth and of unconquerable strength.
One notes that this unity that the Holy Father is about to describe is a fundamental characteristic of the Church of Christ; one that will endure until the end of time.
The Holy Father states:
It is clear that God absolutely willed that there should be unity in His Church, and … it is evident what kind of unity He willed, and by means of what principle He ordained that this unity should be maintained…
He teaches that “the unity of the faith is of necessity required for the unity of the Church.”
Let’s recap briefly:
– The unity of the Church is absolutely willed by God, therefore, it most certainly exists.
– Unity of faith is required in order for the unity of the Church to be realized.
– Unity is a permanent feature of the one true Church as a lasting sign.
With regard to the latter, inasmuch as unity is a lasting sign of the Church’s truth and unconquerable strength, it is necessary that such be made manifest as a visible feature of that perfect society that is the Church, which is herself, as the Holy Father tells us, “always visible.”
The Holy Father goes on to cite Aquinas:
“The unity of the Church is manifested in the mutual connection or communication of its members, and likewise in the relation of all the members of the Church to one head” (St. Thomas, 2a 2ae, 9, xxxix., a. I).
The Holy Father proceeds to address in some detail “by means of what principle God ordained that this unity should be maintained.” He writes:
It is clear that, by the will and command of God, the Church rests upon St. Peter, just as a building rests on its foundation. Now the proper nature of a foundation is to be a principle of cohesion for the various parts of the building. It must be the necessary condition of stability and strength. Remove it and the whole building falls. It is consequently the Office of St. Peter to support the Church, and to guard it in all its strength and indestructible unity.
In our day, given the present state of the Office of Peter, one may be moved to question just how indestructible that unity truly is!
Pope Leo XIII, however, meets that concern by making it clear that it is not simply the person of Peter, the Roman Pontiff, that serves as the principle of cohesion that provides for the stability and strength of the entire Church; rather, it is the Roman Church. To this end, he cited two of the early Church Fathers:
Who is unaware of the many and evident testimonies of the holy Fathers which exist to this effect? Most remarkable is that of St. Irenaeus who, referring to the Roman Church, says: “With this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, it is necessary that every Church should be in concord;” and St. Cyprian also says of the Roman Church, that “it is the root and mother of the Catholic Church, the chair of Peter, and the principal Church whence sacerdotal unity has its source.”
The Holy Father then saw fit to explain and expound upon St. Cyprian’s words, writing:
He [St. Cyprian] calls it the chair of Peter because it is occupied by the successor of Peter: he calls it the principal Church, on account of the primacy conferred on Peter himself and his legitimate successors; and the source of unity, because the Roman Church is the efficient cause of unity in the Christian commonwealth.
The Roman Church is the efficient cause of unity…
This should make sense to us given that there are times when the Chair of Peter is empty (e.g., the interregnum period following the death of a pope), and it cannot be said that the unity of the Church at such moments is destroyed because the principle of cohesion has thus been removed. For as long as the Roman Church endures, so too does the unity of the Christian commonwealth.
Being indefectible, the Roman Church will stand not just as a visible sign of unity, but as its efficient cause as well, and this until the end of time.
Pope Leo XIII taught, as previously mentioned, “the unity of the faith is of necessity required for the unity of the Church.” This being so, one can understand why the gift of indefectibility pertains most particularly to the Church of Rome – that is, to the See of Rome – she who is both the sign and the cause of unity.
The 1917 Catholic Encyclopedia, in its treatment of the indefectibility of the Church, explains:
The gift of indefectibility plainly does not guarantee each several part of the Church against heresy or apostasy. The promise is made to the corporate body. Individual Churches may become corrupt in morals, may fall into heresy, may even apostatize …
Only to One particular Church is indefectibility assured, viz. to the See of Rome. To Peter, and in him to all his successors in the chief pastorate, Christ committed the task of confirming his brethren in the Faith (Luke 22:32); and thus, to the Roman Church, as Cyprian says, “faithlessness cannot gain access” (Epistle 54).”
At this, dear reader, we stand face-to-face with a genuine conundrum.
It is perfectly plain to all with eyes to see that faithlessness has most certainly gained access to the institution that is operating out of Rome today under the headship of Jorge Bergoglio. This terrible reality, however, is not a purely recent development.
Some fifty years ago, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre had warned that this same institution, though it is pleased to call itself the Catholic Church, is really nothing of the sort; rather, he said, it is a “counterfeit church.” Why did he say as much? Because this Roman church has lost the faith!
One may also think of Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich, who in 1820 had visions of a “counterfeit church,” and the warning issued by Our Lady of LaSalette, who said that Rome will lose the faith, becoming the seat of the Antichrist.
When we look to the Eternal City today, what do we see? We see but one visible society that is commonly accepted as the See of Rome; it is corrupt, immoral, and infested with grave error, and it disseminates its filth globally and with impunity.
Taking into consideration all that has been written here, one cannot help but ask, nay, make that plead to the Almighty:
Where, O’ Lord, is the Roman Pontiff upon whom the Church rests just as a building rests on its foundation? Where is the Vicar of Christ, who serves as the principle of cohesion and provides the necessary condition of stability and strength of the one true Church? Where is the pope, he who supports the Church and guards it in all its strength and indestructible unity?
Where is the indefectible Roman Church to be found? Where is this See of Rome, that visible society that serves as both the sign and cause of the unity with which you endowed the one true Church? Where, pray tell, is this Church of Rome wherein faithlessness cannot gain access?
Dear God, we beg Thee, enlighten us!
St. Robert Bellarmine
Book III: On the Church Militant; CH. X: Secret Infidels, p. 303-304.
Objection B: The Church cannot exist without Bishops and priests, as Jerome teaches. But who knows for certain who might be true bishops and priests since that depends upon the intention of the one ordaining and upon an invisible character.
Reply to Objection B: Two things can be considered on Bishops: Firstly, that they hold the place of Christ so for that reason we owe obedience to them, and because they cannot deceive us in those things necessary for salvation. Secondly, that they might have the power of Order and Jurisdiction. If it is considered in the first mode, we are certain with an infallible certitude that these, whom we see, are our true Bishops and Pastors. For this, neither faith, nor the character of order, nor even legitimate election is required, but only that they be held for such by the Church. Since they are Bishops on account of the Church, they are not against it; God assists those who are held for such lest they would err in teaching the Church. Now, if this is considered in the second manner, we do not have any but a moral certitude that these will truly be Bishops, although it is certain, with infallible certitude, that at least some are true, otherwise God will have deserted the Church. For this purpose, to hold the Church is certain and clearly visible in so far as the heads and members, the first consideration suffices.
Bellarmine is speaking on secret infidels and defending the Church’s teaching that secret heretics or infidels are included in the visible Church by external profession only. In the comments above, it seems that he is teaching that the visibility of the Church is maintained even in a hierarchy that is faithless. Knowing Bellarmine’s position on the Papacy and Infallibility, I can only imagine his words above presume a valid and reigning pontiff. My other thought is Bellarmine may be saying that the visibility of the Church is maintained even when a counterfeit church pretends to be the true Catholic Church.
What are your thoughts on this Louie?
Does anyone have any thoughts on this?
(Ubi Maria, ibi Ecclesia, 14th May 1989)
“And since, she participated in the foundation of the Church, she has the needs of the Church at heart. She who was filled with the Spirit of Truth and Holiness, she wanted the apostles also, to be filled with this same Spirit and we know that they were filled with this Spirit since they started to talk and they converted thousands of souls and they even gave their life rather than deny the truths that they preached.
I’d like to take this opportunity to make a few practical conclusions considering the situation in which we find ourselves today.
People who don’t really understand our position and our attitude towards Vatican II, they like to say, and to remind us constantly, that “Where the Pope is, there is the Church;” therefore, to oppose the Pope is to separate yourself from the Church. But isn’t it better to say, with a more profound truth, “Where Mary is, there is the Church.”
Because it is through Mary that the Apostles were made founders of the Church. And Mary cannot err, Mary is infallible. Mary cannot sin, she is immaculate, conceived without sin. She is holy, perfect and she is the light of truth, and that is what she communicated to the Apostles.
Therefore, as far as the Apostles and St. Peter continued to be united to Mary in the Spirit of Truth, in the Spirit of Holiness, YES, O YES, we are with the Popes, we are with the Church because She continues her holy work.
But, if, by some incredible circumstances, the successor of Peter decided no longer to follow Mary, no longer to preach the Spirit of Truth and Holiness. What would we do? Whom would we turn to? Quite simply, we would stay with Mary. We would surround her as the apostles did on Pentecost Sunday. And we would remain with her in the Spirit of Truth and Holiness.”
This is speaking of occult heretics. All of the Vatican II hierarchy profess the religion of Vatican II. How is that occult?
Right. It’s my view that Mary is what Eve would have been like if she hadn’t bought Ol’ Nick’s lie.
“But isn’t it better to say, with a more profound truth, ‘Where Mary is, there is the Church’.”
No, that would be better to say, since Mary is not part of the Church Militant, but the Church Triumphant. If it was to a member of the Church Triumphant that Catholic should look to know where the Church is, it would be Christ, not Mary, since Christ is the true head of the Church.
I agree 2Vermont. I posted the quote primarily for what Bellarmine says below when speaking about the visibility of the Church. I believe it may be relevant since the question was asked, “Where is the indefectible Roman Church?”.
Bellarmine: For this purpose, to hold the Church is certain and clearly visible in so far as the heads and members, the first consideration suffices.
1st Consideration: Firstly, that they hold the place of Christ so for that reason we owe obedience to them, and because they cannot deceive us in those things necessary for salvation. […] If it is considered in the first mode, we are certain with an infallible certitude that these, whom we see, are our true Bishops and Pastors. For this, neither faith, nor the character of order, nor even legitimate election is required, but only that they be held for such by the Church. Since they are Bishops on account of the Church, they are not against it; God assists those who are held for such lest they would err in teaching the Church.
To me, Bellarmine seems to be saying that as long as the hierarchy presents itself as the Catholic Church, then the visibility of the Church is maintained, even though the true Church is eclipsed. Despite dealing with manifest heretics today, as you rightly point out, I think Bellarmine’s position may still hold. Just my thoughts. Feel free to poke holes in them. For the R&R, the visibility of the Church is the biggest hurdle to get over before accepting the Sede position. The Whore holds in act what the Church holds in potency. Isn’t this what an eclipse is all about?
I don’t see how it applies: He says “because they cannot deceive us in those things necessary for salvation”. How can that be the “conciliar” hierarchy? Maybe I’m not following you.
“…isn’t it better to say, with a more profound truth, “Where Mary is, there is the Church.”
Yes, it is better to say that than to say, (given the present abomination who is supposed to be the Vicar of Christ) that “where the pope is there is the Church.” Francis is where the Church is??? No Catholic would say that.
I understand the confusion, which is why I posted it, to get other thoughts on it. I think Bellarmine makes that statement because he is speaking about secret infidels, thus they can’t deceive anyone because they are not manifestly against the Church. Forget that part though.
Focus on this.
Bellarmine says plainly: neither faith, nor the character of order, nor even legitimate election is required, but only that they be held for such by the Church.
Remember, this is in his argument defending the visibility of the Church.
I don’t know where the Roman Catholic Church is, but I can know where it is not. It is not in Rome nor is it at my once Catholic dioceses nor is it at my local once Catholic parish.
But he ends that section with ….”lest they would err in teaching the Church.”
This can not be talking about the situation we are in…because these men ARE erring in teaching the Church.
Quote, “In our day, given the present state of the Office of Peter, one may be moved to question just how indestructible that unity truly is!”
Quote “Where, pray tell, is this Church of Rome wherein faithlessness cannot gain access?”
The indestructible Church of Rome exists in the 2 infallible levels of the magisterium, less the modern contradictions of it. This magisterium we have because of the popes throughout history, and those who contradict it, even if they are popes, are the counterfeit church who have lost the faith, roughly or basically it’s the 1958 magisterium, because the contradictions come after that time. Because of confusion, most people from every tribe of tradition are material heretics till they understand this!?!
Yes, they could still be popes if they contradict this magisterium on a material level so “lost the faith” would only actually occur on the actual level of heresy and not the material level of heresy.
No, we must say, with St Ambrose, “where Peter is, there is the Church”.
The pope is the principle of unity. Read “Pastor Aeternus” of Vatican I – the whole thing, it’s not too long. You will see that Francis doesn’t fit. It is quite clear that were Francis is, there the Church isn’t. It’s impossible.
So, where IS Peter, Librorum?
Certainly not in Rome.
The modern “catholic church” has zero to do with the True Catholic Faith. Stay far from the fake church and close to the Faith. Our Lord is still in charge. He will restore the True Church in His own time.
Good morning mothermostforgiving,
Praised be Jesus the Christ, Son of the Living God, true God and true Man. Amen. Alleluia.
Saint Paul’s Second Epistle to the Church of Thessalonica, chapter 2, verses 6-11, Douay-Rheims copy: “6 And now you know what withholdeth, that he may be reveled in his time. 7 For the mystery of iniquity already worketh; only that he who now holdeth, do hold, until he be taken out of the way. 8 And then that wicked one shall be revealed whom the Lord Jesus shall kill with the spirit of his mouth; and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming, him, 9 Whose coming is according to the working of Satan, in all power, and signs, and lying wonders, 10 And in all seduction of iniquity to them that perish; because they receive not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying: 11 That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity.”
What can only now be understood, in this as our time, is what Saint Paul is prophetically warning us of here, in this his Epistle, as to both the Church of Thessalonica and (both/and) to the Universal Church of all time, and unto the end of time. Amen. Christ our Lord and Savior, gave us the means of entry into His One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church unto the moment of the end of time, in the most holy Sacrament of Baptism, the most vital of all, and as Christ Jesus Himself received, and not by a priest, in most holy John, and its ministry not requiring a priest thus, of the holy Roman Catholic Church-praised be God.
Saint Paul suggests first that he has informed them of, “what”, withholds Satan from bringing forth the son of perdition, the man of sin, and tells them that before the Second Coming of Christ, this man must first be revealed and there must be the “revolt”, understood as the Great Apostasy from Holy Church, whose nascent genesis was Luther’s revolt, as now clearly understood, as res ipsa loquitur. The, “what”, that withheld Satan until his prophesied time from bringing forth the person of Antichrist, is now plainly understood as having been the once visible– One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. The, “who”, then, that Saint Paul speaks of, can only be one man in the cosmos, as Saint Paul plainly said that, “he”, was already holding back Satan in Saint Paul’s time, because it was not yet the prophetic time of Antichrist. The, “he”, of course, is the Vicar of Christ, the true Holy Roman Pontiff, with Peter as he, in Saint Paul’s time, yes. Only the Vicar of Christ Jesus our Lord, held the power of God to prevent Satan from bringing forth the very person of Antichrist, the man of sin, as the son of perdition. That is now patently clear in what Saint Paul says, because he says that once-he who now holdeth, do hold, until he be taken out of the way- the very next thing Saint Paul says is, “…and then that wicked one shall be revealed…”. We are here, mothermostforgiving, the prophesy has been revealed and Christ Jesus commands us to know the time of the season that we are in. Amen. Alleluia. Praised be Jesus the Christ. God bless and keep you. In caritas.
“And in all seduction of iniquity to them that perish; because they receive not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying: 11 That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity.”
And I know many of them (quite a few attend Novus Ordo services) that will perish because they hate the truth and WANT the lie. Thank you, In caritas.
Wow, God bless you Louie – asked myself the same question earlier today.
My inadequate answer is to follow St. Vincent of Lerins by clinging to Antiquity in the face of a foreign contagin that is seeking to infect the whole body, and that the Church is where the traditional Masses are.
Even if authentic Catholics are reduced to a handful, that is the True Church of Christ. St. Athanasius ora pro nobis!
Everyone pray 3 Hail Marys for Louie and the true Catholic Church of Christ!
Jesus bless you all
Are you so certain? You provided an answer to where this See of Rome, “this Church of Rome wherein faithlessness cannot gain access” could emerge. TomA said on the IAAD blog a year ago to this day at 6:43 AM:
“After Peter, the Church, through the clergy and even the people of Rome, have the power to designate their Bishop, thus the Pope. We can safely say that all those who accept V2 and the NO cannot be of the Church since they hold a false faith. If the traditionalists who live in Rome were to elect a Bishop for themselves, he would become Pope. I wish they would.”
Maybe you’re not far off: In 2019, the SSPX, FSSP, ICKSP and the Sodalitium MBC (Cassiciacum Thesis) all have a very significant and growing presence in Lazio/Roma Diocese. What if they agreed to designate a Roman Bishop? What if it also become politically necessary for Matteo Salvini and the Lega Nord to recognize this Traditional Bishop of Rome as the true occupant of the Cathedra della the Basilica di San Giovanni in Laterano ? Just sayin.
Bishop Gracida recently published an article on his blog written by an anonymous priest which states why Benedict is the one and only pope. Where the pope is there is the Church. It is very offensive that so many Catholics are ignoring Bishop Gracida right now. Every truly Catholic media outlet should be clamoring to interview the only successor of the Apostles who is actually calling for an investigation of the terrible events of 2013. May God bless and Our Lady protect Bishop Gracida.
I’m not sure how any Catholic does not see that what you put forth here is the truth. Catholics follow the Pope who is Catholic yet New Orders follow some really evil communist. Recognize & Resist people are following a really evil communist just in a disobedient manner. And sedevecantists are attending Masses that are not in Communion with the Pope, insisting they are in the middle of a prolonged interregnum, which is obviously not what we are experiencing. I see nothing further to do for Catholics than to refrain from sin and pray unceasingly that the Holy Ghost will grant us fortitude and final perseverance in these end days.
But “Benedict XVI” has never renounced his numerous heresies. (And he’s the POPE???)
I wish they would!
You’ve come a long way to truth in Truth over time, as I have been allowed to bear witness to, in your words. Praised be God in His most Holy Name and Triune Person hood. Amen. May our most Holy as Virgin Mother continue to hold you in her Immaculate Heart and carry you unto her most Sacred Heart, our Lord Jesus the Christ, true God and Man. Amen. Alleluia. May God have mercy on me. In caritas.
Ratzinger was never a Bishop, as he was “consecrated” under the juridical masquerade of a false pope. Ratzinger is not Catholic, as he lost the Faith, if he ever held it, latae sentenciae, when he assented to the first false pope, Roncalli. See, “Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio”, Pope Paul IV’s singular Apostolic Constitution, written during his short 4 year reign during Trent. Amen. In caritas.
Of course, that scenario would require every one of those R&R groups to first conclude that the Holy See is vacant. In other words they would have to accept sedevacantism. Too many are still too busy fighting that conclusion.
Hello In Caritas, Do you believe the visible Church with four marks no longer exists?
“…[T]he once visible– One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church” is now, I believe, ensconced in the hearts of the Catholic faithful. Therefore (and in spite of the Church’s enemies’ desire that it not be so) it still exists and the four marks of the Church are still in play, just as our Blessed Lord said they would be till He comes again. The gates of hell have NOT prevailed against it. Viva Christo Rey!!!
Kindly spare us the copious virtue signaling in your future posts. They could all be 40-80% shorter without that incessant virtue signaling. Reserve your blessings, doxologies, etc. for the privacy of your prie-dieu and thus retain their merit. Eternal thanks.
We are commanded by Christ our Lord, as the Angelic Doctor taught, to reason to Truth and freely as willfully, assent to divine Revelation, the Catholic Faith. This is the teaching of the One, Holy Church, Faith and reason (both/and), Amen. Faith alone is the heresy of fideism, as it allows for the wolves dressed as sheep to steal our souls, as our blessed Dominus Deus commanded, thus warned us, Amen. When the human intellect conforms to reality, “as it is”, this is “truth”, as Saint Thomas Aquinas taught. For the second time now, the query is posed to you. Tell us where we may today and since Oct. 9, 1958 find Apostolic Succession, FormerSede and then formal heresy as apostasy, will be demonstrated for you if needs be, under the juridical facade of, “Solemnly Promulgated”. In caritas.
God bless you and yours’, AlphonsusJr. In caritas.
To clarify, sedevecantists are attending Masses that are not in communion with what they consider a *false* pope. It’s an important distinction.
Cute. I knew you were a pious devil.
Formal apostolic succession is found today in every bishop that has been legally appointed to a see, which was founded by an apostle or canonically established by the Church after the death of the last apostle, and is presently recognized as being in canonical possession of the see by the Church. That would include every member of the episcopate that is in union with Pope Francis.
I answered your question directly. Will you answer mine?
Well said. Truth vs the Fantasy world of R&R
I would like to appeal to reason. “And what concord hath Christ with Belial? Or what part hath the faithful with the unbeliever? (2Cor 6:15) That tells me that someone like Francis, or any of the previous Vatican II claimants to the Chair of Peter, have “no part” with the faithful of the Catholic Church. And that’s because, to be “faithful” is to accept all the tenets of the Faith, e.g. that the Catholic Church is the only religion which Almighty God finds acceptable for worship of Him, and that all of the other religions are abominations in His sight. Neither Francis nor any of the other VII “popes” adhered to that particular tenet of the Faith. In fact, they promulgated the exact contrary of that tenet via their maniacal promotion of “ecumenism.” So, does it stand to reason that they could in any way be thought of as acceptable stewards of Christ’s Church? And yet there are some who attempt to make the case that, due to certain arcane elements found in Church documents and teaching, such heretics can, in fact, be condidered valid popes and can remain in the Chair of Peter. The fact is, that’s either true or it’s false. If it’s true, then St. Paul errs in his second epistle to the Corinthians. If it’s false, then none of the VII “popes” were valid but were, rather, heretical usurpers of the Chair of Peter.
Rosalia, agreed. If for no other reason than it would be a GREAT story, why is Bishop Gracida not being interviewed at this time by Louie, Matt, Skojec, J D Flynn, EWTN, etc…? Mr. Voris interviewed him several years ago when Bishop Gracida’s strong suggestion was for the laity to do what Louie and many in this combox do so well—identify that which is not Catholic and loudly, persistently, passionately call it out especially and most importantly in the presence of those deceived NO-goers and deceiving NO-clergy. They seem to prefer to echo each other here, at NOW, and in private doing no active NO-goer any real good.
“Where, O’ Lord, is the Roman Pontiff upon whom the Church rests just as a building rests on its foundation? Where is the Vicar of Christ, who serves as the principle of cohesion and provides the necessary condition of stability and strength of the one true Church? Where is the pope, he who supports the Church and guards it in all its strength and indestructible unity?”- To this I say, the chair of Peter is filled but at present has Stage 4 Alzheimer’s disease and this doesn’t remove him ipso facto from the office. Don’t even go there SEDE’s I’ve heard it all. And that doesn’t make me a papist either.
“Where is the indefectible Roman Church to be found? Where is this See of Rome, that visible society that serves as both the sign and cause of the unity with which you endowed the one true Church? Where, pray tell, is this Church of Rome wherein faithlessness cannot gain access?”- To this I say, at present has Stage 4 Alzheimer’s disease and this don’t remove them ipso facto from their positions.
“Dear God, we beg Thee, enlighten us!”- and I hope this movie clip https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6wE2W3ag1g enlightens all of you and helps remove the blinders we all wear due to the crisis. Please watch. Neither person, blog, social media apostalete, etc…. will be able to fix this crisis nor do they have the solution, however; they all assist and we could “unite the clans” to the point, portrayed well in this movie clip to assist Our Lady in casting out the devil from the Pontiff and Rome all together. God is still with us and sends us many signs through science, art, family members and fellow traditionalists to help remove the blinders and see a way out. Not one of us is Gandolf in the movie. With the exception of his fake wizard powers and human element, he closely represents Our Lady’s role in the solution to this crisis. Traditionalist have to stop trying to be Gandolf. We don’t possess the supernatural means. “Unite the clans” are the fellowship of the ring and all the other people assisting for the same goal. If you want to be a leader that stands above all and truly helps end this crisis then stop trying to trump one another. Instead promote the one and only message that has the ultimate solution. Fr Gruner and John Venarri were the only leaders before, and they were taken from this world and from Satan’s perspective for obvious reason. Both “united forces,” saw the only solution to this crisis and promoted it- The Consecration of Russia, and for that they received mortal death but probably eternal salvation- I hope and pray.
The Consecration needs to be the foundation and focus of all the traditional camps and should be the foundation that “Unites the clans” which I suspect Michael Matt will progress to once the clans have been united. After all the Fatima message is the one thing that Unites all of us and all will be resolved once the Consecration is fulfilled- Our Lady’s promise and she doesn’t Lie! God will not allow a “Gandolf” (a human by human means) through the use of his/her newspaper or blog to solve the crisis because to do so makes Our Lady’s message irrelevant and THAT IS ABSOLUTELY FALSE.
Catholics unite around one thing and one thing only, the Pope. He is the Vicar of Christ.
“If you want to be a leader that stands above all and truly helps end this crisis then stop trying to trump one another. Instead promote the one and only message that has the ultimate solution.”
I agree. And that message includes a conviction that no one can unite with Catholics unless they reject all of the non-Catholic nonsense currently in vogue. Mr. Matt et al do not reject all of it.
As in 1Corinthians 13:2???
Sorry, 2Vermont. I must have hit the wrong button. (Maybe Alzheimer’s is in play.)
Uh, some notable canonists would disagree that stage 4 Alzheimer’s wouldn’t remove him ipso facto from office:
Wernz-Vidal: “By falling into certain and perpetual insanity, the Roman Pontiff would automatically lose pontifical jurisdiction… For the certain and perpetual insanity of the Roman Pontiff (not doubtful or temporary) is the equivalent to death, and through death the Roman Pontiff certainly loses his jurisdication.”
(Wernz-Vidal, Jus Canonicum [Rome: Gregorian 1938] vol 2 paras 415, 452)
Prummer: “The power of the Roman Pontiff is lost: …(c) By his perpetual insanity (“amentia perpetua”) or by formal heresy.”
(Manuale Iuris Canonci (1927) Question 95)
I’m just not seeing how anyone can say this man has Alzheimers, let alone the last stage of it (by the way there is no Stage 4). Here are the symptoms of all stages of Alzheimers:
Where is the evidence that Bergoglio has Alzheimers?
Alzhiemers is my analogy to help you see that a person still exists and remains in a certain position even when they are brain dead. If my father has stage 4 alzheimers that doesn’t make him no longer my father. I the sane individual have to make judgments about what he says still yes. If a husband is unfaithful to his wife that doesn’t ipso facto annul his marriage. – another analogy and analogies aren’t perfect comparisons. Obviously Pope Bergolio doesn’t have Alzhiemers.
Good try, FS, but you will never get a direct answer out of this IC fellow.