tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post3620356388311757051..comments2024-03-27T11:26:55.051-04:00Comments on Vox Cantoris: Coming to Tradition via the Back Door - a guest post by IranaeusUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger37125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-43939696084918458092017-08-22T09:39:57.379-04:002017-08-22T09:39:57.379-04:00Thank you, Vox.
It has been two days. The offend...Thank you, Vox. <br /><br />It has been two days. The offending website and post are still up. Let us hope there is a quicker resolution than what we saw with the Fr. Mongeau affair, and a more satisfying one, too.Irenaeushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15432088067981270937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-9361166300114791392017-08-21T16:56:12.252-04:002017-08-21T16:56:12.252-04:00Dear Johnno, Most beautifully put and we are in en...Dear Johnno, Most beautifully put and we are in entire agreement regarding the sequence of events. You have established that the heretic is deposed by God for the sin of heresy against Divine law; He is tried by the proper Church authorities for a crime against canon law and if found guilty, formally deposed for purposes of good governance.<br /><br />"an heretical pope is ipso facto deposed by God, before and without any declaration by the Church" would still not be contradictory to the necessity of a declaration from authority to VERIFY the claim." Absolutely, but the necessity is only for good governance. I don't like the use of "verify" here. It might imply that man is verifying - declaring true - the prior action of God. I would prefer "to proclaim formally and officially". The due process of charge, trial, verdict and sentence, is perfectly correct and necessary, as you have described, in canon law.<br /><br />However, we must constantly bear in mind we are dealing with two laws - Divine and canon. Your analogy to the murderer is perfectly valid in terms of civil and/or canon law.<br /><br />Divine law is different. God delivers the judgement, verdict and sentence immediately upon commission of the sin. The sentence of excommunication is immediately in operation, without any necessity for confirmation by man.<br /><br />Bear in mind we are dealing with a public/formal/manifest, (all mean the same thing), heretic who is pertinaceous, (knows he is speaking heresy.) bergoglio has repeatedly, publicly, denied the existence of hell which is formal heresy. To imagine that a Jesuit priest does not know the rudiments of the Faith is ridiculous. He has not repented. Therefore I, a Catholic instructed in the Faith, can know with certainty that bergoglio is deposed by God from the Papacy and is no longer a Catholic, has zero authority in the Church and is an enemy of Christ.<br /><br />Holy Scripture, the Magisterium, Catholic Doctors, Saints and theologians tell me precisely how I, as a good Catholic, should respond to an heretic - let him be anathema - and so that is precisely what I have done. None of the aforementioned tell me to continue recognizing bergoglio as a true Pope, disregarding Divine law and Catholic doctrine, until such time as the requirements of due process of canon law might be met. Do you think the College of judeo-masonic cardinals will ever put their leader on trial? I am sure they never will.<br /><br />Bear in mind that Roncalli and Montini were registered judeo-masons and were in terms of canon law therefore not eligible for election to the Papacy in the first place. Obviously as a consequence, everything that flows from them is null and void - VII and everything else.<br /><br />I think you might find the Cassisiacum Thesis of Bishop Guerard des Lauriers appealing. He was the ghost writer of the Ottaviani Intervention. In short:<br /><br />The process of election was legally valid and correct, even though the candidate was ineligible for election, (not a Catholic). The election was void, (worthless), but the designation legal in terms of canon law, Therefore the elect is materially pope, but not formally Pope, (devoid of authority.) Should the impediment be removed and he converted to Catholicism, he would become Pope formaliter. Thus have been the conciliar "popes".<br />Peter Lambhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17952041193215971470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-8071408844230639972017-08-20T21:29:28.052-04:002017-08-20T21:29:28.052-04:00Hi Peter. The fact that "an heretical pope is...Hi Peter. The fact that "an heretical pope is ipso facto deposed by God, before and without any declaration by the Church" would still not be contradictory to the necessity of a declaration from authority to verify the claim.<br /><br />Much like if a jury were to investigate a murder that occurred on Sep 1st on Sep 8th.<br /><br />The murder would ipso facto have taken place on Sep 1st and the guilty would be guilty of murder on Sep 1st regardless of his being caught and tried. But the declaration of a court hearing and sentence on the 8th would simply verify that for all who were not there to witness the crime.<br /><br />The exposure is the issue. Just as the murderer must be caught and tried, a heretical Pope must be tried and judged.<br /><br />If the Pope committed himself to heresy on Sep 1st, he was ipso facto deposed by God. The fact that this occurred would only be declared in hindsight by a Council on Sep 8th. And that therefore in hindsight they had not judged a Pope on Sep 8th because he ceased to be Pope on Sep 1st. <br /><br />It is therefore not the declaration of the council on Sep 8th that deposed him. He was deposed by God through his own heresy on Sep 1st. The council findings of the 8th only verify this fact for the Church at large, even if a number of witnesses were certain of it being the case on the 1st.<br /><br />The trial is just, charitable and necessary.<br /><br />If hypothetically a council was investigating a true Pope on sep 8th who did not give himself over to heresy on Sep 1st, they would still not have judged a Pope because if the investigation reveals the Pope was not a heretic on Sep 1st, he was therefore not deposed by God, and there would be no reason to pass any judgment verdict and therefore the Pope was not judged because there were no grounds, only naturally the Pope investigated and questioned by his Bishops no different than the Council of Jerusalem when Paul confronted Peter. <br /><br />Of course, even if on Sep 1st the Pope might have sided with heresy, it is to be determined if he held it formally and obstinately or in ignorance but humility. In which case, like Peter he would not be deposed, but humbly accepting correction and instruction recants the action or words of heresy he mistakenly and humanly spoke or advanced.<br /><br />In the end the thing would still have to be determined by legitimate authority at a later date over whether the Pope ceased to be Pope at an earlier date.<br /><br />Likewise if we were to investigate Francis tomorrow on August 21st. The findings would have to declare that Francis ipso facto was deposed by God on the earlier date when he promulgated Amoris Letitia intending obstinately to contradict and undermine the explicit Teaching of Jesus Christ. He was ipso facto deposed then, by God alone, without us knowing it. The council and authority of the Church would only be establishing that fact at a later date for the Church at large and on the record.Johnnonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-86203600126589902872017-08-20T07:24:15.413-04:002017-08-20T07:24:15.413-04:00It is time to end the Servimus.
He continues to d...It is time to end the Servimus.<br /><br />He continues to do great spiritual harm to himself by his continued public bloodletting of slander against people who have done nothing to him to warrant such diabolical action. Further, he is projecting his own actions on to others, it needs to stop. What he is doing is not of Christ, it is of the devil himself. Ask yourself, whom does he serve by his personal attacks publicly upon others? He has publicly accused my wife and I of adultery and yet, never apologised. I took it to the Church.<br /><br />It is now time the words of Our Blessed Lord Himself by understood and taken to heart.<br /><br />[15] But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother.<br />[16] And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. [17] And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican<br /><br />VoxVox Cantorishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16987049370515084083noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-35921486795506144262017-08-19T23:44:10.706-04:002017-08-19T23:44:10.706-04:00Barona, I did indeed pray for the aforesaid malef...Barona, I did indeed pray for the aforesaid malefactor, I perhaps should have chosen better words than I did, the situation and calumny he directed at Irenaeus simply got the better of my anger, that is all. <br />By the way, let's maybe get this thread back on topic instead of turning it into another sedevacantism debate.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-19470898583942469392017-08-19T15:43:46.174-04:002017-08-19T15:43:46.174-04:00Anonymous 10:23,
Very disconcerting that you hav...Anonymous 10:23, <br /><br />Very disconcerting that you have determined to lower the standards of Christian and civil discourse to introducing vulgarity. Such behaviour is not becoming of someone who claims to uphold Catholicism. Presumably you do since you are opposed to "modernism". When Catholics become infected with naturalism and liberalism - so that they are no longer indistinguishable from the neo-pagan - we have a very serious problem. A Catholic, imbued with naturalism, can hardly be an effective opponent of modernism. <br /><br />Would it not be far more profitable to pray for the angry young man and do penance for him, rather than refer to him as excrement? Our Lord Jesus Christ died for him, as he did for you and for me. Surely we owe Our Lord greater love, honour and respect than to address each other - who have been baptized into His Mystical Body - as feces? <br /><br />Our Lord, on the Cross said, "Father, forgive them, for they known not what they do". Should we not do the same? <br />Baronahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06265555388172261643noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-84188469907775546502017-08-19T15:10:13.986-04:002017-08-19T15:10:13.986-04:00Hey Johnno, Great to see you back. Very interestin...Hey Johnno, Great to see you back. Very interesting comment, but you raise so many points, in such a wide field, it would take a small book to answer them all. We can take them one by one over time. Please have a look at the list of quotes from a few days ago stating that an heretical pope is ipso facto deposed by God, before and without any declaration by the Church. As I said to Irenaeus, bear in mind that some are from Infallible Magisterium.<br /><br />Also bear in mind that a Pope is judged only by God. He is sovereign and a true Pope may be judged by no man, or Council on Earth.<br /><br />The R&Rs seem to see it this way: <br />A Pope becomes an heretic. He remains in Office and remains a true Pope, until such time as the proper Church authorities get around to formally deposing him, if found guilty of a crime against canon law, after a trial. Then they make formal Declaration that he is an heretic, at which point he ceases to be Pope. If I've got it right, that's what they seem to think.<br /> <br />Such opinion is erroneous on a number of grounds:<br />Firstly, the heretical pope is deposed by God, for the SIN of heresy, the instant he utters pertinaceous, public heresy - see quotes. <br /><br />http://voxcantor.blogspot.co.za/2017/08/quo-vadis-indeed.html<br /><br />NOW he can be judged by men, because he is just an ordinary man - he is no longer Pope. NOW the authorities may judge him for the CRIME against canon law of heresy and formally depose him for purposes of Church governance - to let everybody know that this egit is an heretic and is no longer Pope. Divine law comes first and only THEN may canon law, (man made law), intervene. The R&Rs persist in putting the cart before the horse.Peter Lambhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17952041193215971470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-34207069317135100362017-08-19T14:26:49.420-04:002017-08-19T14:26:49.420-04:00Irenaeus, No problem ol' chap. We can take the...Irenaeus, No problem ol' chap. We can take them one by one over time. The quotes were meant for everybody, but I meant you have a good look at them, if you haven't already done so and bear in mind they include magisterial ones, which should remove all dispute. <br />I'm fine thanks. One never gets over it, but more than anything else I thank and praise God that he died having received valid Sacraments. That means more to me than anything else on Earth.<br />The Army has honoured him greatly. They have held two memorial days; they have named a mess after him with a brass bell with his name on it; they named a new army barracks in South Sudan after him - "Lamb Lines" :) and they are putting a little memorial to him in the Army Museum in London. The most unlikely little monkey turned out to be a very good soldier. He was amazingly brave, yet genuinely very humble and compassionate. I have never known such a popular man. There were hundreds of men at his funeral from different regiments from Signals to Medical to SAS. Even the entire Bristol paramedics were there. So long as Mikey gets to Heaven, I'm happy. :)Peter Lambhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17952041193215971470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-15116881582387641022017-08-19T03:12:54.983-04:002017-08-19T03:12:54.983-04:00In Israel, when Saul was screwing up and David was...In Israel, when Saul was screwing up and David was anointed King, the people didn't have the benefit of the Bible being around to give them the established facts. David knew he was the rightful King. So did a good many near him, and people by and large suspected something was up. So what did David do? Start a civil war and divide the people? Nope, he just declared Saul was also anointed and that God would sort it out in time and give him what was due. So he carried on in his duty. But here's the rub - David did not declare that Saul was not the King, and he even pledged allegiance to him. He even killed those who killed Saul. And he was someone with FULL COMPLETE KNOWLEDGE OF THE FACTS. But understanding the complexities, didn't just unilaterally act on it.<br /><br />If Francis continues he'll get his due, just like Saul. I can suspect that he's a formal heretic on top of being invalidly and conspiratorially elected, but I cannot authoritatively say he is not the Pope. Most of all because I'm not in any position to verify it as an inquisitor. That's the Church's job, and God will dethrone Francis in His own time. Until then, like Saul, he remains in place, the empty corrupt figurehead, wearing the crown but unable to command anything fruitful nor get the people to love him.Johnnonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-34366405693014709392017-08-19T03:12:12.345-04:002017-08-19T03:12:12.345-04:00So what does that leave us with?
Either the Churc...So what does that leave us with?<br /><br />Either the Church ceased to be during the 1800s with no valid Popes, or that the Sede logic has fundamentally misunderstood Council declarations about the Pope being completely infallible, immune from any error and completely unjudge-able, when these dogmatic statements all assume as a model a Pope acting completely in accordance with Tradition and truth, and not one who is suspect of heresy, material or formal. The latter being determinable only by thorough and charitable investigation by the proper authorities either during his reign or after. not left up to individual Catholics, even if those individuals happen to be right in the end and in fact. Just as a witness to a crime cannot likewise impose their witnessing of a fact of crime upon the society at large without due process from the secular authorities and the courts to make a declaration. Until then it is only 'private revelation' as far as the Sedes are concerned and to be treated as such.<br /><br />The Sedes will argue that all the cardinals are likewise heretics and will never hold Francis accountable. But these same ones will turn around and likewise offer no solution except that God will sort it out... somehow... But if that's the case, one can likewise just turn the argument around against the Sedes and declare that God will 'sort it out' by getting the suspect Cardinals back on track to hold Francis accountable through His own inevitable means. Maybe God will even strike the lot of them dead so only the kosher ones survive... who knows? Certainly not the Sedes!<br /><br />So from my perspective the Sede thesis as it is now, may be something one can hold as a possibility with regards to Francis or heck, all the VII Popes. But it does not make it fact, and it is not to be believed with any authority. But the logic behind it is flawed if they resort to the idea that Popes are immune from error whatsoever, because that means the Church went away since the 1800s when it caved to modernist heliocentrism over the course of time. A Heresy that is still BINDING on Catholics, and never revoked, not even by John Paul II who set up a commission to achieve that very thing and how strange that not even a so-called modernist like him was able to repeal it, instead resorting to Cardinal Poupard to simply argue (correctly), that the current Scientific establishment couldn't prove its case against the Church, but hey the Church apologizes anyway for being so mean to Galileo when it could've supposedly handled it better despite him being wrong.<br /><br />So like it or not, the only authoritative way out of this mess is a Church Council. If you don't get it in your lifetime, tough luck. The Church has been under Anti-Popes before. People didn't go to Hell for being mistaken about the right one. Some of those folks are even declared saints despite their mistake! The responsibility doesn't fall on laypeople who are legitimately confused during the time of crisis. That responsibility is on the heads of the Cardinals. Our duty is to keep banging on the doors of these judges to sort it out.<br /><br />Johnnonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-90708901885837758972017-08-19T03:11:08.278-04:002017-08-19T03:11:08.278-04:00Let's go through these briefly. As I see it:
...Let's go through these briefly. As I see it:<br /><br />1. Cannot be substantiated. Remains a possibility that any Catholic may hold until further information, or until it becomes too obvious that to pretend otherwise is laughable. But very stupid people do exist and it's possible that Francis can be one of them. This is sadly the most charitable answer that can be given, that he is that stupid. But he remains Pope. I believe as time goes on this point will collapse and calling him the Pope will no longer be defensible, but I don't think we're there yet.<br /><br />2. As explained above in point 1, I don't believe we can state this either way. A public trial under a Church council will be the most necessary. Whether in Francis lifetime or after.<br /><br />3. This remains the most damning and confusing point. But we still cannot say unless Benedict XVI himself too is dragged before an Inquisitional hearing to clarify the matter. So along with the points up above the investigation must also encompass putting both Francis and Benedict on trial.<br /><br />4. For the time being, these are indicative of smoke, but not necessarily a fire, but this angle should be further pursued and not simply dismissed.<br /><br />5. This point is impossible. We already have historic precedent of Popes holding to heresies publicly and even to stubborn extents. Some Sedes have attempted to defend suspects like John, Honorius etc. but even more to the point is that the Papacy, from the time of the 1800s, were beginning to abandon upholding the faith and the numerous Papal condemnations and the Holy Inquisitions' ruling against the FORMAL HERESY OF HELIOCENTRISM. In actions, they undermined the faith by removing Galileo and Copernicus from the Index, allowed heliocentric modernists free reign in the face of traditional Geocentrists, and moving right up to the present day even in Papal speech and private theology allowed for heliocentrism, then for Darwin culminating in even many Sede's own persdonal favorite 'last Pope' Pius XII who further undermined the faith by being approving of Fr. Lemaitre's Big Bang Cosmology, something Lemaitre himself cautioned against Pius XII's enthusiasm about. Many Sedes themselves are heliocentrists as is the majority of the world and therefore under their own criteria are no longer within the Church based solely on that count. But this is incorrect due to the fact that if there was ever proof of a heresy held in complete invincible ignorance, heliocentrism is one of them. The condemnation of Copernicus and Galileo were something so solid that not even Pope John Paul II could lift it, and neither did Benedict XVI, both appeasing the world by appealing to the paradigm of Relativity that stated that Science could not tell whether it was the Earth or Sun that was moving against the other. Though significantly enough the Great Miracle of Fatima made it abundantly clear that the Sun itself could dance and move however God wished against the anti-Catholic heliocentrists who for the past 500 years cannot provide a shred of proof against the arguments of the 16th Century Popes and the Holy Inquisitors. The condemnation against heliocentrism was just conveniently forgotten much like the condemnation against contraception, and many other things. The Great Apostasy got the ball rolling from Descartes, the anti-Catholic scientific enlightenment and culminated in their largest victory with the triumph of Heliocentrist dogma above the Papacy, the Church, the Fathers and Scripture. This historic fact alone refutes the Sedevacantist error that Popes are immune from ever spreading by action or inaction, heresy or things harmful to the Church. The diabolical disorientation is rooted in Relativity, both moral and scientific. And in both cases it is a demonstrable lie.<br /><br />Johnnonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-77097254343410130942017-08-19T03:09:40.840-04:002017-08-19T03:09:40.840-04:00I'll just toss in my two cents here with regar...I'll just toss in my two cents here with regards to the sede issue.<br /><br />Indeed only one side can be right, but as of now this is unverifiable.<br /><br />We only have possibilities and these remain until further information can be gleaned and substantiated.<br /><br />---<br /><br />Here are inescapable facts.<br />- Pope Francis is currently the visible man widely believed to be the Pope.<br />- Pope Francis is a material heretic as proven by his words, actions and Papal documents.<br />- There are widespread doubts as to whether Francis remains Pope.<br />- There are growing doubts as to whether Francis was validly elected a Pope at all.<br />- Pope Benedict XVI's abdication was a partial one that created the idea of a dual Papacy, as evidenced by his own words, the words of his own secretary Ganswein, the about-turn by the previous head of the CDF Mueller who once denounced the very idea only to then substantiate it later as a possibility, along with the backhanded words about being someone unable to fully resign coming from Francis himself.<br /><br />---<br />Here are the theories. Some of which can be combined.<br /><br />1. Pope Francis remains Pope via virtue of his heresy being material and not proven formal nor obstinate, and therefore possibly being held under ignorance.<br /><br />2. Pope Francis has ceased to be Pope because his actions and words are significant enough to indicate formal heresy without requiring further diligent investigation, nor declarations of Church authorities.<br /><br />3. Pope Francis was never validly elected Pope due to the deficient nature of Pope Benedict XVI's partial abdication being invalid.<br /><br />4. Pope Francis was never validly elected Pope due to behind-the-scenes emerging evidence of pressure from Cardinals and staff within, as well as from outside such as the Obama administration and Soros-affiliated groups.<br /><br />5. Belief that the Holy Spirit makes the Pope immune from all error. Which is the largest basis for a large portion of the Sedevacantists. Therefore if any Pope is said to be teaching error in any capacity, even in ignorance or only materially, he ceases to be Pope and no formal authority is necessary to declare it but the private judgment of individual Catholics.<br /><br />Johnnonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-2437197790494940052017-08-18T20:48:16.244-04:002017-08-18T20:48:16.244-04:00Dear Dr. Lamb,
Thank you. It was lonely. Still is...Dear Dr. Lamb,<br /><br />Thank you. It was lonely. Still is. I came to it not because it was hip, but that it was right. That has had consequences I couldn't have foreseen. So many neo-cons out there who like the pretty things but not much else.<br /><br />Those quotes are for me? Thanks! I got some reading to do. You are a much better person to converse with - and read - than the other blogger. No caging.<br /><br />I will address your points about sedevacantism some other time. I am a little weary of dealing with this particular topic (anything related to the screed) and need a bit of a break. I perhaps spoke too soon about the pride matter ... but it was something prevalent in the Protestant leaders, harmfully so.<br /><br />How are you managing after your son's passing?Irenaeushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15432088067981270937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-31121454119112626762017-08-18T15:56:57.137-04:002017-08-18T15:56:57.137-04:00Dear Irenaeus, We have some confusion re heretic t...Dear Irenaeus, We have some confusion re heretic terminology, but I'll get back to you on that another time. My one finger typing is temporarily shot. :)Peter Lambhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17952041193215971470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-62558346405932869092017-08-18T15:54:08.945-04:002017-08-18T15:54:08.945-04:00Dear Anonymous @ 10:09, Great suggestion! You good...Dear Anonymous @ 10:09, Great suggestion! You good ladies go and pray and leave discussion of the Gold Standard to us men. :)Peter Lambhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17952041193215971470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-906700782564032282017-08-18T15:45:13.387-04:002017-08-18T15:45:13.387-04:00Dear Irenaeus, I found your story most interesting...Dear Irenaeus, I found your story most interesting - actually amazing. It is a thousand times more difficult for you youngsters to recognize the folly in present times than it was for us oldies who grew up before the death of Pope Pius XII. You have only experienced what is. We lived and knew what was. For us, the contrast is stark and easily comprehended. You must, almost alone, discover what was - as thanks to the Holy Ghost, you are busy doing.<br /><br />To poke the sede-R&R bear is good. Only one side is correct. The Catholic Faith is black and white - never grey, ambiguous, or relative. We must thrash it out until we find Catholic Truth. There is only one truth. By the way Archbishop Lefebvre was a sedevacantist in his heart. He knew the truth, but being a gentle, holy missionary, he lacked the courage to take upon himself the responsibility of taking the final, public official step. If only he had, the SSPX would be sede today, to the great benefit of the Church:<br /><br />"That Conciliar Church is a schismatic Church, because it breaks with the Catholic Church that has always been. It has its new dogmas, its new priesthood, its new institutions, its new worship, all already condemned by the Church in many a document, official and definitive.... The Church that affirms such errors is at once schismatic and heretical. This Conciliar Church is, therefore, not Catholic. To whatever extent Pope, Bishops, priests, or faithful adhere to this new Church, they separate themselves from the Catholic Church..." (Archbishop Lefebvre.)<br /><br />"But what stops me from becoming a sede is my knowledge of Protestant history... I cannot take it upon myself to declare myself more knowledgeable than Christ and His Bride. That's pride right there, thinking I know better than God."<br /><br />Stop right there dude. Now you speak poppycock. :)<br />It is ludicrous to think, or suggest that anybody can know more than God, or His Bride. No sane soul could think that. I do not think that, nor does any sede!<br />Catholics, (sedes), are faithful to the Infallible Catholic Magisterium. I have quoted to you the explicit pronouncements of Popes, Vatican I, Saints, Doctors of the Church and Catholic theologians that an heretic cannot become Pope, or IF a Pope were to become an heretic, he would ipso facto be deposed by God. <br /><br />Do you refute all those Catholic Teachers? If you do - I can say no more. If you don't, then submit and obey - stop recognizing an heretic as Pope. Then let him be anathema.<br /><br />Dear Irenaeus make this point a priority. Pray for guidance from the Holy Ghost. Read, study until you are certain of the answer. Can one who denies the Faith and thereby Christ, be the Vicar of Christ? It took me 18 months of virtually day and night reading to become utterly convinced and entirely at peace in my conscience and my soul that, in our situation, sedevacantism is Catholic Truth and therefore the only correct Catholic response to the onslaught. Sedevacantism is nothing more, or less, than pure undiluted Catholicism. Many love to call me a sede heretic, but they come only with invective - never with Catholic doctrine. Sedevacantism has nothing to do with false pride. It has nothing to do with heresy, or protestantism. If our Fathers were right, we are right; If our Fathers were wrong, we are wrong. We preach the Faith of our Fathers.<br /><br />OK, now I've had my say. Now it's your turn.<br />You say: "Sedevacantism is Protestantism under another name, and that is why I am Recognize and Resist."<br />Right, convince me of the Catholic truth of your statement. Save me from perdition. But, come with citations and Catholic doctrine to back your statements. Prove to me that sedevacantism is protestantism under another name. I challenge you. :)<br />Peter Lambhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17952041193215971470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-40425213682805276122017-08-18T12:52:37.224-04:002017-08-18T12:52:37.224-04:00St. Cyprian
“Whoever is separated from the Church ...St. Cyprian<br />“Whoever is separated from the Church must be avoided and fled from; such a man is wrong-headed; he is a sinner and self-condemned. […] But if some of the leaders of schism persist in their blind and obstinate foolishness, and if advice for their own good fails to bring them back to the way of salvation, let the rest of you break away from their ensnaring falsehood. One must withdraw from those who are engaged in sin; rather, one must fly from them, lest by joining in their evil course and thus taking the wrong road, one should become involved in the same guilt oneself.<br /><br />Do everything you can to break away from such men; as you value your salvation, avoid those who associate with such harmful connections. […] Their talk spreads like cancer, their conversation is as catching as an infection […] their poisonous and pernicious propaganda is more deadly than persecution was. Persecution leaves the door open to penance and satisfaction; but those who do away with penance for sin shut the door against satisfaction altogether. And so it is that, through the presumption of certain people who beguile themselves with false promises of salvation, all true hope of salvation is destroyed.<br /><br />Pius XI<br />Is it permitted for Christians to be present at, or to take part in, conventions, gatherings, meetings, or societies of non-Catholics which aim to associate together under a single agreement everyone who, in any way, lays claim to the name of Christian? In the negative! ..this Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics. There is only one way in which the unity of Christians may be fostered, and that is by furthering the return to the one true Church of Christ for those who are separated from her.”<br /><br />“When St. Augustine speaks of man’s last end, he hastens to add this counsel to any one who wishes to reach that end: “Their attempt will be useless if they do not submit to the Catholic Church, and humbly obey her, for she alone has been divinely instituted to give light and strength to souls, without which they will necessarily stray from the right path.” Would to God they had listened to the voice of Augustine in the past! And would to God that everyone might hear him today who rends the seamless robe of Christ, and casts himself miserably outside the path of salvation.”<br /><br />Leo XIII<br />“She is a garden enclosed, My Sister, My Spouse, a garden enclosed: a fountain sealed up” (Canticles 4:12). These words of Holy Scripture are applied, according to the Fathers, to the Catholic Church, the immaculate spouse of Christ; they distinguish her from infidel or heretical sects, so that men will know whom to follow and whom to avoid in their search for eternal life.”<br /><br />II John 1:10-11<br />If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house, nor say to him: “God speed you.” For he who says to him “God speed you” communicates with his wicked works.<br /><br />Of course Russia has not been consecrated to the Immaculate Heart as Our Lady requested it should be. However, She said it would be done, even if late, (60 years so far). This is further proof that eventually Our Lady will prevail and that we will again have a true Pope. God bless you. Put your hurt behind you. :)<br />Peter Lambhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17952041193215971470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-14456371297534457012017-08-18T12:51:19.222-04:002017-08-18T12:51:19.222-04:00Pope Innocent III
It is impossible for us to hold ...Pope Innocent III<br />It is impossible for us to hold communion after their death with those who have not been in communion with us during their life.<br /><br />III Lateran Council<br />“The accursed perversity of heretics has so increased that now they exercise their wickedness not in secret, but manifest their error publicly, and win over the weak and simple-minded to their opinion. For this reason, We resolve to cast them, their defenders, and their receivers under anathema, and We forbid under anathema that any one presume to help heretics or to do business with heretics.<br /><br />Council of Laodicea<br />“We should anathematize heretics even after their death.”<br /><br />II Council of Constantinople<br />“Those who are members of the Church are not to be permitted to go into the cemeteries of any of the heretics for the purpose of prayer or veneration. If they do, they are to be excommunicated.”<br /><br />St. Athanasius<br />“Saint Anthony never held communion with the Meletian schismatics, knowing their wickedness and rebellion from the beginning; neither did he have friendly converse with the Manichees or any other heretics, except only to warn them to return to their duty, believing and teaching that their friendship and society was harmful and ruinous to the soul. Thus also he loathed the Arian heresy, and taught all men neither to go near them nor to partake in their bad faith. Once, when some of the Ariomanites came to him and he questioned them and found them to be misbelievers, he drove them from the hill, crying that their words were worse than the venom of serpents.”<br /><br />St. Thomas Aquinas<br />To know whom to avoid is a great means of saving our souls. Thus the Church forbids the faithful to communicate with those unbelievers who have forsaken the faith by corrupting it, such as heretics, or by renouncing it, such as apostates.”<br /><br />St. Cyril of Alexandria<br />“It is unlawful, and a profanation, and an act the punishment of which is death, to love to associate with unholy heretics, and to unite yourself to their communion.”<br /><br />St. John Chysostom<br />“For if they have doctrines opposed to ours, it is not fitting to be mixed up with them for this cause alone. […] What do you say? “Their faith is the same; these men are orthodox”? Why, then, are they not with us?”<br />Peter Lambhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17952041193215971470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-61988710484925836232017-08-18T12:50:07.810-04:002017-08-18T12:50:07.810-04:00Dear Margaret, Who constituted me as judge, jury a...Dear Margaret, Who constituted me as judge, jury and executioner over Pope Francis? Please read the extract from "Liberalism is a Sin" published a day, or two ago and you will have your answer.<br /><br />My father may be ill and not recognize me but he's still my father. This is true, but an heretic is not my Pope, nor is he Christ's Vicar. <br /><br />Sedevacantism is nothing other than pure, undiluted Catholicism. It is you, the willfully blind who would lead souls astray. You who is strong on invective and short on Catholic doctrine.<br /><br />I pray for my enemies. I do not pray for the enemies of Christ. I consign them to hell, as do all real Catholics:<br /><br />“If he will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as a heathen and a publican.”<br /><br />St. Ignatius of Antioch<br />If anyone walks according to a foreign doctrine, he is not of Christ nor a partaker of His passion. Have no fellowship with such a man, lest you perish along with him, even though he should be your father, your son, your brother, or a member of your family.”<br /><br />St. Thomas More re heretics:<br />“I pray God that we live not to see the day we would gladly wish to be at league and composed with them, to let them have their churches quietly to themselves so that they would be content to let us have our quietly to ourselves. Upon conditions that all heresies were suppressed, I would wish that all my books were burned up and all my labour utterly lost.”<br /><br />St. Robert Bellarmine<br />“St. Paul commands that a heretic be avoided after two warnings, that is, after showing himself to be manifestly obstinate. And this is what St. Jerome writes, adding that other sinners are excluded from the Church by excommunication, whereas heretics exile themselves on their own from the Body of Christ.”<br /><br />St. John Eudes<br />“I entreat you to shun, whenever possible, the society of those who profess false doctrines.”<br /><br />Pope St. Clement I<br />“If any man shall be friendly to those with whom the Roman Pontiff is not in communion, he is in complicity with those who want to destroy the Church of God; and, although he may seem to be with us in body, he is against us in mind and spirit, and is a much more dangerous enemy than those who are outside and are our avowed foes.”<br /><br />Peter Lambhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17952041193215971470noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-8603123084748453382017-08-18T12:37:26.707-04:002017-08-18T12:37:26.707-04:00This article could have been written by me - if I ...This article could have been written by me - if I was so elegant a writer. The only difference would be that where I live there is no reasonable access to a TLM. Talk about pain and heartache! With my St. Andrew missal and Breviarium Romanum I endure. I am grateful for a valid Eucharist. Kathleen Fortenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-51110089435928377262017-08-18T12:12:09.696-04:002017-08-18T12:12:09.696-04:00Dear Irenaeus,
BRAVO! Thank you for your magnific...Dear Irenaeus,<br /><br />BRAVO! Thank you for your magnificent post. <br /><br />May Our Lord and Our Lady guide and protect you always.<br /><br />Yours in Christ the King,<br /><br />Margaret<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-57151915300363446012017-08-18T10:09:41.846-04:002017-08-18T10:09:41.846-04:00Margaret, God bless you.
You have nailed it! I ca...Margaret, God bless you.<br />You have nailed it! I can only wonder how much more help we'd be to Our Lady if we'd all spend the time in prayer rather than arguing on blogs.<br />Arguing never solves anything and it's always the same old arguments over and over, very often by the same posters.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-90580345660572702412017-08-18T04:51:14.751-04:002017-08-18T04:51:14.751-04:00Archbishop Fulton Sheen was so prophetic in his wo...Archbishop Fulton Sheen was so prophetic in his words<br /><br />“Who is going to save our Church? Not our Bishops, not our priests and religious. It is up to the people. You have the minds, the eyes, the ears to save the Church. Your mission is to see that your priests act like priests, your bishops act like bishops and your religious act like<br />religious".<br /><br />Thank you for your marvellous blogs, you give me inspiration and you are not alone in your love for the faith. The old saying "where there is no love there is no zeal" is so true today.<br /><br />You are in good company as our Lord says <br /><br />If you had been of the world, the world would love its own: but because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. [20] Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-3763463561874199382017-08-17T23:39:52.615-04:002017-08-17T23:39:52.615-04:00Stop pestering Ana. She knows the Faith.
Also, ...Stop pestering Ana. She knows the Faith.<br /><br />Also, exactly who constituted you as judge, jury and executioner over Pope Francis? You don't know the reasons why he does and says things and neither do I.<br /><br />Our Lord said that He would not leave us orphans (John 14). To paraphrase Archbishop Lefebvre, your father may be ill and not recognize you but he's still your father.<br /><br />Stop infecting the faithful with sedevacantism. You are doing incalculable harm to souls.<br /><br />If you prayed for Pope Francis with as much vehemence as you blog against him, both you and he would benefit. <br /><br />Yes or No: Do you believe that the Collegial Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary is done? <br /><br />Margaret<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20981956.post-90124357427823150912017-08-17T23:26:02.870-04:002017-08-17T23:26:02.870-04:00Thank you, Ana, for your post. Sedevacantism is ...Thank you, Ana, for your post. Sedevacantism is NOT the answer. There MUST be a valid, legitimate Pope on the throne of Peter to order and make in union with all the bishops of the world the Collegial Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.<br /><br />Much love,<br /><br />Margaret<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com