There is a taped interview of Daneels boasting about the St Gallen 'mafia' club (Daneels is the one who called it a mafia) and their resistance against Benedict and lobbying for Bergoglio. The video of McCarrick talking about the Italian who 'suggested' that Bergoglio could change the Church and how McCarrick responded to that, is in my post above. Here it is again: Austen Ivereigh, in his book about PF, 'The Great Reformer', exposed the lobbying by Murphy O'Connor after he obtained consent from Bergoglio. If the culprits themselves are not shy to boast about their achievement, what more proof do we need? Everything else about this 'papacy' dovetails with these public statements.
We need action to be taken by those in authority. We can post and talk until we are blue in the face. Pope Francis is Pope. We can’t just go storm the Bastille.
Well, Pope Benedict XVI still calls himself and signs himself off as pope, dresses as pope, gives papal blessings and lives on Vatican grounds.
I find it offensive in the extreme that you would bring Luke into this and that you would insinuate that I did not care for his soul. Disgusting in fact. Firstly, you seem to be ill informed on this issue, the SSPX does not reject Francis as Pope. Secondly, even if Luke was in error, you have absolutely no idea what he and I talked about privately. Why don't you get your facts straight and not insult me and someone for whom I cared dearly. Absolutely disgusting.
He never rejected the legitimacy of Pope Francis. He accepted him as Pope and that is also the official position of the SSPX. He (and they) reject the errors being sown, not the pontiff. Disgusting that someone would sully a departed man's good name without even getting their facts straight.
The real problem is that Pope Francis is setting Catholic against Catholic. Catholics doing their best to live the faith are being dragged down instead of being lifted up by the Vicar of Christ. And it's beginning to look like a deliberate strategy. Those of us who believe what the Church has always taught need to be careful not to make the strategy successful because the more fragmented we become the more space we leave for a full takeover by Modernist heretics and apostates posing as Catholics. For example, I don't believe for a minute that this isn't orchestrated from on high as a means to get cash-strapped Latin American Bishops to support a married priesthood and the ordination of women at the Amazonian Synod as another step towards the introductionn of Catholic "we won't call it marriage" ceremonies: https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/...rts-church-strike-for-womens-ordination-28538
I think most of the things you post are correct. The trouble with all of this is we are supposed to be charitable, which means not assuming bad interior motives of others. At the same time we also must be wise so as to avoid falling into the traps the Modernists are setting. This is all very difficult in the current circumstances. It would be difficult under normal circumstances. To say that none of what is going on is calculated is, at this point, beyond credibility. Personally I try not to guess the interior motives of particular individuals, but make general statements that appear to be true of the whole organization. I cannot know for sure what clerics are material or formal heretics, but I can recognize patterns and the pattern we see now is a revolution inside the Church. A "re-formation" of what Catholics are supposed to believe. In 1517 they left the Church, now they are trying from within.
That's all very nice but at some stage we have to face up to reality. Only an apostate or heretic with something to hide would have difficulty responding to the dubia. Jesus said "Let your yes be yes and your no be no. Anything else is from the evil one". That's the same Jesus who said that any man who so much as looks with lust at a woman who is not his wife has already committed adultery in his heart. Jesus said nothing about accompanying him while he acts out on the lust. Time for Pope Francis to get off his backside and start poping by defending the Deposit of Faith. If he doesn't publicly censure those Germans post haste, it will be all the confirmation I need that he should be ignored - even shunned - until there is an investigation into the shenanigans leading up to Conclave which elected him. An excommunicated Catholic is not eligible to be Pope. Jesus said that when the blind lead the blind they all go over the cliff.
Not quite sure what you want me to say. It's not for me to state that the Pope is a heretic or an apostate. All I can say about the whole episcopate is that every Catholic must now know his or her faith inside and out and measure what these men do and say against Catholic teaching. If they are teaching falsity those teachings must be avoided. That is a horrible spot for a lay person to be stuck in, but here we are.
I'm not asking you to say anything. I understand that we all are in a terrible spot thanks to Pope Francis. We have to accept that the Bishops decide who is Pope but we don't have to remain silent while they run for cover just as all the Apostles ran for cover when Jesus was arrested. Archbishop Schneider was interviewed by Raymond Arroyo tonight. He didn't agree with the signatories of the Easter letter. My TV was playing up so I didn't get the full gist of what he was saying but the best I could make of it was that he thought they had exceeded their authority and I think he said that the letter didn't prove that Pope Francis is a formal heretic. Formal heretic or not, he is permitting the corruption of the faith. More serious than that is the women's attitude to Holy Mass and the Eucharist. They clearly don't believe that the Mass is for our benefit and that our presence at it doesn't add an iota to Christ's eternal and perfect sacrifice. It's evident that the Bishop and priest supporting them don't believe it either. I'm reminded again of that prophecy about the apostasy starting at the top.
Not a direct prophecy, but Cardinal Ciappi relating what he says was in the Third Secret: "In the Third Secret it is foretold, among other things, that the Great Apostasy in the Church begins at the top." Of course one thing to keep in mind is that he was speaking about the Great Apostasy, which may happen later before the antichrist. We may merely be in a the dress rehearsal. Of course a dress rehearsal also closely imitates the actual events so perhaps this will happen twice. One thing we know is that nothing the Vatican has released about the Third Secret mentions this apostasy, so either someone is lying, misinterpreting or is confused.
"The tail of the devil is functioning in the disintegration of the Catholic world. The darkness of Satan has entered and spread throughout the Catholic Church even to its summit. Apostasy, the loss of the faith, is spreading throughout the world and into the highest levels within the Church." -Pope Paul VI, Oct. 13, 1977 as quoted in Corriere della Sera, Page 7 of its issue dated October 14, 1977
What is the solution then? We cannot be silent while these Modernist heretics and apostates posing as Catholics become ever more bold in implementing their agenda. I fully believe that the true Church will become small again, just as (then) Cardinal Ratzinger prophesied.
Which quote has been taken out of context? And can anyone tell us why should we not take heed of this verse from Scripture? Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. Surely PF is not exempt from this?
Our Lady gave us the solutions. Prayer, sacrifice, and penance. She has said this over and over and over. It is not our job to decide if the Pope is valid or not. It is our job to pray, sacrifice and do penance. That's it.
I was referring to the earlier quote you posted, but like this one you posted up above it cannot be used to say the Pope has somehow lost the papacy or is invalid. To do so is to take it out of context. The Church interprets Scripture for us and nowhere does it say the laity has the right to decide if the Pope is valid or not. If every lay person had a right to decide if each Pope was valid the Church would basically be lawless with people in every generation deciding certain Popes were invalid for one reason or another. The sedevacantists have been claiming this right since the 1970's. They are wrong.
If the apostasy begins at the top, those at the top would be the last to mention it, wouldn't they? It is unedifying to see various shades of orthodoxy becoming divided over what amount to matters of procedure. We should all concentrate on the essential problem and thrash out the procedural nuances later. We are in virgin territory, without precedent, and we mustn't become entrapped in legal niceties as the modernists continue their attempt to drive a coach and four through the Faith. As for those German women, they and their ideology have nothing to do with Christ or His Mother. Their action is all about feminism, part of the cultural Marxist power play, which is adamantly in opposition to all that Christ stands for.
He's not, but neither you nor I have the authority to officially decide this. To do so would be to become Protestant. Grinning and bearing it might not seem the most attractive course, in the short term, but consider all the innumerable versions of Protestantism as a lesson on where private judgement leads. Pope Francis might well be anathema, according to the Judgement of Christ-if this is the case, it is so regardless of what the official position is, or of what we think or say or do about it. Saint Paul did not specify whether or how we should deal with false preachers, he simply advised us not to believe in false gospels. The latter is what we must, therefore, continue to do. "Whatever they do in the Vatican, I'm staying Catholic".
God has already spoken to us through Scripture, and I am not being disobedient to Him in this. Anyone who preaches another gospel should certainly not be shown obedience or deference. Pope Vigilius, in the 2nd Council of Constantinople, decreed: Since the Lord declares that the person is judged already, and the Apostle curses even the angels if they instruct in anything different from what we have preached, how is it possible even for the most presumptuous to assert that these condemnations apply only to those who are still alive? Are they unaware, or rather pretending to be unaware, that to be judged anathematized is just the same as to be separated from God? The heretic, even though he has not been condemned formally by any individual, in reality brings anathema on himself, having cut himself off from the way of truth by his heresy. What reply can such people make to the Apostle when he writes: As for someone who is factious, after admonishing him once or twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is perverted and sinful; he is self-condemned. It was in the spirit of this text that Cyril of holy memory, in the books which he wrote against Theodore, declared as follows: “Whether or not they are alive, we ought to keep clear of those who are in the grip of such dreadful errors. It is necessary always to avoid what is harmful, and not to be worried about public opinion but rather to consider what is pleasing to God”. +++++++++++++++++++ Acts 5:29 But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men. +++++++++++++++++++ As for the matter of the 2013 conclave: Pope JPII made it clear that no declaration on the matter needs to be made. +
