Discussion in 'Pope Francis' started by garabandal, Jul 19, 2020.

  1. AED

    AED Powers

    It is the refiner's fire for sure.
    HeavenlyHosts likes this.
  2. HeavenlyHosts

    HeavenlyHosts Powers

    Lyrics to “Refiner’s Fire:”
    Refiner’s Fire,
    My heart’s one desire is to be holy,
    Set apart for you, My Master.
    Ready to do Your will.
    AED likes this.
  3. Christy1983

    Christy1983 Archangels

    Charitably discussing your concerns with John R and the mods before you made your accusations would have been a nice gesture, too.

    I'm not saying I agree with John R on everything or anything. But honestly, I don't think he knew what hit him. If there are any rules, they need to be made clearer.
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2020
    Frank Markus likes this.
  4. Frodo

    Frodo Archangels

    I also don’t agree with John on everything either, I do feel however he could add Much to the forum (his recommendation of Garrigou Lagrange tells me that he is serious about his Catholic faith. I don’t know too many Catholics who know who he is let alone recommend him). I also understand that his idea about the papacy is flat out dangerous to souls. I wonder if he could be given the opportunity to be allowed to post as long as he doesn’t speak to his erroneous thoughts on the papacy?

    As always I will abide by whatever you deem right Padraig - you have always steered us through the worst of storms here.

    Prayers for you John if you are reading this. But do be careful with your thoughts on this matter. Let the Church deal with this, ultimately this is not our role to chime in on who is pope. I get your stance - and we aren’t that far off in our opinions, but I think you are miss applying the saint’s stances. There is no current controversies over the papacy like in the examples you use from the saints before us. Take it to Our Lady ( I’m sure you have, but keep doing it). She won’t steer you wrong - but you have to listen carefully.

    And prayers for Padraig and the entire forum. I remember you all each day and entrust you all to Our Lord and Our Lady. I often think about the reunion we will all have when, God willing, we reach of eternal home.
    Frank Markus, Booklady, AED and 2 others like this.
  5. Jason Fernando

    Jason Fernando Archangels

    So are the SSPX group schismatic?
  6. garabandal

    garabandal Powers

    They are not sedevacantists or Benevacantists. As far as I am aware in the SSPX Masses they pray for Pope Francis: they recognise the Pope so that is significant. Bishop Schneider concludes they are not schismatic.

    What is the Status of Society of Saint Pius X? with Bp. Athanasius Schneider and Dr Taylor Marshall

    Bishop Schneider says schismatics are those who refuse in principal the authority of the Pope like the Orthodox who are descrived as schismatics rather than heretics.

    Thus those who are sedevacantists or Benevacantists refuse in principal the authority of Pope Francis and therefore are schismatic.
    Jason Fernando likes this.
  7. Richard67

    Richard67 Powers

    I'm not sure that this is the correct understanding of the dilemma. The issue is whether or not Pope Benedict actually resigned. If he did not, then he is still Pope whether he thinks so or likes so and it wouldn't matter how many Catholics recognize Francis. Canon Law is the deciding factor, not consensus.
    Frank Markus likes this.
  8. Sam

    Sam Powers

    But are their Masses valid? Are their priests validly ordained? I am really serious about this question, because I would like to know if Jesus is really present in the Holy Eucharist at one of their Masses and if you are receiving Him, body, blood, soul and divinity. That to me is the question.
    Frank Markus likes this.
  9. HeavenlyHosts

    HeavenlyHosts Powers

    The views lately from Fr. Z is that the situation is wide open, but I am way more concerned than that. The Masses are valid, but the SSPX priests have no canonical standing in the Church. In order for a Mass to be legal and licit, priests need to have permission from a diocese to offer Mass. The SSPX priests do not have that permission to offer Masses so their Masses are illicit and illegal. They are not joined as part of the Church hierarchy. They govern themselves! The argument is often given that not all NO Masses are licit, either. But the Church has always taught that two wrongs don't make a right, so choosing to go to SSPX Mass means that a person is deliberately choosing an illicit Mass. That to me is not a good thing for a person's soul. I know I will have a hundred posts after this trying to convince me otherwise because so and so says this. Even the highly respected Fr. Z says this. Well, I don't agree and simple facts tell me that if I choose to go to an illegal Mass, I will have to one day answer for it. So I will say again, I don't believe that going to the SSPX is a panacea for escaping staying in the Barque of Peter.
    There are now churches that offer the TLM as the Extraordinary Form that have permission from the diocese to do so.
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2020
    Mary's child and Sam like this.
  10. garabandal

    garabandal Powers

    Who decides?
    Mary's child and HeavenlyHosts like this.
  11. Luan Ribeiro

    Luan Ribeiro Archangels

    I believe that there is a great chance that Francis will be condemned as a heretic in a future ecumenical council, but that at the moment does not make me say with certainty whether he is a legitimate Pope or not, I understand the doubts that many people have about his legitimacy not so much because of the dilemma of the validity of Benedict XVI's resignation but because of the heresies he committed against the dogmas of the Church as in the homily that he said that Mary thought she was deceived by GOD, or in the interviews with Scalfari that he denied existence from hell, divinity and literal resurrection of Christ
    maryrose likes this.
  12. non sum dignus

    non sum dignus Archangels

    Could you link that homily?

    That is a serious acusation that I have never heard.

    If not, I would suggest that people be careful what they say about the Pope without providing evidence.
  13. garabandal

    garabandal Powers

    The problem with this is that many of those statements are second hand through Scalfari. They do not stand up to scrutiny as Scalfari's memory could be questioned.
    Mary's child and HeavenlyHosts like this.
  14. HeavenlyHosts

    HeavenlyHosts Powers

    How is Scalfari’s credibility?
  15. AED

    AED Powers

    My understanding on this from back in the days of JPII is they are valid but not licit. Since PF this may have changed to licit. Of this I am not sure.
  16. HeavenlyHosts

    HeavenlyHosts Powers

    No not changed at all because they have no permission from a Church diocese to say Mass
    No matter what anyone says
    Priests have to receive permission from a diocese to celebrate Mass or the Mass is not licit (illegal)
    So yes they are valid but illegal, illicit
    AED likes this.
  17. garabandal

    garabandal Powers

    He is 96 years old and doesn't take notes relying on his memory.

    Nuf said.
    Mary's child, AED and HeavenlyHosts like this.
  18. Luan Ribeiro

    Luan Ribeiro Archangels

  19. Luan Ribeiro

    Luan Ribeiro Archangels

    I think that if Scalfari had distorted the Pope's words in the first interview (which denied the existence of hell) he should have avoided giving interviews to this journalist on other occasions.
    I remember the Pope once saying that he hadn't watched television for more than 25 years, the benefit of the doubt for him in that case would be that.
  20. It is impossible, this speach was not ex cathedra. He is not changing the teachings of the church. there is a solemn procedure for establishing truths of faith.

    To condemn someone as a heretic is a little more complex and the accused can still renounce his mistakes.

    It was only an homily. They say many errors in homilies. the Pope is not the best Pope on the history of the church, but there were some worse than him.

Share This Page