Filial Correction of Pope Francis for multiple heresies

Priceless!!!

 

Lol. I supposed I asked for that.

I discovered that there's Mass in Latin in the city centre on Sunday mornings. Although I'm happy with Mass in English, I'm not a fan of the "Lord's table" altar and orientation. To their credit, our priests offer Mass reverently and don't put on a performance making it all about them. For nostalgic reasons, I would like to attend a Latin Mass so was thinking of making the effort some Sunday. Trouble is that it's the Novus Ordu Mass and I'm not sure the celebrant won't be facing the people so it won't really be the Mass of my childhood. Probably no smells or bells either. I can't make up my mind whether it's worth the effort, bypassing my parish church, tackling the city traffic and parking just for the opportunity of saying et cum spiritu tuo and the Pater Noster (that's all the Latin I can remember and I'm not so confident on the Our Father). I'm assuming that the congregation give the responses rather than leaving it to the altar boy. Life would be so much easier had they simply translated the Tridentine Mass into English rather than turning Mass into a protestant service plus Consecration.

 

Awesome

 

Sunburst,

Thank you for posting this video. Father Michael Rodriguez appears to give some very good advice the only thing that I question and this question is not for you alone necessarily but for anyone here who can answer this question. At @45min. & @56min. marks, Father Rodriguez states that we should commit ourselves 100% to the Traditional Latin Mass, the TLM, but I wonder why we have never been told this by Our Lady in all of the approved apparitions that I am aware of including that of Fatima this advice was never given unless I have missed something.

My question is, have I missed this somewhere along the way. Has Our Lady rebuked Vatican II in anyway and suggested that the New Mass, the Novus Ordos, should not have been put in place and that the only acceptable form of the mass is the Traditional Latin Mass? I think that the answer to this question is no.

The Traditional Latin Mass is beautiful and extremely reverent, I have absolutely no doubt that it makes Heaven happy. I believe that the TLM should be available for those who want to participate in it but I find it very difficult to believe that Vatican II was not accepted by Heaven and if that were the case than why would we not have been told this by Our Lady. This would be a huge issue to leave out of the dire messages at Fatima.

I am thankful for all of those who have and continue to fight for the orthodoxy of the Church. I will continue to remain obedient to the Church and pray that there is a resolution to this current situation in the very near future.

Although it would be better for the Pope to answer the dubia, I pray that Cardinal Burke has moved forward with the Formal Correction of the Pope. The sooner the better but as many of you have stated on this thread, we must remain patient - it's God's time not our's.


The following "interview" from Cardinal Burke may shed some light on the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), as Cardinal Burke states in the video this is complicated. As Father Rodriguez mentioned in the above video, Bishop Bernard Fellay who is the Superior General of the SSPX was the only bishop to initially sign the Filial Correction.



Here is a video from Michael Matt of the Remnant in relation to the above video.




This is all complicated. May God bless us all.

 

There are so many questions Carol that it does get quite confusing. I think the Latin Mass should be attended for a number of reasons. First off in times of confusion we are told by the saints to flee to the traditions of the Church. I am not speaking directly against anything in particular that came out of Vatican II or to the council itself. I am not qualified to do so. That being said, I do have eyes and a brain. Everything in the Church started to go bad right after that council. I think many of us can see this. As to specifics, I don't know. It is above my pay grade.

Also, at the Latin Mass there is generally much more reverence. The priests also speak about true Catholic concerns, the Chastisements, The requests of Fatima, the Rosary etc.

Just look at all of the sermons that are posted on the forum here. Does it not seem to be a strong indicator that all of them are given by traditional priests? I think there may be a smattering of Novus Ordo priests that know what is going on, but for the most part they don't know or don't care. I don't think this is an accident. Go where the fruit is good.

Follow the breadcrumbs. That's what I did. If you ask me personally. I think personally I would prefer the old Mass in Latin with some parts in the vernacular. That is what was proposed at Vatican II, but that is not what Archbishop Bugnini did when he wrote the new Mass. He had very different ideas. In any case I don't go to the Mass because it is what I like, but I try to do what God wants.

I don't push or condemn anyone if they don't do what I do. I think God is leading us all along, but I can tell you that personally I think the Church went off the rails when it left the Latin Mass. The Mass of the ages that all of the great saints attended.

 

I agree with everything you say Praetorian. I think if the TLM is available don't walk RUN to the Church and thank God for this incredible gift.

 

Let those who have eyes see and ears hear. It has become blatantly obvious. That is why the trajectory of conservative/orthodox Catholics is solidly towards traditional Catholicism.

 

I suspect the answer is yes.
I can point to these ....

1,
Msgr. Eugene Pacelli, the future Pope Pius ХII:
“I am worried by the Blessed Virgin's messages to Lucy of Fatima. This persistence of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a divine warning against the suicide of altering the Faith, in Her liturgy, Her theology and Her soul. ‹…› I hear all around me innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame of the Church, reject Her ornaments and make Her feel remorse for Her historical past.
A day will come when the civilized world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God. In our churches, Christians will search in vain for the red lamp where God awaits them. Like Mary Magdalene, weeping before the empty tomb, they will ask, 'Where have they taken Him?'”



2,
Judging the Novus Ordo Missae in itself and in its official Latin form (printed in 1969)*, Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci wrote to Pope Paul VI:
...the Novus Ordo represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXIII of the Council of Trent."


3,
Dollinger spoke with the cardinal and brought up the topic of Fatima and the Third Secret. Ratzinger told him: ‘What we have published is not the whole secret.
He also told Dollinger that the published part of the Secret is authentic and that the unpublished part of the Secret speaks about “a bad council and a bad Mass” that was to come in the near future.
12 June: Bishop Athanasius Schneider has informed me that he himself will be celebrating the Requiem Mass for Dr. Dollinger

 

While I love the Latin Mass, the following alleged message from our Lord in the book www.godspeakswillyoulisten must be respected, as its rings completely true to what saints in heaven (St. Pope John Paul) have believed and spoken. A serious admonition to those who reject Vatican II.

6/27/07
Now let me clear up an area of confusion for you. Daniel 12:11. And from the time when the continual sacrifice shall be taken away and the abomination unto desolation shall be set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred ninety days. The continual sacrifice is the mass and the abomination of desolation is when the doctrine of the mass is changed in my church- the Roman Catholic Church. If you study church history, this doctrine of the mass is the one Satan has tried to destroy. From the time of the early church until now.

Please read the next comments carefully. In my present church, there is much confusion regarding Vatican II. This is from Satan, not from me. Answer me a question: if the Holy Father calls an ecumenical council with all the bishops of the world and the Holy Spirit is guiding the church, how can that council be of Satan? It was not. My people do not understand the working of my Holy Spirit. Remember, I told you to be ware of false prophets who come to you in the clothing of sheep. Satan has caused schism in my church, by allowing false interpretations to abound concerning Vatican II. My words do not change. I am going to give you a clue to share with my people. Satan hates the doctrine of the mass and the doctrines concerning my Blessed Mother. These are the two areas he has been trying to destroy. The Vatican II Council reaffirmed both of these doctrines. This council was not convened by hell, but by my Holy Spirit. A council or a Pope who destroys and denies my mass and my Blessed Mother’s privileges is from hell. This is how you can recognize the abomination of desolation. A false prophet or anti pope will proclaim the protestant doctrine of the mass to be correct. This is the one teaching that will change. The rest of my churches teachings can stay the same. Satan knows how to deprive my children of everlasting life, deprive my children of my presence. This is how the man of sin, the son of perdition will sit in the temple of God. Reference II Thessalonians 2:4-10. He will attempt to lead my people to deny my presence in the Eucharist and to teach the mass is only a symbol. This is antichrist. This will bring the wrath of God on the children of disobedience. This will cause the unleashing of the bowls of divine justice.

My sacrifice of the mass daily holds back my Father’s justice. Luke 18:8. But yet the Son of man, when he cometh, shall he find, think you, faith on earth? Will I find any of my children, who I recognize with my life in them? Will there be faith left in my holy sacrifice? These are the questions which need to be pondered. My son, a false Christian church will be forced on the people. A gospel of prosperity and a make you feel good gospel will be preached. My churches can be filled with people, but the churches will be dead because I am not there. Without my presence in the churches, God does not dwell in the churches. Then, these sheep who hear my voice will be forced to worship in underground churches where I will be present. This truly is the abomination of desolation and antichrist. Then I will come with the brightness of my coming, destroy this false church, and restore my church according to my will. Then you will see an era of peace. A Eucharistic era of peace where I will reign in the hearts and mind of my people in the holy Eucharist. You must believe all these words I am teaching you and the teachings of my church or you will not enter my era of peace. Ponder these words or I may say to: I NEVER KNEW YOU. The words of the Lord. I bless you Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. AMEN

 

The courage of the martyrs always amazes and delight it reminds me how reliant on grace we are

 

Signed it

 

It is my understanding that the Mass we ended up with, and most particularly the Second Eucharistic prayer, was nothing like what the bishops of the Second Vatican Council intended. I think their intention was the introduction of some vernacular and a certain degree of minor, gradual change that remained within the spirit of the Tridentine Rite.

I think we must be very careful in distinguishing the Second Vatican Council and the opportunistic movement that became known as 'the spirit of Vatican II', a title that may possibly be construed as a blasphemous and dishonest attempt to invoke the support of the Holy Spirit as a cover for all manner of shenanigans that seem to have little connection with what was actually decided at the Council.

As regards a 'bad Council', I also understand that there have been such before. Correct me if I'm wrong (as I certainly have no wish to propagate error), but were there not some dodgy Councils during the Arian period? I think there were Arian Councils at Tyre and Constantinople. Lest we get too discouraged, it is a fact that the Church reinstated Arius into full communion, but it looks like God directly intervened, as he died suddenly and unexpectedly just the night before his reinstatement, with full pomp, was supposed to take place. That softened a few coughs at the time, I'd think.

 

I love that Mario brought up St. Margaret Clitherow. I had never heard of her before. I also checked on the internet and saw where she was expecting a baby at the time of her execution. Barbarians!

 

Yes Carol, I agree with much that you have said and have asked the same questions myself about the Mass and I hear so many times,...the I like and I don't like when it comes to the Mass but as for myself "I" think it matters most what God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost find acceptable. There are so many examples in the Old Testament that give examples of how the High Priest should approach and offer sacrifice to the Almighty. So important in fact God has struck priests with death for the way in which it was offered (here are some examples)
http://unamsanctamcatholicam.com/liturgy/78-liturgy/474-people-struck-dead-in-old-testament.html
Praetorian's answer above is very much in line with my way of thinking. The other concern I have is now we have Pope Francis playing around with the Liturgy
We all know how Pope Francis honored and celebrated the historical 500th anniversary of the reformation of Martin Luther

 

I think the message I quoted is very clear. If we cannot accept VatII council as valid then the gates of hell prevailed long ago against the church. Yes, there has been bad periods in church history and yes the Arian crisis was of the worst. However, Vat2 was convened to further clarify and teach in a new era. It was done so with all the Catholic hierarchy and with a valid pope. A pope who stated that the 'smoke of Satan has entered the church'. The Holy Spirit was also present and some beautiful writings came out of the council.

If anyone rejects Vatican II as an invalid council then they are in schism.

A Church is a larger picture of a family. God's family. Anyone who has been around a large family knows that some members are not always going to adhere to what has been taught. Some may even reject the whole family identity. Our Church is the same way. Having hierarchy rejecting Humanae Vitae did not stop the Church from teaching the fullness of the truth in explaining the grave sin of contraception. Yet many, if not most, clergy have rejected this truth.

My point is simply that we have to see beyond the errors that crept into our liturgy and sometimes suffer through abuses that crept in from priests and fight the good fight to correct them. In the end God will reward those who fought against modernism within our liturgy and I don't mean the true NO liturgy, but the one that his been usurp by the devil and his minions clergy.

 

Mac,

Thank you. Like DeGaulle, "I don't want to propagate error". I don't think that any of us want to do that.

Do you think that the sacrifice of the Novus Ordos Missae is invalid? I do not. I don't think that the following has happened yet,
"In our churches, Christians will search in vain for the red lamp where God awaits them. Like Mary Magdalene, weeping before the empty tomb, they will ask, 'Where have they taken Him?'”

I think that it is important that we discern these things for ourselves. I remain in union with the Church.

Pray, hope and don't worry.

 

K

We are broadly in agreement, but my main point was that many of the changes in the Church that happened after Vatican II weren't intended at all by the Council, but some people are wrongly or mistakenly blaming the Council.

I would think you are correct that one must, as a Catholic, accept the validity of a Council. However, just as one must accept the validity of the papacy of Pope Francis while still retaining the option of considering that he might very well be a bad pope, I think one entitled, while accepting the validity of Vatican II, to assert that at least some of it might be 'bad' if one has reasonable grounds to do so. There certainly seem to be certain areas of the documents that remain questionable, such as those on religious freedom and relations with the Jews. I'm no expert, but it is difficult to ignore those who are and who retain a great loyalty to orthodoxy and the Church.

Like you, I accept the NO as a true Sacrifice of Christ. Some extraneous aspects can be cringeworthy, but that is no reason to reject the Sacrifice-one would be better just offering it up! Personally, I find the bare-bones version, without any lay involvement except for altar-boys (spare us altar girls!) preferable. I wish the Roman Canon and ad orientem was used. That would do me. That and the return of communion on the tongue and the abolition of extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist.

 

The problem is not that I'm deciding who the pope is , the problem is the confusion surrounding the papacy.
There is enormous doubt and my position as a practising catholic is to follow the known safe course.
The only safe path and safe course that I can follow in this time of great doubt and confusion is to continue to regard Pope Benedict as the sole valid Pope.
So I am not a sedevacantist.
I am not the only practising catholic holding this position.

 

I have read Peters and many many others on this matter.
The problems remain that either the Catholic Church is governed by its own laws or it is not.
Peters does not understand this point.

Violations of canon law occurred in connection with and continue in relation to Benedicts alleged resignation.
Violations of canon law [the apostolic constitution] in relation to the 2013 conclave may have occurred.
There is some credible evidence extant.
Extraordinary violations of church teaching on the sacraments especially marriage, immortality of the soul, and the divine commandment to preach the gospel to all nations [ie the necessity to convert to catholocism] have been ongoing at the very highest level of the church.

Therefore where is the Rock of Peter that is meant to protect and conserve the faithful from these depredations that I have listed?

What I have listed is nothing less than base spiritual anarchy widespread and unchecked , an anarchy that has spread widely and exponentially since 2013.

Therefore what is the safe option?
The safe option is to deem Pope Benedict as the only valid Pope.

Accepting the individual elected at the 2013 conclave is in my view unsafe.

 

That you proclaim yourself, and others, Catholic, doesn't make you, or them, one. Joseph Ratzinger is no longer a pope. He resigned, and with it went his validity. Pope Francis, no matter what sort of character he possesses, is a valid pope and will remain so unless some person or persons with the legitimate authority and the relevant evidence, and using the recommended protocols, decide otherwise. The infantry just obey orders, even if we complain and consider them daft-the Church Militant, like any army, cannot survive otherwise.