Another Misrepresentation of Sedevacantism

On July 24th, WMJR 1380, the official radio station of the Diocese of Lexington, KY, hosted a show that dealt with schisms. Of course, the show would not be complete if they didn’t deal with traditionalism and specifically sedevacantism.

Deacon Skip Olsen in his futile attempt to explain the problems of sedevacantism completely mangles basic Catholic theology and why sedevacantism exists, not to mention the name of the late Archbishop Lefebvre. (He probably went to Wikipedia and did a quick study of him for the show.)

The topic of sedevacantism was led into with the comment that if we don’t like what the pope says in an encyclical we’ll just reject him as pope.

This is ridiculous!

John XXIII through Benedict XVI are not popes because they are not Catholics plain and simple. They clearly and unambiguously reject clear DOGMAS of the Catholic Faith. It has nothing to do with what they stated in some Encyclical, not even in Vatican 2 itself.

Then, Olsen explains that sedevacantists believe Holy Orders are invalid because there is no pope. His reason for stating this is because of his false understanding that it takes a pope to make valid bishops. He stated that it takes a pope to make valid bishops and therefore reasons that sedevacantists reject the validity of the priests and deacons on down the latter.

First of all, Eastern Orthodox have valid Orders. It does not take a pope to have valid Orders, if we believed that, then we would reject our own bishops and priests.

Sedevacantists reject the validity of Holy Orders in the Vatican 2 Church because of the deficiency of the Form in the sacrament as Pope Leo infallibly declared with the Anglicans. Rome’s 1968 revision of Holy Orders mirrors that of the Anglicans with precisely the same deficiencies. That’s all.

The Church is still visible.

Skip Olsen simply doesn’t understand basic Catholicism. Perhaps this is why he is not a sedevacantist.

The prayer at the end of the program asked God that we may be one meaning that the Church may be one.

This is classic Vatican 2 stuff.

Vatican 2 teaches over and over that that the Church is not fully united and not “ONE.”

Christ already prayed for the unity of the Church and I don’t presume that His prayer failed. As a matter of fact, it is an Article of Faith that the Church is one and will always be one.

The only thing Skip Olsen got right about sedevacantism was that the Chair of Peter has been vacant since Pope Pius XII. That’s it. The rest of his comments were a complete misrepresentation.

Read Full Post »

Top Ten Questions Neocatholics Can’t Logically Answer

The following questions have been asked to either Tim Staples of Catholic Answers, Fr Harrison of the Latin Mass Magazine and other so-called Catholic publications, Chris Ferrara of the Remnant, and numerous other notorious apologists for Modernist Masonic Rome. None of them answer directly. They all either ignore the question; skew the issues, reject the facts, and then run away.

1. How can a man knowingly reject the historic understanding of the Apostles’ Creed and still be considered pope, as John XXIII through Benedict XVI have done?

2. Since the Church has infallibly declared that She cannot issue harmful or evil disciplines and practices, how can the Vatican 2 Church be recognized as the Catholic Church when the Vat2 church issued Altar Girls and Female acolytes when 3 true popes condemned these practices as evil in themselves?

3. How can John XXIII and Paul VI be considered popes if they are known Masons as their own Masonic brothers have told us time again when the Church has an automatic anathema to Masons?

4. How can the New Mass be considered valid when Pope St Pius V declared that a changing of the Consecration with a different meaning as with the Novus ordo invalidates it?

5. Since Pope Leo XIII infallibly declared that ONLY the Catholic Church has the means to salvation, how can Vatican 2 which is supposed to be the Supreme and Universal Magisterium (which is infallible according to Vatican 1) say that false churches also have a means of salvation?

6. How can Vatican 2 say that we long for and hope to have one day ONE visible Church of God if the Church of God, which is the Catholic Church, is already ONE? This is an article of Faith.

7. How can Vatican 2, the formal teaching of the church, say that man has a right to practice his false religion in public with speech and writing without hindrance, when 4 popes infallibly declared the opposite?

8. How can Vatican 2 say that Muslims worship the same true God as Catholics when Jesus said that all those who reject Him and the Gospel have Satan as their father?

9. What was the Great material and spiritual Chastisement that happened between 1957 and 1960 that Sister Lucia of Fatima said was going to take place as a punishment for the sins of man?

10. What would it take for you to be a sedevacantist? In other words, what do you need to see?

WILL YOU ALSO IGNORE THIS AND FOLLOW MODERNIST MASONIC ROME TOO?

Read Full Post »

Clarification of Catholic Sedevacantism

There is a serious misunderstanding about what the foundations are for the position of sedevacantism.

Since most all sedevacantists reject the novus ordo mass and Vatican 2, it is thought that these are the two grounds for holding to sedevacantism. However, this is not true.

The main foundation is simply that the last 5 claimants to the papacy do not hold to the Faith and/or belonged to the religion of Freemasonry. The fact is the novus ordo mass and Vatican 2 are but bad fruits that came from these men, which is strong evidence to demonstrate that these claimants are not popes.

Even if the new mass were valid or Vatican 2 were perfectly orthodox, it would not change the fact. Many other factors can be shown that Roncalli through Ratzinger are not Catholic.

One more thing to consider, even if sedevacantists are wrong (which they are not), the Vatican 2 Church still considers sedevacantists as part of the Church of Christ with “a” means (if not the “fullness of”) to salvation, just as they do with other religions.

If one believes sedevacantists are truly wrong, then it doesn’t matter what you believe. All it would prove is that Rome and those united to Her are still not the true Church or at least not infallible and the Protestants were right along, at least on this point. Eastern Orthodoxy would be a viable an option as any.

The Vatican 2 church can’t win since they have already taught and practiced things previously condemned by the historical Catholic Church.

It is that simple!

I submit that Catholic Sedevancatism is the answer, since it best fits all the teachings of Christ and the Bible as taken in the historical context.

Again, I cover 33 major objections to sedevacantism in my book, “The Greatest Conspiracy Ever.”

Read Full Post »

One of the Great Heresies of John Paul II in His Own Words

Vatican 2 apologists like to think that sedevacantism is silly nonsense or even heretical. All of them use logically absurd arguments in attempt to refute it. In my book, The Greatest Conspiracy Ever, I refute every objection to sedevacantism including the Vatican I argument used by nearly everybody.

You will see from my answers that the only silly nonsense and heretical thing to say is that the Vatican 2 popes are true popes of the Catholic Church even when they teach complete garbage and actually participate in pagan worship as John Paul II occasionally did.

Below is just one of many examples of heresies that comes out of the Vatican 2 popes, and yet Vatican 2 apologists have no problem saying these heretics are real popes of the Catholic Church.

How often do we hear the phrase “Pope John Paul the Great?”

Well, I say, “John Paul the Great Apostate” who rejected at least three dogmas found right in the Apostles’ Creed.

How blind must you be to think such an individual can be a true pope?

Below is just one of many things taught by John Paul the Great Apostate.

TAKEN FROM MY BOOK “THE GREATEST CONSPIRACY EVER”

The Great Heresy of John Paul II on the Dogma Descent into Hell, an Article of Faith

Excerpt from a General Audience given JPII on January 11, 1989 on articles of the Apostles’ Creed specifically denying the dogma Descent into Hell.

4. As is evident from the texts quoted, the article of the Apostles’ Creed, “he descended into hell”, is based on the New Testament statements , after his death on the Cross, into the “region of death”, into the a abode of the dead”, which in Old Testament language was called the “abyss”. If the Letter to the Ephesians speaks of “the lower parts of the earth”, it is because the earth receives the human body after death, and so it received also the body of Christ who expired on Calvary, as described by the Evangelists (cf. Mt 27:59 f, and parallel passages; In 19:40-42). a real , including the final moment which is generally a part of the whole process: It is a confirmation that this was a real, and not merely an apparent, death. His soul, separated from the body, was glorified in God, but his body lay in the tomb as a corpse.

During the three (incomplete) days between the moment when he “expired” (cf. Mk 15:37) and the resurrection, Jesus experienced the state of death”, that is, the separation of body and soul, as in the case of all people. This is the primary meaning of the words “he descended into hell”; they are linked to what Jesus himself had foretold when, in reference to the story of Jonah. he had said: “For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so ” (Mt 12:40).

Comment: Notice what John Paul is saying Descent into hell means: “experience of death” – “placed in a tomb” – “separation of body and soul” – “as is the case of all people” and this is “the primary meaning.”

For John Paul II there is no real and actual place for the abode of the dead but that it is merely an expression for dying and being buried with a separation of body and soul but the soul doesn’t really go anywhere.

Also, he states this descent into hell is the case for all people. In other words, this descent into hell will, according to him, happen to each and every one of us.

Again, see what else he states:

Death and glorification
5. This is precisely what the words about the descent into hell meant: By on the cross, Jesus had delivered his spirit into the Father’s hands: “Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit!” (Lk 23:46). If death implies the separation of the soul from the body, it follows that in Christ’s case also there was, on the one hand, the body in the state of a corpse, and on the other, the The First Letter of Peter speaks of this duality when, in reference to Christ’s death for sins, he says of him: “<Being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit” (1 Pt 3:18). Soul and body are therefore in the final condition corresponding to their nature, although on the ontological plane the soul has a relationship to be reunited with its own body. The Apostle adds however: “<In spirit (Christ) went and preached to the spirits in prison>” (1 Pt 3:19). This seems to indicate metaphorically the extension of Christ’s salvation to the just men and women who had died before him.

Comment: Again, Descent into hell is merely an expression of dying and giving the soul over to the Father but never do we see JPII saying anything about a real substantial place for the souls known as limbo. Even I Pt 3:19 is only metaphor since JPII is saying that Christ didn’t really go into some place like a prison but only as figure of speech of Christ’s extensive work of salvation.

6. Obscure as it is, the Petrine text confirms the others concerning the concept of the “descent into hell” . It is Christ—laid in the tomb as regards the body, but glorified in his soul admitted —who communicates his state of beatitude to all the just whose state of death he shares in regard to the body.

The Letter to the Hebrews describes his freeing of the souls of the just: “Since… the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same nature, that through death he might destroy him who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong ” (Heb 2:14-15). As dead—and at the same time as alive “forevermore”—Christ has a the keys of death and Hades” (cf. Rev 1:17-18). In this is manifested and put into effect of Christ’s sacrificial death which brought redemption to all, even to those who died before his coming and his “descent into hell”, but who were contacted by his justifying grace.

Metaphors of space and time

7. In the First Letter of Peter we read further: “…the gospel was preached even to the dead, that though judged in the flesh like men, they might live in the spirit like God” (1 Pt 4:6). This verse also, though not easy to interpret, confirms the concept of the “. It is a phase “condensed” into a few days by the texts which try to present in a comprehensible way to those accustomed to reason and to speak in metaphors of space and time, but immensely vast in its real meaning of the extension of redemption to all people of all times and places, even to those who in the days of Christ’s death and burial were already in the “realm of the dead”. The word of the Gospel and of the Cross reaches all, even those belonging to the most distant generations of the past, because all who have been saved have been made partakers in the Redemption, even before the historical event of Christ’s sacrificial death on Calvary took place. The concentration of their evangelization and redemption into the days of the burial emphasizes that in the of Christ’s death there is contained the of the redemptive causality of Christ’s humanity, the “instrument” of the omnipotent divinity. With the entrance of Christ’s soul into the beatific vision in the bosom of the Trinity, the “” of the just who had descended to the realm of the dead before Christ, finds its point of reference and explanation. Through Christ and in Christ there opens up before them the definitive freedom of the life of the Spirit, as a participation in the Life of God (cf. St. Thomas, III, q. 52, a. 6). This is the “truth” that can be drawn from the biblical texts quoted and which is expressed in the article of the Creed which speaks of the “descent into hell”.

Comment: Even the part of the Gospel, which states, “the Gospel was preached even to the dead” is only a metaphor.

8. We can therefore say that the truth expressed by the Apostles’ Creed in the words “he descended into hell”, while , at the same time proclaims ; and not only of his glorification, but of all those who, by means of his redemptive sacrifice, have been prepared for the sharing in his glory in the happiness of God’s Kingdom.

Comment: This is all completely contradicted by Papal teachings and the Catechism of Trent which states:

“we firmly believe and profess that when His soul was dissociated from His body, His Divinity continued always united both to His body in the sepulcher and to His soul in limbo.”(p. 53)

“by the word hell is not here meant the sepulcher, as some have not less impiously than ignorantly imagined; for in the preceding Article we learned that Christ the Lord was buried, and there was no reason why the Apostles, in delivering an Article of Faith, should repeat the same thing in other and more obscure terms.

Hell, then, here signifies those secret abodes in which are detained the souls that have not obtained the happiness of heaven. In this sense the word is frequently used in Scripture. Thus the Apostles says: At the name of Jesus every knee shall bow. Of those that are in heaven, on earth, and in hell; and in the Acts of the Apostles St. Peter says that Christ the Lord is again risen, having loosed the sorrows of hell. (p. 62-63)

Lastly, the third kind of abode is that into which the souls of the just before the coming of Christ the Lord, were received, and where, without experiencing any sort of pain, but supported by the blessed hope of redemption, they enjoyed peaceful repose. To liberate these souls , who, in the bosom of Abraham were expecting the Saviour, Christ the Lord descended into hell. (p. 63)

Christ the Lord descended into hell, in order that, … he might liberate from prison those holy Fathers and the other just souls… (p. 64)

John Paul II said this descent into hell is the case for all people indicating that it is merely a metaphor for the sepulcher (death or died and buried). To the contrary, the Catechism of Trent says this abode of the dead is the bosom of Abraham. Since Christ has now opened the Gates of Heaven to free man, there is no need for us to enter into this abode of hell for we cannot enter it.

However, John Paul II is denying that this abode of the dead “hell” is even a place as the Catechism indicates when it uses the word “prison.” For John Paul II, everyone before Christ who died, without time, was immediately after their own death seeing Our Lord in His death and therefore there is no need to have this real place of prison where souls were detained over all the years since Adam. This is the clear reading of his metaphors of space and time and his explanation of what the Descent into hell meant in his views.

Therefore, this is a complete rejection of the historical dogma making John Paul II a radical and manifest heretic.

Read Full Post »

Hateth by the World

Everywhere I turn these days, the death of the musician Michael Jackson keeps popping up. He is displayed on nearly every magazine in the supermarkets. The televised programs on his life and death including his funeral were watched by millions (not me.) My web news tells me how his funeral cost the city of L.A. $1.4 million.

Michael Jackson was apparently loved by the world.

The last time I saw this much commotion about the death of someone was John Paul II. People by the thousands came to pay their respects. His death was also on all the magazines with special editions. Not only “Catholics” but millions of non-Catholics also mourned his death.

John Paul II was without a doubt loved by the world.

It is understandable why Michael Jackson was so loved by the world. He was the “King of Pop.” He was a man of the world.

However, John Paul II was supposed to be a pope of the Catholic Church in a modern world that was further away from Christianity than ever seen in the last 1000 years.

How can this be?

Jesus said very clearly that if the world hated Him then it would also hate you (followers of Christ.) (John 15:18-19)

Why would Christ make such a statement?

Let’s contrast the love of the world of John Paul II and the hatred of Pope Pius XII.

Pope Pius XII is hated by the world.

He has been accused of not doing enough for the Jews, despite the fact that he saved over 800,000 of them. He has been labeled as Hitler’s pope for not condemning the Nazis despite the fact that he actually did condemned them in letters to all of the bishops around Europe. He has even been accused by so-called traditional Catholics as being ultimately responsible for the Second Vatican Council since he did nothing to stop the modernists despite the fact that he warned the Church of the enemies within. Pope Pius XII even consecrated specifically Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary as Our Lady said the pope would in the end do and the Soviet Union collapsed and the annihilated countries were rehabilitated. Yet, even this has been rejected by most all so-called Catholics.

Pope Pius XII was and is hated by the world.

However this makes sense because Pope Pius XII followed Jesus and resembled Him.

The world lies about Pope Pius just as they lie about Jesus.

The world loves John Paul II because he was a man of the world accepting false religions as justifiable means of salvation even participating in them, all the time, Christ was just a front. This is a popular practice in the modern world and fully expresses the heart of Freemasonry which is nothing more than the rebuilding of the Tower of Babel.

The world hates Pope Pius XII, the last true pope, because he was heroically loyal to Our Lord. This means being countercultural standing against all the false religions. His great 1943 encyclical Mystici Corporis Christi or On the Mystical Body of Christ is a beautiful and clear defense of the one and only way to salvation.

It is not popular going around telling the world that it must have Jesus Christ and his Catholic Church to be saved, but Pope Pius XII wasn’t trying to be loved by the world, he was trying to please Our Lord in trying to win souls for Him.

For this, he was and is hateth by the world!

Read Full Post »