(Taken from my book “The Greatest Conspiracy Ever.)
The single most common argument used by Vatican 2 Catholics against sedevacantism is, “it is impossible to go 50 plus years without a pope because Christ promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against His Church.” The typical Novus Ordo Catholic will accept this argument without any thought as to how anyone calling himself a Catholic could hold to sedevacantism.
One would think that sedevacantists must have thought about this before coming to this conclusion, right? Why on earth would sedevacantists not believe in Christ’s promise?
This argument is used in three ways:
a. The Church failed by the Vatican I declaration of perpetual successors. See also objection number 7.
b. The Church failed by not having a visible church with a visible head and apostolic authority. See also objection number 26.
c. True popes taught heresy and are heretics therefore the gates of hell prevailed because error is now in, through, and part of the Church.
However, this argument is a misunderstanding of Vatican I, the nature of the Church, and specifically indefectibility.
What are the gates of hell?
Pope Vigilius at the Second Council of Constantinople, in 553 called “the tongues of heretics” the “gates of hell.” Pope St. Leo IX, In terra pax hominibus, Sept. 2, 1053, said to Michael Cerularius that “the gates of Hell” are the “disputations of heretics.”
Based on Christ’s promise that the gates of hell will not prevail, Popes Vigilius and St. Leo statements imply that heretics and their heresies will never overcome the Church. The Church will always exist without error.
The very Scripture verse of Christ’s promise, used as the most common argument against sedevacantism, is precisely the verse on which sedevacantism rests.
Since the Second Vatican Council, the Catholic Church had to go underground because the last 5 claimants to the papacy have been those heretics with death-dealing tongues as they have led astray many of the faithful with their heresies and acts of apostasy.
The gates of hell have not prevailed against the Church but it has prevailed against particular churches such as Rome today as it did with England in the 16th century.
Rome is not “the” Church as the Vatican 2 Catholics would like to have us believe. It is only one part of the Church. No doubt, the pope is the head of the Church on earth, but Christ is always the Head of the Church. Every time a pope dies, the visible head is absent but Christ (the invisible Head) remains.
If the papacy could be filled with a death-dealing tongue of a heretic, then the head of the church would be counted along with the devil, the father of lies.
This is impossible since Christ with the pope is the Head of the Church. Christ is not in union with the devil, but a heretic is. Therefore, the pope cannot be a heretic nor formally teach heresy. This is what Christ meant when He said the gates of hell will not prevail.
Pope Leo XIII called the Roman Pontiffs “the Gates of the Church” in his 1894 encyclical letter Praeclara Gratulationis Publicae.
Therefore, the gates of the Church cannot be one and the same as the gates of hell.
By claiming that popes can be formal heretics, Vatican 2 apologists are actually claiming the Gates of Hell have indeed prevailed without realizing it. This also means they are calling Christ a liar and worse, they are saying this is the law of the Church given by the Holy Ghost.
Cardinal Manning of Rome said in 1861 that it is the universal testimony of the Church fathers that Rome will lose the faith in the end. He was speaking about the Great Apostasy, and we sedevacantists are following this universal testimony. If we sedevacantists don’t believe in Christ’s promise then neither did all the Church fathers. However, they knew what Christ meant when He said the gates of hell would not prevail.
As long as one person holds the faith, the church exists in that one person.
We know that the Church does not exist for the sake of the papacy or the rest of the hierarchy, but rather, it is the hierarchy that exists for the sake of the Church.
We have seen in history Catholics living for centuries without any hierarchy. Japan is a prime example. The Church can and will survive till the very end. This is the promise.
The Great Apostasy foretold in Scripture will surely be disastrous, and it happens around the time of the final antichrist just before the Second Coming.
Christ said, “I tell you that he will avenge them quickly. Yet when the Son of Man comes, will he find, do you think, faith on the earth?”
We know He was using hyperbole, but He was clearly emphasizing that it will be so bad that very few will actually profess the true faith. Christ never promised a pope in every generation. When He built the Church on Peter, it was on him and his faith, not necessarily his office. The Church has never stated otherwise. All of Peter’s successors must be in union with Christ, Peter, and Peter’s Faith to be part of the Church.
There have been over 40 antipopes in history, and never were Catholics expected to be union with them just because these men claimed to be popes. Catholics had to make a judgment call whether or not these men were true popes or not. Some made the right call, some didn’t.
St. Vincent Ferrer made the wrong call if Benedict XIII were not a true pope. He even declared the papacy vacant because things were so confusing, it didn’t matter whether there was a true pope or not.
Today, it is not as confusing as in St. Vincent’s time. Never before in history has it been clearer than now. The last 5 claimants to the papacy are not true popes because of their extreme modernism and anti-Catholic practices.
They reject over 5 dogmas found right in the Apostles’ and Nicene Creeds. Benedict XVI has even criticized the Creed, but that should not come to any surprise since he doesn’t believe it, as it has historically been understood. Being an extreme modernist, he, like his 4 predecessors, understands the Creed precisely as the Protestants who profess the same Creed.
Anyway, the point is made that Christ’s promise is the reason for sedevacantism, not the proof against it.
I suspect there is two reasons psuedo-catholics keep using this straw-man argument.
The first reason is the belief in the nonexistent dogma that there must always be a pope in every generation.
Just like the nonexistent Scripture teaching that the Scriptures alone are the sole authority for Christians, the psuedo-catholic rejects the historic Catholic Faith by ignoring clear and unambiguous papal teachings on what constitutes Catholicism and the gates of hell.
Just as the Protestant will, in vain, give his personal interpretation of this and that Bible verse to demonstrate why Sola Scriptura is biblical, the psuedo-Catholic will, in vain, give his personal interpretation of this or that council and canon law to demonstrate how a papal interregnum cannot last more than a generation.
In the end, it always comes back to Christ’s promise.
The second reason is the good-ole-fashion bearing false witness against thy neighbor, because of the intense hatred of us Catholics who hold fast to the Catholic Faith.
Notice how Vatican 2 “Catholics” are so very kind, considerate and understanding with the Muslims, Jews, and Protestants, but when it comes to traditional Catholics, watch-out!
Those Vatican 2 “Catholics” are not so kind, considerate and understanding. They get downright nasty and look downward on the traditionalists.
It is not hard to figure out. After all, holding fast to Catholic Tradition means being more orthodox and conservative than those who like to call themselves “the orthodox and conservative Catholics” accepting every modernist novelty that comes down from Rome.
My opinion is envy and sloth is the root cause of this hatred. Envy because their lack in holiness compared to sedevacantists. For instance, the traditional Roman Mass is infinitely more beautiful than the Protestant look-alike novus ordo mass.
Also, sedevacantists follow the much more stricter 1917 Code of Law, with over 50 days of fasting throughout the year compared to 2 days in the Vatican 2 Novus Ordo Church. This is where the sloth comes in because the suffering that comes with changing to a much holier religion. Not to mention, there are very long travels for mass and the loss of family or friends comes with holding fast to traditional Catholicism.
We sedevacantists are just viewed as weird or loony because we are so completely counter-cultural.
Lastly, it would appear, contrary to their claim, psuedo-catholics don’t really believe in a Great Apostasy, antichrist, and Christ’s return.
Whenever that time should happen, there surely will be men warning the faithful about the antichrist and the Great Apostasy, as we sedevacantists are doing now and being ridiculed and persecuted for it.
However, pseudo-Catholics will keep disregarding the warning for it means the Second Coming would be imminent. The psuedo-catholic will take the Bible out of context and say, “no one knows the day or hour.”
The problem with this position is how can anyone be told and warned about the appearance of antichrist or the Great Apostasy? The psuedo-catholic position is illogical.
Sedevacantists don’t claim to know the hour or day of Christ’s return, but we do know that it must be imminent because we are now in that period of the Great Apostasy. We also know that whatever antichrist is reigning at the time of the Second Coming will be the one.
Right now, the current claimant to the papacy fulfills the prophecy of the final antichrist whether or not he is actually the one.
If not he, perhaps the next imposter pope will be the one.
Why would any Catholic think the antichrist would pose as a pope? It is precisely because the antichrist would need to deceive Catholics, since non-Catholics are already deceived in erroneous beliefs. Holy Scripture also seems to point in that direction.
II Thessalonians 1:3-4, “Let no one deceive you in any way; for that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God.”
Some have argued that the temple of God will be the old Jewish temple rebuilt, but a Jewish temple that rejects Christ would not be the temple of God.
The Church Christ founded would fit as the temple of God and the head of that temple would be that of the papacy.
My favorite so far…masterful!
Hi Steven: Yes, you are right in your article here. I don’t think the 3rd secret of Fatima was ever revealed, but we know the words Antichrist and Apostasy were in the Secret as in the Secret of LaSalette. Both probably had the same secret messages. Malachi Martin was a fraud. I can send you the information. It even has his picture on the book he wrote under his Pseudonym, so you can verify it when you get the information. Also, look up the books he wrote under his false name. He was a wolf in sheeps clothing.
Pax Christi.
Carol Navarra
I THOUGHT I WOULD RESPOND WITH THIS OLD EMAIL THAT I RECEIVED ON THE SUBJECT SINCE MANY PEOPLE BELIEVE MALACHI MARTIN WAS AN EVIL PHONY.
Caviat From John Maffei On: Was Malachi Martin A Double-Agent?
Dear John,
That is not true in the least. As you know, I knew Malachi Cardinal Martin well and for
many years.
Yes, he worked in Vatican Intelligence and wrote the controversial book, The Pilgrim,
under the name Michael Serafian. which book he was ordered to write by Paul VI, while
Malachi accompanied him on a trip to Israel.
Malachi got the name from a hanging sign over a local merchant’s shop. He used a ghost
name because he did not want to be associated with the nature of the book, which theme he
was directed to write by Paul VI. Malachi told me this directly and I have no reason not
to believe him. In spite of what his enemies say about him, I and others found him to be
quite humble and holy. I knew the family he lived with and spent hours with him there
and also in his office a few blocks away.
I read the Look Magazine article and in fact have a copy of it. It proves nothing. What
makes the author of the article reliable?
He never left ties with the Vatican. One of the reasons he left the Vatican was because
of the Freemasonic and Satanic influence in the Vatican to abate deicide. When Paul VI
allowed him to leave, a condition upon leaving was for Malachi to report to a cardinal in
the Vatican because he was indeed a cardinal himself. He was not to write about
anything, nor talk about anything without conferring to this Vatican prelate. I know
that factually because I was involved in having Malachi appear and talk at a major Long
Island function, which he initially agreed to do but later had to withdraw because of his
Vatican contact. There are others who can testify to this.
Soon after leaving the Vatican, Malachi was frequently pestered by Jewish elite in the
United States to support and write on their behalf, which he flatly refused. He
preferred to wash dishes instead.
It saddens me to read all the outright lies and misrepresentations tossed about,
particularly by some Traditionalists, on the reputation of this very special holy man,
who deeply loved the Traditional Holy Mother Church, Our Lord Jesus Christ and His Most
Blessed Mother. But then, I look at all the suffering they experience from ungrateful
people and I’m sure Malachi feels he is in good company.
I have no doubt he was and is a gift from God to us Traditionalists.
Sal Guadagna
Good no nonsense writing Mr. Speray. I heard Malachi Martin interviewed on Coast to Coast saying “Christ bled like a pig”. Sounded like a satanic slip up & Martin quickly tried to cover his mistake.
Am I the only one out there who thinks the 1870 Vatican council was a disaster ? To me that was the real fork in the road for the Church where the papacy was held at a higher level than even scripture. Only a few years later Pope Leo XIII had a vision of the devil’s threat to destroy the Church. Why would the Good Lord permit a chastisement unless a serious breach (infalliblity) had been committed.?
Top notch evaluation of the Novus Ordo abomination! Peace!
Your forgetting sir that the Fathers of the Church are unanimous in their opinion that there will be a Universal Conversion after the Great Apostasy, where everyone in the world will convert to the Faith. Then after that, people will again fall away and there will be no Faith on earth.
The Universal Conversion has not happened yet.
Moreover. this is all just prophecy.
I don’t think you are correct, here.
If they fall away again, then that would be the Great Apostasy, not something before it.
Never does anyone say that they will be no faith on earth or else Christ would have no lambs to place on his right side at Judgment.
Lastly, Scripture is quite clear that the Second Coming happens during the Great Apostasy and Antichrist. Read my book and see the details.
Steven, do you think Vatican 1 was a sacreligious heretical disaster?
Speray replies: No, I think Vatican I was brilliant and awesome!
When you unmask those who are working to teach the gates of hell, you find that over centuries, the names of God have been changed. The Holy Ghost is the Father, removed at Vatican II. Our Lady is the Mother of the Trinity (replaced in the Middle Ages), and the Son, Our Lord, Jesum Christum is God- not a burning bush, the Lord, the God of Israel and of those who keep killing us! Those are the keys to Heaven. The fourth beast (name change) is the Jewish Jesus who will soon make an appearance. Check out http://www.fatimamovement.com – the Third Secret is out and there’s 40 weeks left, if it is authentic. The mystery of the Seven Candlesticks in the Apocalypse is sacramentum in the Vulgate. No mystery at all. Conditional baptisms for all- the Seven Seals were opened by John XXIII in the Council. They’ve got every angle covered and it didn’t start 50 years ago! Good luck!
SPERAY: Please tell me this is a joke.
This is not a joke. Go to fatimamovement.com and read the rare Catholic texts from long ago. There are Dogma’s that say flat out that if a child is baptised in the Holy Spirit, he is not baptised. The Devil and his legions of hell are crafty- so don’t fall for it. Remember, the truth is in the Mass- but it was revolutionized in 1962. Then again in 1969. The truth was rewritten. I’ll put it this way, if Masons are sons of the devil, why would you worship their God in the Masonic Vatican? Do you actually think they are guiding you to Heaven? Remember that Jesus Christ is God and you’ll be better off.
SPERAY: I’m already aware of the revolution of the mass in 1962 and why not to attend it. I don’t worship their God in the Masonic Vatican. I tell people to stay away from the Vatican and all the masses that are in union with them.
Also, the conditional baptism works and is required to be Catholic- it causes, shall we say, an effect. After you get it, you’ll understand why it was necessary for Judeo-Masonry to destroy the rite. Remember, even the elect will be deceived.
SPERAY: I write about conditional baptisms and why we should have them. I wrote a book on Baptism. However, the elect will not be deceived. The Bible doesn’t say the elect will be deceived but rather that the false Christ’s and Prophets will be so skillful that if it were possible they would deceive the elect. (Matt. 24:24) The elect remain the elect forever, they can’t be deceived as God protects them. That is why those days will be shortened.
Lastly, I disagree with the fatimamovement site that the third secret is in fact the one they give. I believe it to be false just as the one given by Rome in 2000. I wrote about it here… https://stevensperay.wordpress.com/2010/05/07/the-two-alleged-third-secrets-of-fatima/
The deception that deceives the elect is that the Lord, the Our Father, the hallowed name, is God. I’m glad you know about the Holy Ghost and that Jesus Christ is God. Remember the Trinity was revealed to Sis. Lucia. It was the Mother, the Son, and the Holy Ghost (Father). You have to undo the Apocalypse to come to the truth. Masonry’s objective is to fulfill the Dogmas in the Apocalypse so the Anti-Christ will come. As a Catholic, you must do the reverse.
replies
1. The purpose of the Third Secret not being released in 1960 was to demonstrate that the Church was not following orders. The non-consecration of Russia was another clue to the elect that the Church was not following Our Lady’s orders. It was to be released by 1960 because the VII Council started in 1959. It wouldn’t have made sense to anyone before 1960.
2. Hard to say, but JPII transferred Peter’s remains in 2004 to Fatima for some reason. The Dogma of Faith in Portugal that is lacking in the Novus Ordo is that Jesus Christ is God, not “The Lord”, the “Our Father”. . The Rosary is the best weapon against heresy, the gates of Hell. This goes back hundreds of years and is so difficult to unravel. The Lord beads were added to the Rosary by Pius V, a Jew, and the chain of 150 Hail Marys was broken. The reason for 150 is to pray against the Psalmists of David, who await their Messiah. The two faiths have become melded together under their lie of the Lord being God of everyone.
3. Malachi Martin was dirty, to say the least. Horsemen mix lies with truths. The Masonic Jesus which he likes to talk about is the deception. The scribes are crafty. Remember Sola Scriptura is the dogma of Calvin and Luther for a very good reason. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that Jesus Christ is God. You can find associations to try to make the case that it does say that, but come on, what, did the book run out of room? Read 1 Kings 10:12-14 for the Lord/666 link. It is in every Bible.
The purpose of Masonry is to make a new god, and make Our Lord and God subservient to their Lord, their God (the devil). The Bible accomplishes this. I’ll put it this way- when Jesus Christ asks you, “Who do you say that I am?”, do not reply, “You are the Son of the Lord.” Just say, “You are God.” Heresy or, getting the name of God wrong is the Gates of Hell.
One more point, the Council of Florence condemns all who observe Mosaic Law because of the First Commandment of “The Lord”. Find Catholic Encylopedia and 1633 Douai-Rheims proof of this name switch on fatimamovement.com
Good Luck.
I don’t follow what you’re saying.
Are you saying Jesus Christ is not the son of God? Are you saying he is literally God the creator of the universe? Please explain in very very very very simple terms what you mean, please.Should I be re-baptized in the traditional rite by a valid priest or bishop? I was baptized in the 70’s by a valid priest but not in the traditional rite.
Speray Replies: Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Yes, He is the same God as the Father, Creator of the universe. Baptism is valid in novus ordo and many Protestant religions. No need to be re-baptized.
Copy,thank you for responding.I have seen this website before.It would be great to know where they received this info? The website says the Blessed Mother is God.