AUTHOR AND APOLOGIST JOSEPH SARACENO SENT OUT THE FOLLOWING EMAIL.
IN THE PAST, I’VE RECEIVED NUMEROUS EMAILS FROM THIS MAN WHO CLAIMS TO BE A PROPHET OF GOD.
HE ALSO CLAIMS TO HAVE THE KEYS OF THE KINGDOM GIVEN TO HIM BY GOD AFTER GOD TOOK THEM AWAY FROM ROME.
Hutton Gibson Prints Joseph’s Letter in His Book.
Hutton Gibson is a sede-vacantist and as a sede-vacantist he does not accept any of the independent traditional bishops having valid orders. His position: â€œDo we have to have a papal mandate to consecrate bishops?â€ Even though Archbishop Ngo Diem Thuc had a papal mandate, it was for the crisis that was going on in Vietnam with of the Communist revolution. But how can one get a papal mandate if there is no pope and hasn’t been a pope since Paul VI? But Hutton continues to act like he’s a source of authority by what he writes and prints. So this was my letter to him in which he printed in his book, “The Enemy is Still Here” 2003, page 370.
This was my letter to him:
You again attack those you suppose have no legitimacy, lacking authority from Rome. From whom do you receive your authority? You seem to assume authority even greater than most Traditionalist priests, since you claim infallibility, where is they admit to theoretical assumptions based upon well researched logical conclusions. Until you receive an imprimatur from a bishop who has met all pre-Vatican requirements for validity and liceity (papal mandatum included), and is duly appointed to a diocese with required jurisdiction, how can you, according to your own mechanisms, write in print anything that treats of faith and morals? How can you decide church teaching without even having a doctorate, let alone licentiate? Fools are many, wise men few. Passions easily cloud the mind from clear reasoning. Please take a moment to look at your own arguments. Why, you even give credence to Nostradamus, condemned by the church as an astrologer. I have submitted all my writings to the clergy of the church for their approval.
Thanks for your gracious note. Have you some specific complaint? or do you merely object to my general treatment of my main interest in life? I welcome constructive criticism and general argument. But I have no defense against contumely of boorish manners. I could say a lot about self appointed prophets. Not being in the prophecy business I could offer neither help nor advise, so I keep quiet and inflict my private opinion on no-one. But you are free to draw what conclusions you wish.
Are you serious in charging that I have given credence to Nostradamus? Would you consider it a recommendation if I should say that even you must be right sometimes, perhaps? St. Jerome commented that the apocalypse contained as many mysteries as words. But you, not the man who translated it, are the expert.
Please do not assume superiority over the idea that you have managed to secure clerical approval of your writings. Considering the priestly record over the past 40 years, that is a fact to be concealed. I would neither seek nor desire an imprimatur or nihil obstat from any “bishop.” I can contact whether novus ordo or wildcat. Possibly I over-react here; I have seen no official approval of anything you have written. Of course, you would never apply a double standard.
When you find time to particularize some error I have published and have not recanted or satisfactorily explained, write again and I shall answer (end of letter).
I have often cheerfully admitted that I have no authority. But the church made me responsible for the Catholic education of my children. Since few now teach religion, I must inform my children what the church taught me. It seems not too charitable to withhold this information from others who request it. The prophetical nose is out of joint because, as one of such small minority I could be one of his wise men too.
Whence priests and bishops derive their authority and jurisdiction is set by Divine Law specified in Holy Scripture as inspired or stated by God Himself. These laws are infallible. No one may dodge them by “theoretical assumptions based upon well-researched logical conclusions.” The clergy must obey them, and the laity must obey by requiring the clergy to obey them. (end of letter).
I respond again:
Well, my friends, there you have it. Hutton knows that St. Jerome did not witness the effects of the Vatican II Council and the coming of the “Man of Sin.” who Paul VI was, and that these other â€œpopesâ€ only continue what John XXIII started: “The new Pentecost.”
Hutton confuses Divine Law with Ecclesiastical law. Ecclesiastical law does not carry Infallibility. Now I ask you, who has the double standard????
In Christ, Joseph
I must correct you here.
When Ecclesiastical law is universal, it is infallible.
Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, 66 (1943): “Certainly the loving Mother is spotless in the Sacraments, by which she gives birth to and nourishes her children; in the faith which she has always preserved inviolate; in her sacred laws imposed on all; in the evangelical counsels which she recommends; in those heavenly gifts and extraordinary graces through which, with inexhaustible fecundity, she generates hosts of martyrs, virgins and confessors.”
Monsignor G. Van Noort, S.T.D. Dogmatic Theology 2:91 (1958): “The Church’s infallibility extends to….ecclesiastical laws passed for the universal Church for the direction of Christian worship and Christian living….But the Church is infallible in issuing a doctrinal decree as intimated above – and to such an extent that it can never sanction a universal law which would be at odds with faith or morality or would be by its very nature conducive to the injury of souls…..”
P. Hermann, Institutiones Theologiae Dogmaticae (4th ed., Rome: Della Pace, 1908), vol. 1, p. 258: “The Church is infallible in her general discipline. By the term general discipline is understood the laws and practices which belong to the external ordering of the whole Church.”
A Dorsch, Institutiones Theologiae Fundamentalis. Innsbruck: Rauch 1928. 2:409: “The Church is also rightfully held to be infallible in her disciplinary decrees….By disciplinary decrees are understood all those things which pertain to the ruling of the Church,, insofar as it is distinguished from the magisterium. Referred to here, then, are ecclesiastical laws which the Church laid down for the Universal Church in order to regulate divine worship or to direct the Christian life.”
R.M. Schultes De Ecclesia Catholica. Paris: Lethielleux 1931. 314-7: “The infallibility of the Church in Enacting Disciplinary Laws. Disciplinary laws are defined as ‘ecclesiastical laws laid down to direct Christian life and worship’….. The Church, in establishing universal laws, is infallible as regards their substance.”
Valentino Zubizarreta Theologia Dogmatico-Scholastica. 4th ed. Vitoria: El Carmen 1948. 1:486: ” Corollary II. In establishing disciplinary laws for the universal Church, the Church is likewise infallible,.”
Serapius Iragui, Manuale Theologiae Dogmaticae. Madrid: Ediciones Stadium 1959. 1:436, 447: Therefore, when the Church establishes disciplinary laws, she must be infallible.”
Do you believe this teaching of the Church?
Also, I don’t agree with you that the “man of sin” is Paul VI. Not even close!
I answer the question in my book “The Key to the Apocalypse.”
I’ll get back to you on those other issues, but in the mean time read this article on Paul VI.
Also I don’t recall you ever sending for my booklest or C/D’s on these subjects and I need to know if you are or were ever a sede Vacantist???
In Christ, Joseph
Thank you for sending the attachment, but I disagree with it simply because it is wrong.
No doubt that Paul VI is “AN” antichrist as are all the antipopes, but Paul VI is not “THE” antichrist.
Of course, I’m a sedevacantist. Have you not seen my website that I’ve sent you several times?
I defend the position and my book answers all the objections against it…something that I’ve not seen from any other sedevacantist.
Bishop McKenna has even endorsed one of my books.
My latest book answers the question!
Do you still hold that Ecclesiastical laws are not infallible?
I guess you never read my booklets or heard my lecture. Your getting the Man of Sin and AntiChrist’s mixed up, even though they are all false popes. The only reason we can’t name John 23 an AntiChrist is because , he didn’t sign the heretical decrees of the V-2 Council and he better fits the description of the precursor of the Man of Sin. Apoc:9:1. Fr. E. S Berry
in his book ,”The Apocalypse of St. John.” A Star falls from Heaven…opens the gates of hell…..Counter Sacraments…..Whose revolt from the Church shall lead to the reign of the AntiChrist, (Man of Sin) Whom St. Alphonsus de Liguori states is that one of the first things he would do is try to destroy the Mass. One of the reasons for the confusion is because the AntiChrists are always referred to as one person but it’s only because their can only be one at a time as all are pointing to him who is sitting on the chair but their different persons. Once again I show as well where JP-1, JP-2 and Benedict 16 is also.
In my lecture I predicted where one of these AntiChrist popes would clash with the Jews which Benedict 16 did all last year. Apoc: 17:16. What most Catholics don’t understand is that the Antichrist they are looking for is the last one who will bring and conclude every thing into perfection just before Christ comes back. Their could be up to seven of them. I hope not.
You say you explain the sede vacante position but that;s impossible with out the AntiChrist as Vatican I states and the Church has always taught that we can never be without a true Pope accept for death. Paul VI became the first Pope to become a public (formal) heretic and by doing so he became the man of sin and broke the line of papal successors.
As for Bishop McKenna, he was never a sede vacantist, that’s why he went to France and got Bishop des Lauries to consecrate him, then he backed his position on the “Materially Formally.” theory. This in turn divided the Thuc line Bishops. If anything I help talk Kenna into becoming a Bishop, but I never thought he would go to France when we had 3 Thuc line Bishops here in the United States. But of course they were all sede vacantists.
As for Ecclesiastical Law, which is generally human law, not to be confused with Divine teachings or laws. Generally speaking one doesn’t need a Ecc. law if its already a divine teaching. But you avoided the subject matter which was being discussed, that of a papal mandate for consecration of Bishops. (Hutton Gibson) Which is not a divine law.
It probably would have been better had I said that not ALL Ecclesiastical Law carries Infallibility for those who didn’t understand my subject matter.
As a matter of fact the first two Popes were appointed for, Jesus appointed Peter and Peter appointed Linus. Their was another one, (can’t recall his name) who was also appointed but the Cardinals would not accept him unless they voted for him and did anyway.
Steve, you seem to forget that I have given the Traditionalist 11 mystery’s of the faith over the last 50 years and helped influence many of the Fathers to where we are now. I also need to remind you that had not God visited with me 40 years ago and showed me what I couldn’t understand and needed to know, for sure if He didn’t I would be just another false prophet. I would like to read your book but there isn’t enough time. I can not handle my current work load.
In Christ, the prophet Joseph
You stated that I was confusing the man of sin and antichrist, but I explain this in my book. I don’t confuse them at all.
You stated, “You say you explain the sede vacante position but that;s impossible with out the AntiChrist as Vatican I states and the Church has always taught that we can never be without a true Pope accept for death.”
This is not true. Vatican I says no such thing. Not even close! Perhaps you can show me precisely what Vat 1 statement that you are referring. I go over every statement of Vatican I on the papacy with a fine tooth comb in my book “The Greatest Conspiracy Ever.”
PLEASE SEND ME THAT VAT 1 TEACHING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And I said that I defend all the arguments against sedevacantism. This is not impossible!
I also expose the final antichrist in my book.
John XXIII broke the line of successors for he was a Mason making him ipso facto a non-catholic. He also was a heretic making him ipso facto a non-pope and he did so formally before he was falsely elected in 1958. Both he and Paul VI were never true popes since both were made Masons in the late 40’s.
You don’t know what you are talking about when you say Bishop McKenna was never a sedevacantist. He sells my book defending sedevacantism. I’ve spoken to him a number of times in the past year about sedevacantism. He is a sedevacantist and it drives me crazy to hear people like you keep saying he is not a sedevacantist. I know him very well!
And I didn’t avoid the subject about church law, but you seem to be avoiding the subject on the laws.
All universal church laws (Divine and human) are infallible! Not only laws but all universal disciplines of the church are infallible.
Do you believe this or not?
As for you 11 mysteries of the faith, in the past you gave me a list of only 9. You also say they can’t be refuted. Let me do so now.
For thirty-five years now I have opened up the “book of life” and from it have explained , “Nine Mysteries of the Faith.” To this day they can not be refuted. Let me post them again, one more time. Joseph B.D. Saraceno
Refuted by Steven Speray
#1. Christ will come back on SUNDAY. Apoc.1:10. & Tradition.
REFUTE: It was Sunday John received the vision of the Second Coming, not that the actual day of the Second Coming will necessarily fall on Sunday.
#2. On Pentecost Sunday. Apoc. 14:14. & Tradition.
REFUTE: Matthew 24:36 and Mark 13:32 says, ““But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only.” It might just happen to fall on that day but cannot be predicted any other way.
#3. The General Judgment lasts a Week. Apoc. 17:11. (7 & 8 Th symbol for Pentecost) Tradition. and as in the week of the creation.
REFUTE: Every time the General Judgment is referenced in the Bible, it refers to a single day and not days. That day is the Second Coming and will usher in the final judgment by revelation, separation, and afterwards the resurrection. John 6:39,40, 44, 54, 12:48: “the last day.”
1 Corinthians 3:13: ”each man’s work will become manifest, for the Day will disclose it,…”
Matt 10: 15, 11:22, 12:36, II Peter 2:9, 3:7, I John 4:17: “the day of judgment”
Jude: 1:6: “And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day”
#4. The Vatican II Council in the book of the Apoc. 13:5, 16:13, 17:4 & 2 Tim. 4:3. (Approved by Paul VI).
Refute: Vat2 is not the beast, not even close. The other verses are different and Vat2 in a sense could fit in 16:13 and 17:4, and most certainly in 2 Tim. 4:3.
#5. Name the “Man of Sin” as Paul VI. 2 Thess. 2, Apoc. 18:5. (The Mass is Heaven on earth.)
REFUTE: “THE” Man of Sin is the last antichrist who will be revealed and who will be the one who is destroyed by Christ at the Second Coming. II Thess. 2:8
#6. Name the “Anti Christ” in Apoc.13:14, John Paul II. (Apoc. 13:11 Two Horns, Luke 1:69.)
REFUTE: The AntiChrist is the one destroyed with the False Prophet by the Second Coming. Apoc. 19:20 John Paul II is dead and we are still waiting for the Second Coming.
#7. Name the “False Prophet” in Apoc.19:20 & 20:10. Billy Graham. (Or his successor)
REFUTE: The false prophet must deceive good Catholics, and Billy or his successor just would not qualify.
#8. Describe the symbols of AntiChrists. The Jewish Ephod, the cross of the resurrection & the Broken Cross. Introduced by Paul VI. ( 666 is the symbol of the Hebrew faith, short of perfection or incomplete without Jesus Christ.) Footnotes.Apoc.13:18
NO REFUTATION HERE
#9. Give an approximate length of time of the “Great Apostasy.” about 40 years. Apoc. 18:10-17. Matt. 24:34. Generation, Rev. Dr. Huchede says “45 years History of AntChrist.”
REFUTE: NO WAY OF TELLING. COULD BE MUCH LONGER! MATT. 24:34 IS SIMPLY REFERRING TO THE GENERATION THAT WITNESSES THE EVENTS CHRIST JUST DESCRIBED. WE ARE ALREADY HAVE GONE WAY PAST 40 YEARS. THE APOSTASY BEGAN WITHIN THE CHURCH A HUNDRED YEARS AGO. IT WAS MADE APPARENT IN THE 1960’S WITH VAT2. WHAT POINT DO YOU START IT PRECISELY? 1965 AT END OF VAT2, 1969 WITH NEW MASS? THE APOSTASY WAS ALREADY PRESENT WHICH IS WHY THE NEW MASS WAS SO EASILY ACCEPTED!
There’s no fool like a Catholic fool.
See that’s what happens when you failed to send for my booklets and tapes.
I have a Nihil Obstat on my finding for Christ Coming back on Pentecost Sunday by 5 Traditional Catholic Bishops, including McKenna and Oravec, so you know more then them. Do you have one on your book????
I’ll be glad to mail you the Church’s teachings on successors, “must be continued unchanged until the end of time. Ott. “That this primacy of jurisdiction should pass
to St. Peter successors in an unending and unbroken chain…(accept for death) The Ark and the Dove “–1957 etc, etc, etc.
I’ll also send you Bishop McKenna’s “Catholic’s Forever.” supporting the Materially Formally position of the Papacy. I might have this one on line. I’ll Check.
Mason’s do not lose their holy orders, even Bishop McKenna states that himself, because Arch Bishop Lefevbre was ordained and consecrated by a Mason.
And no one has proved that John 23 was a mason either.
The only way you could expose the final AntChrist would be to know how many their are going to be and who the next few antichrist popes are that are going to be elected. Nobody knows that but God.
The fifth Lateran Council is the authority on the second coming of Christ and merely states that one can not date set without permission from Rome or the Local ordinary. I don’t date set, I day set, but your to stupid to know the difference.
A day is of a thousand years, but it’s in the Apocalypse, I think I know the Bible better than you do.
You didn’t refute anything but your pride
, so send me your address and I’ll send you your requests.
In Christ, Joseph
I see that you have resulted in responding to me with insults. You prove that you are a false prophet and even worse a poor witness to Christ. That’s okay.
You stated, “I have a Nihil Obstat on my finding for Christ Coming back on Pentecost Sunday by 5 Traditional Catholic Bishops, including McKenna and Oravec, so you know more then them. Do you have one on your book????”
Apparently, those bishops didn’t think about the nonsense you give about Christ Coming back on Pentecost Sunday. THAT IS A HERESY!!!!
If Christ comes back on that day, then you won’t be expecting Him any other day and how would His statement that His coming will be like a thief in the night if you know the day in which He comes? I know you aren’t saying which Pentecost Sunday, but you are giving a particular day of the year.
You’re going against Scripture, plain and simple!
You stated: “must be continued unchanged until the end of time. Ott. “That this primacy of jurisdiction should pass
to St. Peter successors in an unending and unbroken chain…(accept for death) The Ark and the Dove “–1957 etc, etc, etc.
Ott does not say what you say which is: “Vatican I states and the Church has always taught that we can never be without a true Pope accept for death.”
Following your logic, the gates of hell have already prevailed a long time ago. You simple don’t understand history or simple theology!
You never sent that Vat 1 teaching? Why? Because you know that it doesn’t say what you are saying.
You can send all the info you want about Bishop McKenna, but I speak to him on the phone. Call him and ask him yourself if he holds the sedevacant position. His answer will be in the affirmative.
As for the antichrist, you don’t get it right at all!
You said nobody but God knows the identity of antichrist. What’s the point in identifying him in Scripture? You falsely assume that it is any number of antipopes. You’re dead wrong!
You said you don’t have time to read my book but you have all the time to write and send me things. How much time do you spend on the computer? To say you don’t have time really means you just don’t want to read it. I would respect you more if you were just honest about it and say that you don’t want to read my book.
As for John XXIII, no one has to prove he was a Mason. There is enough evidence to give legitimate doubt which is all that it takes to keep one out of the papacy!
You arrogantly said, “I don’t date set, I day set, but your to stupid to know the difference.
A day is of a thousand years, but it’s in the Apocalypse, I think I know the Bible better than you do.
You didn’t refute anything but your pride.:
So I’m too stupid? That’s funny coming from one who is very ignorant to basic theology.
The fact is you don’t know the Apocalypse very well.
I did refute your mysteries because they are anti-scriptural.
As for date setting, you did set a particular day of the year which is not quite what the Fifth Lateran had in mind. The fact is your position is still anti-scriptural and illogical.
You never answered my simple questions.
Do you believe that all universal laws (human or Divine) and disciplines of the Church is infallible?
Why did you not answer the question?
It’s plain to me that you’re not interested in truth but cashing in your notions just like the Dimond brothers and so many others.
Insults are all you know, when someone disagrees with you!
Joseph Saraceno wrote me back with “By, have a nice tomorrow and see you on judgment day. I’ll be standing next to Him with Elias. Oh you can send this out too.
In Christ, the prophet Joseph”
Do you see how a false prophet answers when confronted with questions that expose him as a fraud?
Simple questions at that.
I wasn’t mean nor disrespecting him when I corrected him on the laws of the Church. By the way, he never answered the question if he believes the universal laws are infallible, even after I showed him the teaching of Pope Gregory and 5 theologians.
Joseph claims that God gave him the keys of the kingdom after taking them from Rome.
He claims to be a prophet and yet can’t explain how his heretical mysteries of faith can apply in light of the Gospels.
He gives the specific day of the year that Christ shall return.
Because he doesn’t give a year, he claims not to be date setting.
Yet, if you know the day of the year, then you claim to know “the day” which Christ says nobody knows. You won’t be expecting the Second Coming unless it is on one of the Pentecost Sundays that comes but once a year.
He never could give me that Vatican 1 teaching that says, “Vatican I states and the Church has always taught that we can never be without a true Pope accept for death”
Sure the “primacy of Peter” is always with true popes, and there is perpetual succession but never does Vat1 say that we can never be without a true pope except for death.
Two popes stepped down from the papacy. They didn’t die.
Popes can lose their office automatically and we would be without a pope in such a case. Hasn’t happened but it could.
I spoke to the good Bishop McKenna tonight and he is a sedevacantist.
Joseph Saraceno is a false prophet Christ warns us against in the last days.
He is no different from Mohammed or Joseph Smith of the Mormons who all claim to be prophets visited from above.
He believes we are to follow him because he makes the claim. Look again at what he told me from the beginning, “ I also need to remind you that had not God visited with me 40 years ago and showed me…”
I show in my book “Baptism of Desire” why you are to reject anyone who makes such claims.
Anyone claiming to have the keys to the kingdom taken away from Rome is a lunatic. Anyone who would give credence to such a person is an idiot!
DISCUSSION BEGAN WITH A BROTHER BRIAN ASKING THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS…
Why can’t we just get along… This is why we can’t convince anyone to hear us out other than those who already hear us. I think it is important we remember the example of the Irish Chieftains, they were the greatest fighters but could never unite and put aside their differences and therefore never really defeated anyone and have been a occupied nation for so long. We must get along and unite rather than being divided in ourselves. If we were to say things are not allowed to be different that why do we accept the Eastern Rite Churches validity? Their Mass is different from the Latin Rite and their beliefs are slightly different but yet we consider them valid?
Just a thought.
Dear Brother Brian:
Unity among the faithful can only be achieved by following my enclosed letter on, “Fidelity Among Traditionalist” Reason being is one can not have unity without the Love of the Truth. Most of the Bishops want to reverse the Great Apostasy and bring a true Pope into the world. This is a complete denial of the seriousness of the state of the Church today. Every (Pope) from Paul VI on is identified as the Man of Sin and AntiChrists in the scriptures. (pope) Jn-23 was the precursor of the Man of Sin) Scriptures make it very clear that these AntiChrists will control the Chair until Christ comes back. I have more than enough evidence to back up my claims an have 5 Nihil Obstat’s by Traditional Bishops on my writings.
According to the Fathers and the Scriptures, the Great Apostasy lats about 40 to 50 years. We are in the 41 year of it. Christ can not come back until this secular democracy, inter faith gospel spreads through out the world. The only group right now which stands in the way are the Muslim terrorists and they only have the backing of a few nations, Iran & Syria.
I don’t expect this fight to last that long, perhaps a year or two.
There is an old saying, Don’t bother me with the facts my mind is made up.” And as this elderly priest once told me, “Catholics don’t want to know the truth, they just want to survive at the expense of the truth.” If any of you fall into these two categories, you have no business being Catholic. My advice is to “Take up your Cross and defend the Truth or go to HELL with the rest of the Hypocrites.”
May the Lord have mercy on your soul. In Christ, Joseph
FIDELITY AMONG TRADITIONALIST
It has been my experience that Traditional Catholics enjoy a harmonious relationship once they become aware of the following realities:
1. We are living in the Great Apostasy spoken of by St.Paul the Apostle.
2.The Vatican II Anti Christs have taken over the chair of St. Peter and will possess it until Christ returns.
3.There will never be another True Pope.
4. Christ will be back in the Generation of the Great Apostasy. Matt.24:34.
5. The general judgment starts on Pentecost Sunday.
THE FOUR MAIN ENEMIES OF THE CHURCH
1. The Heresies stemming from the V-2 council.
2. Cultism, elevating private revelations and their messages above the Apostles and the Divine doctrinal teachings of the Church.
3. Lack of Biblical knowledge and study.
4. Mortal Sin.
EVERY DISORDER IN THE WORLD IS THE RESULT OF MORTAL SIN:
Based on my writing,” The Status of the Catholic Church as a Result of the Second Council.” 6-13-98.
There must be a distinction between what is licit, illicit, valid, and invalid.
Eastern Rites are valid because they have a valid priesthood and use valid matter, form, and intention.
The 62 Latin mass is valid when a valid priest does it, but it is always illicit since John 23 was not a valid pope and therefore had no right to change the Roman Rite. One should not attend it for mere validity sake or else you might as well go to the Eastern Orthodox Church down the street.
Of course, if you think John 23 is pope, then you would disagree. However, there is enough evidence to point to John’s involvement with Masonry (not to mention Modernism which he taught and was kicked out for while being put on record) that would cause reasonable doubt eliminating him as a viable pope.
So your question is “Why can’t we just get along…”
Because the truth divides as Christ said that he would bring the sword of division which will divide loved ones. (Matt. 10:34-42)
We don’t get along with individuals who teach heresy.
If you want to follow someone (not a pope) who claims to have the keys to the kingdom while naming the day of Christ’s return, then I won’t have anything to do with you.
That’s heretical and I don’t care if every bishop on planet earth put an imprimatur or Nihil Obstat on it.
By the way, ask those bishops if they still back up that Nihil Obstat? I know one who gives a resounding NO! Don’t take my word for it, but ask them yourselves.
I don’t know what else to tell you.
I hope that clarifies where I stand.
In response to Steven Speray’s letter to you he claims that the 62 Mass is valid but is always illicit because John XXIII was not a valid Pope. He doesn’t say illicit because of heresy, but only because of John XXIII not being a valid Pope. But many of the bishops claim that not even a valid Pope can change the Roman Rite. Also, there were no formal complaints by any of the hierarchy to indicate to John XXIII that the changes he was making in the Mass were illicit or invalid. Even more, if it is illicit, invalid, or herectical, all the Cardinals, even the traditional ones, would have been guilty of sacrilege and participants in material error. John XXIII was never accused by the hierarchy of the Catholic Church of being a mason at any time, nor has it been proven by anyone. Therefore, one is innocent until proven guilty while alive and never accused by the hierarchy while alive one must conclude that he was a valid Pope.
Steve Speray seems to suggest that you may as well go down the street to the Eastern Orthodox which might have valid Masses (but use Protestant Bibles).
As far as I know Steve is in error, too, because he claims Roncalli was removed for modernism of which there is no proof. Remember, Pope John XXII was teaching error and still remained Pope. (Maybe he is confused with Giovanni Battista Montini, who was removed from a Vatican high position to Milan without a Cardinal’s hat).
He says that we don’t get along with individuals who teach heresy, but doesn’t define what he means. He is referring to my claim of being a prophet and not a pope. If we are without a pope, ask Steve who has the keys and ask Steve who is his prophet? Even his friend, Bishop McKenna, and I will quote him, says: Dear Joe, I am sorry but while I myself have never seen any doctrinal errors in things you have written, you know I have always repudiated your making yourself out to be a prophet and I am not going to do anything now to publicly foster that impression. (September 21, 2005) Which is a restatement of what Bishop McKenna said to me twenty years ago, accept for the prophet part.
This letter was sent after he had endorsed one of his own Bishops, Oravec, Nihil obstat, onœThe Day of the Lord booklet, where I prove that Christ will come back on Pentecost Sunday and which there is no violation of Church teaching. The reason he wrote the letter is he received a complaint about my calling myself a Prophet.
So, Steven is right, we should not get along with people who teach heresy. He just has a problem with some of the claims I make as does also Bishop McKenna. But at the same time, Steven is a Sede Vacantist himself who supports Bishop McKenna who is not a Sede Vacantist and never was!
I would have to assume Steven wants to be the NEW PROPHET in town himself.
I have letters to prove all the statements I have made in this letter. Feel free to ask me to send you copies via mail if you wish.
Grace be with you, God bless
In Christ, Joseph B. D. Saraceno
Popes can change the mass and have. Pope St Pius X changed it. Prayers are added or removed or changed in different places. Joseph doesn’t know what he is talking about.
I’m not saying to go to Eastern Orthodox churches, but going to the illicit 62 mass is no different. That’s all.
Roncalli was removed from a teaching post long before being falsely elected to the papacy. I didn’t confuse him with Montini.
Go to my website and see how I answer the case with John 22nd. John 22nd didn’t go against any defined doctrine as of yet, unlike the last five who did.
Joseph again doesn’t seem to know the difference.
He wants to know who has the keys when there is no pope. Well, who has it during interregnum periods? The fact is the keys symbolize authority and succession. There are no actual keys. But Joseph claims to have those keys given only to popes. That’s ludicrous.
Again, Joseph makes claims about who said what a long time ago. But I’m telling you to call those bishops NOW.
He says Bishop McKenna is not and never has been a sedevacantist. Well, call Bp McKenna and find out the truth from him.
No, I’m not a prophet either.
Joseph is a false prophet because he makes a claim that is heretical!
Scripture is clearly against him.
I’m going to reply to everything you stated to Brian below and expose you once again for the false prophet and heretic that you are. I will also post this on my website for all to see. I noticed that you ignored the email asking you to remove Rich Petrick off the list. He died last month.
JS. Brother Brian,
What I am alluding to is that when John XXIII put St. Joseph in the Canon, he did something never done before, change the Canon of the Mass. This is an impeachable offense but he was not charged.
Speray: The Eucharistic Canon had one short clause inserted by St. Gregory the Great. The phrase Pope Gregory added was “diesque nostros in tua pace disponas” [may you order our days in Thy peace] to the Hanc Igitur of the Canon. Pope St. Gregory was threatened to be killed for the act and since that time it was not touch again until, of course, in 1962 antipope John XXIII added “beati Ioseph, eiusdem Virginis Sponsi” [of blessed Joseph, Spouse of the same Virgin] to the Communicantes of the Canon.
If John were a true pope, his actions might well be justified.
JS: Steven knows that the SSPX uses the 62 missal and many of the traditional Fathers allow their parishioners to go to the SSPX Mass, where the 62 Mass is said if there is no other traditional Church. But they would not recommend them to go to the Orthodox or other schismatic Church.
Speray: Who cares what the cult SSPX uses? It is wrong to attend any mass which is “una cum” with Rome.
JS: His claim of Roncalli being removed from a teaching post does not mean that he is being removed for disciplinary actions, because Roncalli was promoted to higher offices, not hidden away.
Speray: Wrong! Roncalli was a Professor of Patristics at the Lateran University, and removed several months “on suspicion of modernism” and for teaching the theories of Rudolf Steiner, an illuminati member and originator of “The Science of the Spirit known as Anthroposophy.” A file dated to 1925, the Holy Office had maintained a dossier on Angelo Roncalli which read “suspected of Modernism.”
JS: Nor was he falsely elected to the papacy. Again, to make an accusation without a trial, witnesses and evidence that is incontestable is to bear false witness to the fact that someone is guilty when in fact there has been no judgment by proper authority. So Steven is wrong to state de facto that John XXIII was falsely elected. He is basing it on hearsay and setting up his own tribunal without jurisdiction.
Speray: What hypocrisy! Joseph, you sound like the typical Vatican 2 apologist but yet you can state de facto that Montini and following are not popes. By what authority? Your own tribunal without jurisdiction?
You think Roncalli was an orthodox Catholic but just a material heretic? You can’t tell that he knew what he was doing? You think he was just stupid?
JS: Steve states, Who has the keys during interregnum periods. But saying that we are going through an interregnum infers that we are under formal jurisdiction by those in office who are in charge until a future pope is elected. And as a Sede Vacantist Steven knows there is no formal jurisdiction in the Church. So who possesses the keys of jurisdiction? And, since Steve is a Sede Vacantist, he knows the line has been broken and that we do not have the normal means to elect a Pope.
Speray: Well, the solution is not saying that you have the keys, Joseph. And since you are claiming the keys, then you are suggesting that you now have jurisdiction over the whole church.
But there is a solution, and I cover it in my book.
First, there is no such thing as keys of jurisdiction. Popes have been elected outside normal means before and even outside of the law and yet are recognized as true popes. It is unfortunate that you simply don’t know your history and have not attempted to see any other solution but saying God gave you the keys.
The papal line has not been broken and suggesting that it has been broken means that you are a heretic, Mr. False Prophet and heretic Joseph!
JS: Once Paul VI approved the heretical teachings of Vatican II and implemented the teachings along with repudiating the Ottaviani intervention in 1969 (a formal complaint), he lost the keys (jurisdiction). Since there is was no Pope, I was given the keys to hold since, as God’s witness, I have the truth by naming the Man of Sin (Paul VI) and the AntiChrists that follow him.
Speray: YOU’RE A LUNATIC!!!!
Come on, people reading this, speak up. Is this not pure lunacy… that Joseph is claiming the keys of the kingdom?
Joseph, you simply don’t know what the keys are!
They symbolize the apostolic authority of the papacy and succession. Only true popes have the keys for they symbolize the papacy which you are not part of!
Paul VI was never a true pope because he was not a Catholic when he was falsely elected. HE WAS A HERETIC, MAKING HIM IPSO FACTO, OUTSIDE THE CHURCH!
No declaration is needed for the obvious!
Do you not believe in automatic anathemas issued by the Church?
JS: On the other hand, Steve claims that he knows who the final AntiChrist is. It is impossible to make such a claim because the AntiChrist presently is Benedict XVI and we do not know how long he will live or the others to fulfill all the prophecies.
Speray: You have not read my book and you make false assumptions. Benedict is not the final antichrist, either. I’m not predicting any future evil as forbidden by the church since I believe antichrist is now. Predicting the precise day of Christ’s return was forbidden by Pope Leo X and was said that anybody who said such a thing is a liar. There is no stipulation about examining such claims by proper authorities first to see if it goes against church doctrine since this particular “prediction” is already condemned.
POPE LEO CONDEMNS YOU AS A LIAR!
JS: Steven states that the bishops who backed my position don’t do that now. But three of those bishops are now deceased and I just sent you an e-mail, Brother Brian, from one of the bishops asking me about the mystery of the Antichrist. I quoted my letter from Bishop McKenna that was only 4 years ago that says there are no doctrinal errors in my writings.
Speray: I said call the bishops (the two that are still living)?
I know Bp McKenna and he has made it quite clear to stay away from your false teachings. Perhaps, he missed your heretical points, like the ones missed at Vatican 2.
JS: Who is Steven that he can say they are heretical? And that includes my position that Christ will come back on Pentecost Sunday that there is no violation of Church teaching by teaching it. Will Steve censure Bishop McKenna?
Speray: I can say they are heretical simply because I’m a Catholic and know the faith. Every Catholic can say your teachings are heretical. To say Christ will come back on Pentecost Sunday is in violation of Scripture and the teachings of the Church, not to mention common sense. Read pg 488 of Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Dr. Ludwig Ott.
Come on. You’re claiming to know the DAY. What is wrong with you????
JS: Steve is using semantics. Bishop McKenna holds the formal/material pope theory which may be interpreted as Sede Vacante position, but is not absolute Sede Vacantist.
Speray: I’m not using semantics. He even sells my book that defends completely the position of sedevacantism.
JS: Remember, Bishop McKenna’s state of heath and mind can be questionable due to his age and illness. I don’t believe anyone today would rely upon his ability to make a sound answer.
Speray: Bishop McKenna’s mind if just fine. You wouldn’t rely on him because he is against you! You’re a devil and this is an outrageous statement of yours! How dare you say such things.
JS: Steve calls me a false prophet after previously supporting my position as a sede vacantist over the internet, only because I refused to endorse or read his book where he claims to know the final AntiChrist.
Speray: Another lie! I supported you only as a sedevacantist, but not for the rest. I called you out before you said anything about my book. It’s on my website https://stevensperay.wordpress.com/against-the-false-prophet-joseph-saraceno/
for all those who want to see the truth.
You just got mad at me for correcting you on laws of the church and stating that I don’t agree with you about the man of sin. I was never rude to you before, but then you began to get nasty. What arrogance you possess!
JS: I said above that this is not possible. But, to claim to speak in God’s name (that is, to prophesy) is to claim to be a prophet. So, if Steve says he knows the final AntiChrist, is he not claiming to be a prophet?
Speray: That’s right! It doesn’t take a prophet to identify him. It only takes a Catholic. I also don’t claim to be absolutely correct either. I could be wrong, but I don’t think so.
JS: Unfortunately Steven is throwing around a lot of accusations without hard evidence. It is easy to accuse, it is difficult to prove. But false accusations is what crucified Christ. Even here in the United States one is presumed innocent until proven guilty. But apparently Steven still believes in lynching.
Grace be with you, God bless
In Christ, Joseph B. D. Saraceno
Speray: I don’t throw around anything without hard evidence unless I’m specific about it. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand basic Catholicism. As for presuming innocent until proven guilty, the law of the church states:
Canon 2200.2, 1917 Code of Canon Law: “When an external violation of the law has been committed, malice is presumed in the external forum until the contrary is proven.”
“The very commission of any act which signifies heresy, e.g., the statement of some doctrine contrary or contradictory to a revealed and defined dogma, gives sufficient ground for juridical presumption of heretical depravity… Excusing circumstances have to be proved in the external forum, and the burden of proof is on the person whose action has given rise to the imputation of heresy. In the absence of such proof, all such excuses are presumed not to exist.” (Eric F. Mackenzie, A.M., S.T.L., J.C.L. Rev., The Delict of Heresy, Washington, D.C.: The Catholic Univ. of America, 1932, p. 35. (Cf. Canon 2200.2).
Pope Innocent IV, First Council of Lyons, 1245: “The civil law declares that those are to be regarded as heretics, and ought to be subject to the sentences issued against them, who even on slight evidence are found to have strayed from the judgment and path of the Catholic religion.” (Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Vol. 1, p. 283.)
You can take that to the bank, you devil you!
I’ll be waiting for your next ridiculous reply to expose it also!
to be continued….
Steven Speray replies to Joseph…
JOSEPH, YOU NEVER RESPONDED ABOUT THE KEYS TO THE KINDGDOM YOU CLAIM TO HAVE. THIS IS AN OUTRAGEOUS CLAIM AND COMPLETE AND TOTAL MISUNDERSTANDING ABOUT WHAT THE KEYS SYMBOLIZE!
I’LL REPLY BELOW TO YOUR LATEST WITH SPERAY 2….
As for your quotes, the Fathers were not unanimous about the end times. They were all over the place. The DAY was never mentioned.
JOSEPH: Not true, every Pope, Saint or Doctor picked either the Easter Season or Easter Sunday. On page 38, History of AntiChrist quotes Lactance (Lib. 7,C. 19) & Doctor, St. Anslem, (Elucid) who pick Easter Sunday.
SPERAY 2: THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH GIVING AN OPINION ABOUT WHEN YOU MIGHT THINK CHRIST WILL COME BACK. HOWEVER, YOU ARE GIVING A DAY AS THE DEFINITE TIME WHICH NO FATHER DID.
Jesus knowing the Day is another issue. I cover that issue in another book I wrote.
JOSEPH: If He didn’t know, from His human nature, He new after the resurrection. Also Sunday had not been established yet, as the Lords Day. I cover this in my booklet, 16 pages why Christ will come back on Pentecost Saturday, Sunday, Monday depending which part of the world your in.
SPERAY 2: AGAIN, ANOTHER ISSUE THAT I’VE ALREADY COVERED ELSEWHERE.
You can’t take the giant leap that Jesus perhaps knows the Day and then preclude that you can know it.
JOSEPH: That’s your opinion, all of the Traditional Bishops, Fathers I confronted on this issue told me that as long as I did not pick the year, it was fine, except for Bishop Vezelis but he also had problems with all the other Bishops but one thing we both agreed on is “The Great Apostasy is irreversible.”
Also many of the Bishops and Fathers have put out my booklets in their churches. Bp. Dolan, Hesson. I sent Bishop McKenna some over the years, he never sent them back or told me not to send more.
SPERAY 2: SORRY, BUT IT’S NOT MY MERE OPINION BUT MY CATHOLIC FAITH THAT TELLS ME THAT YOU CAN’T KNOW THE DAY.
THE CHURCH DIDN’T FORBID ANYONE FROM GUESSING THE DAY. YOU CAN PICK A DAY AND YEAR PROVIDED THAT YOU DON’T GIVE IT ANY REAL CREDENCE. THE PROBLEM IS THAT YOU ARE GIVING A DEFINITE TIME AS THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH OF THE MATTER.
AS FOR THE GREAT APOSTASY, WE’RE IN IT. NEVER BEEN A POINT OF DISAGREEMENT!
You state: Pope Leo X, at the Fifth Lateran Council, made it mandatory that henceforth permission had to be obtained from either the local Ordinary or the Apostolic See before one could set the exact date for the End of the World.
Please give that FULL quote in context (don’t leave any part out). I’ve read the 5th Lateran on the part of preaching and it condemns predicting the exact Day of the Christ’s return.
JOSEPH: Your either lying or you didn’t read the whole thing. “But if the Lord reveals….(Parousia)….This Matter……….before they are published, or preached….reserved for examination by the apostolic see……..or local ordinary….” Well I submitted my Findings to the Holy See in 1970 and to my local odinary but nobody responded.
SPERAY 2: AS I THOUGHT, YOU TOOK THE COUNCIL OUT OF CONTEXT!
REVEALS “SOME FUTURE EVENTS IN THE CHURCH OF GOD” DOES NOT INCLUDE THE SECOND COMING SINCE IT WAS ALREADY CONDEMNED TO DO SO. I’LL GIVE AN EXAMPLE IN A MINUTE WHAT THE COUNCIL WAS REFERRING TO.
JOSEPH: On the other hand you and many of the Fathers violate the same council which states, “They are in no way to presume to preach or declare a fixed time for future evils or the coming of ANTCHRIST.”
JOSEPH: You yourself violate the council by saying you know who the final Antchrist is in your book.
SPERAY 2: YOU OBVIOUSLY DIDN’T READ MY OTHER REPLIES. THE COUNCIL CONDEMNED PREDICTING SOME FUTURE EVIL OR COMING OF ANTICHRIST. IF ANTICHRIST IS HERE ALREADY, THEN I WOULD ONLY BE WARNING WHO HE IS…RIGHT? DO YOU THINK THAT WAS WHAT THE COUNCIL WAS CONDEMNING????? WARNING TO STAY AWAY FROM THE ANTICHRIST????
JOSEPH: Also everyone who Quotes Our Lady of La Salette, on “Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of AntiChrist” (Bp. McKenna # 41 nsltr) Is in violation of this same council and it was also put on the index of forbiden books and writings by Pope Benedict XV in 1915.
SPERAY 2: SORRY, BUT THE QUOTE DOESN’T VIOLATE THE COUNCIL EITHER SINCE THE QUOTE IS WARNING TO AVOID ANTICHRIST WHEN HE COMES. THAT’S ALL. BUT IT WAS ON THE INDEX AND NOT APPROVED BECAUSE THAT PART OF THE MESSAGE WASN’T IN THE ORIGINAL APPROVED ONE. IT CAME YEARS LATER.
That part of the message was never approved by the Church in the first place. I would also like to mention Our Lady of Fatima’s message perdicting the great chastisement to come before the end of the 20th century, no? Are you going to condemn all these people to? It makes one laugh to think about it.
SPERAY 2: SORRY, JOSEPH, BUT YOU’RE WRONG AGAIN! OUR LADY OF FATIMA DID PREDICT THE GREAT CHASTISEMENT, BUT NOT THE SECOND COMING AND THIS WAS WHAT THE COUNCIL WAS TALKING ABOUT WHEN IT SAID “SOME FUTURE EVENTS …” THEREFORE, IT DIDN’T VIOLATE ANYTHING SINCE LUCIA SENT THAT MESSAGE FOR APPROVAL WHICH THE CHURCH DID.
YOU KEEP TWISTING THINGS AS ALL FALSE PROPHETS LIKE YOU DO.
You state: Again, by picking Sunday as the day, one is not date setting. Hence, one does not need to seek permission.
YOU’RE GIVING THE DAY! Just because you don’t give the year doesn’t mean you’re in the clear.
JOSEPH: Again I cover this above and in my booklet which you obviously have never read, but you want me to read your book! I mean, am I to take you serious?
SPERAY 2: ON WHAT GROUNDS ARE WE TO TAKE YOU SEROUS? WHO ARE YOU THAT WE SHOULD ALL LISTEN TO WHEN YOU CAN’T EVEN GET SOMETHING SO SIMPLE AS THE QUOTE IN THE COUNCIL. IT CALLS YOU A LIAR!!!!
If you know the day of the year, then you will not be expecting Christ to come until that day each year. This is silly!
JOSEPH: You show your ignorance of Scripture and the Prophecies which make it clear that Christ can not come back until all nations blend into the one universal fusion of political unity, and the new V-2 social gospel. Then we still have to get through the Great Chastisment, which you will be lucky to survive the way your going now. History of AntiChrist page 13 And My booklet on the Great Apostasy.
SPERAY 2: NOW YOU’RE GIVING YOUR OPINION AND PRIVATE INTERPRETATION. AGAIN, MY POINT STILL PROVES TRUE. IF YOU KNOW THE DAY OF THE YEAR, THEN YOU WILL NOT BE EXPECTING CHRIST’S RETURN EVERY OTHER DAY OF THE YEAR. AS FOR THE COMING CHASTISEMENT OF FATIMA, OUR LADY SAID IT WOULD HAPPEN BEFORE 1960. SO WHAT WAS IT????
You quote, If then thou shalt not watch I will come to thee as a thief and thou shalt not know at what hour I will come to thee (Apoc. 3:3).
Who knows the precise night of the year the thief will rob them?
JOSEPH: The Scriptures has many Paradoxes
SPERAY 2: ARE YOU SERIOUS? THIS IS THE BEST RESPONSE YOU CAN GIVE ME? THE FACT IS THE QUESTION DESTROYS YOUR POSITION AND EVERYBODY READING THIS KNOWS IT!
You state: If anyone says that Jesus Christ WILL NOT COME BACK ON PENTECOST SUNDAY, he just simply does not know his Catholic faith as well as he should.
I say that anyone who says for sure that Christ will come back on Pentecost Sunday is a liar and a heretic!
JOSEPH: I left out one personal fact and that is my two visions. I left it out because God just showed me what I couldn’t understand in the Scriptures. That is, The Holy Trinity showed me.
SPERAY 2: NO POINT IN ARGUING WITH ONE WHOM GOD TALKS TO WITH VISIONS. SORRY, BUT JOSEPH SMITH, MOHAMMED, AND MANY OTHERS GET VISIONS (THEY CLAIM) BUT WHY SHOULD WE BELIEVE THAT YOURS COMES FROM GOD?
OH YES, YOU SAID GOD TOOK THE KEYS AWAY FROM PAUL VI AND GAVE THEM TO YOU RIGHT? DID GOD TELL YOU THAT, TOO?
JOSEPH: Anyone who goes against the Holy Ghost can not be forgiven.
SPERAY 2: I’M SAFE!
JOSEPH: Right now, I say ditto to you on being a liar and a heretic.
SPERAY 2: YOU HAVE NOT PROVED IT AS I HAVE WITH YOU!!!!!!!! YOU CAN ONLY MAKE ACCUSATIONS WITHOUT FACTS!
JOSEPH: I will send this to the Bishops. Let them decide our fate NOW, once and for all time.
SPERAY 2: IF THEY DECIDE WITH YOU THEN THEY ARE IPSO FACTO HERETICS LIKE YOU! BUT I’M NOT WORRIED THAT ANY OF THEM WILL DECIDE IN YOUR FAVOR ON ANY OF THIS! THEY KNOW ANYONE CLAIMING TO HAVE THE KEYS TO THE KINGDOM OF GOD OTHER THAN THE POPE IS A LUNATIC!
JOSEPH: The Second Coming of Christ is a Two Man Job and your not one of them.
JOSEPH: And may the Lord have mercy on you all.
SPERAY 2: WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?
AGAIN, I’VE EXPOSED YOUR LUNACY…WHAT ELSE DO YOU HAVE?
JOSEPH: Below is the Fifth Lateran Council teaching on this subject.
In Christ: Joseph B. D. Saraceno
You stated: Steve fails to tell you also that I’m the first person in history to point out where each one of these V-2 (popes), the Vatican II council and name the false prophet are in the Scriptures. I also would like to add that at least 2 traditional priests endorsed my “Day of the Lord” booklet from the pulpit.
Speray: Again, these are your personal interpretations. The fact is you’re wrong! V2 popes and council are part of the Great Apostasy….that’s all. You’re completely WRONG about Billy Graham being the false prophet!
YOU MISUNDERSTAND THE KEYS OF THE KINGDOM. YOU MISUNDERSTAND THE APOCALYPSE AND COMPLETELY MANGLE IT!
AND I’VE EXPOSED EVERYTHING YOU HAVE SAID THUS FAR!
If anyone says the Our Lord will not come back on Pentecost Sunday, let them be anathema.
We will all see soon enough.
In Christ, the prophet, Joseph
YOU’RE SIMPLY ONE OF THE FALSE PROPHETS CHRIST WARNS US ABOUT IN MATTHEW 24.
You said the last email was going to be your last reply to me, but so it goes, you replied yet again.
You stated: Steve: Until you can tell me who has the Keys than your the false prophet. And I want a NAME. Their is no Pope and there will never be another one, so give me a name.
In Christ the Prophet, Joseph
MY REPLY: This reply proves that you don’t understand the Catholic Faith.
THERE ARE NO ACTUAL KEYS. THE KEYS SYMBOLIZE PAPAL AUTHORITY AND DENOTE SUCCESSION.
Since there is no pope, I can’t give you a name. Every time the papal chair is vacant, the “KEYS” are not held by anyone. Only a true pope has papal authority which those KEYS represent. They pass from one pope to another denoting succession. We probably will not have another pope but only Heaven knows for sure. If God wills another pope, there are ways to have one through natural means though not by normal means. Read the Catholic theologians on the subject.
I’m no prophet because I’m not giving some prophecy like you that Christ will return on Pentecost Sunday.
WILL YOU REPLY AGAIN????
I don’t have hard feelings towards you. I’m just blunt and tell you how I feel. I’m not trying to man-please. God is the only one that I ultimately must please and so therefore, I speak to HIM, and about HIM as reverent as possible. I only reply to all that you say because of the honor due to God in giving a defense and for those who read it to be led down the right path.
Now, I will address your statements…
YOU STATE: Steve:
Now were getting some where. Correct, but God always has a voice in the world at all times. A pope is the High priest and King first, then the # 1 one PROPHET and the # 1 Doctor.
MY REPLY: Where is this in church teaching? I don’t even believe the pope is the voice of God. Peter was the only pope who spoke for God which comes from his Epistle. All other popes speak for the Bride of Christ and are prevented by God from speaking error under certain circumstances. But I’m willing to hear where the Church teaches this statement of yours.
YOU STATE:Before the line was broken God revealed Most of the mysteries of the faith to me and had already trained me for His prophet. He never told me what He was training me for.
MY REPLY: How do you know it was God and not the devil? Why should we believe you? After all, many make the same claim as you do. True prophets and false prophets are what Catholics must discern. If you misrepresent Catholic doctrine as I believe you have, then I must reject you as a false prophet!
YOU STATE: You need to under stand that the fight for the Church’s existence took place in the late 60′s and we won.
MY REPLY: Of course, the Church won. God promised it so. This all comes from the Holy Ghost!
YOU STATE: Once the AntiChrist takes over the chair, they poses it until Christ comes back. A sad reality.
MY REPLY: I have a totally different belief on the Antichrist. YOU MUST READ MY BOOK TO UNDERSTAND WHERE I STAND. Of course, Benedict is an antichrist but he is small potatoes compared to THE antichrist.
YOU STATE: In my 1991 lecture I predicted that one of these A/C popes would clash with the Jews, well Benny 16 has fore-filled the prophecy for the last 1 1/2 years. Apoc: 17:16. But no body gives me credit for that.
MY REPLY: Joseph, I have a completely different interpretation on this passage and my interpretation perfectly fits. I cover chapters 13, 17, and 18 verse by verse of the Apocalypse and it will blow you away!!!!!! I know you think you have it, but I’m telling you… every Catholic (even Protestants) that I know of who have read my book have been profoundly moved by what I demonstrate.
YOU STATE: Any way I have to leave right now. I don’t really take offense to what you say because I know how hard it is to face the problems that we face.
MY REPLY: Not hard at all. My position is much worse than what you have painted. We’re in the Great Apostasy, no pope, most everybody is hell bound (hopefully I’m not included); Christ’s return is most probably imminent.
YOU STATE: Remember that I was brought up the same way you were and it wasn’t easy realizing how much I was mislead.
I will send you some writings which could help you see the whole picture.
In Christ, Joseph
MY REPLY: I’M WAY PAST THAT.
READ MY WEBSITE AND ALL THE THINGS I’VE WRITTEN ON THE SUBJECT OF SEDEVACANTISM. HOW I’VE TAKEN ON CATHOLIC ANSWERS, “FR” BRIAN HARRISON, SUNGENIS, FERRARA, ETC.
I HAVE THE WHOLE PICTURE!
My problem with you are based on several things…1. You claim to have the Keys to the Kingdom when only a true pope possesses papal authority which those keys represent. (Therefore, you misrepresent and misunderstand basic catechetics.) 2. You claim to know FOR SURE the Day of Christ’s return. (Against Church Teaching not to mention logic. Again, who knows the night of the year when a thief will rob them?) 3. You claim that Billy Graham is the false prophet of the Apocalypse (I tell you who he really is in my book and ole Billy is small potatoes to the real false prophet). 4. You claim to be the prophet of God with visions when you completely mangle Church teaching which condemns your position in order to justify your claims. 5. You believe John XXIII was a true pope, and that Paul VI was validly elected pope but lost it. (I prove that this is impossible).
LASTLY, you never answered the question. What was the Great Chastisement that Lucia through Our Lady said would happen by 1960?
You said to me: Your an Idiot, Go to hell were you belong.
The prophet Joseph
Is this the best you can do? Can’t answer the questions, can’t show those church teachings, can’t handle being exposed can you?
When a false prophet like you calls me an idiot and tells me to go hell, then I know that I’ve done my job well!
As a matter of fact, this reply of yours proves that you are a false prophet!
19 December 1516
[On how to preach]
Leo, bishop, servant of the servants of God, with the approval of the sacred council, for an everlasting record. Under the protection of the supreme majesty by whose ineffable providence things in heaven and on earth are guided, as we carry out the office of watchman over the Lord’s flock committed to us, insofar as this is granted to our weakness, we reflect within ourselves in great depth that, among many other important matters, the office of preaching is also our concern. Preaching is of the first importance, very necessary and of great effect and utility in the church, so long as it is being exercised rightly, from genuine charity towards God and our neighbour, and according to the precepts and examples of the holy fathers, who contributed a great deal to the church by publicly professing such things at the time of the establishment and propagation of the faith . For, our redeemer first did and taught, and by his command and example, the college of twelve apostles — the heavens alike proclaiming the glory of the true God through all the earth — led back from darkness the whole human race, which was held by the old bondage under the yoke of sin, and guided it to the light of eternal salvation. The apostles and then their successors propagated far and wide and rooted deeply the word itself through all the earth and unto the ends of the world. Therefore those who are now carrying this burden ought to remember and frequently reflect that they in turn, with respect to this office of preaching, are entering into and maintaining that succession of the author and founder of this office, Jesus Christ our most holy redeemer, of Peter and Paul, and of the other apostles and disciples of the Lord .
We have learnt from trustworthy sources that some preachers in our times (we record this with sorrow) do not attend to the fact that they are carrying out the office of those we have named, of the holy doctors of the church and of others professing sacred theology, who, ever standing by Christians and confronting false prophets striving to overturn the faith, have shown that the church militant remains unimpaired by her very nature; and that they ought to adopt only what the people who flock to their sermons will find useful, by means of reflection and practical application, for rooting out vices, praising virtues and saving the souls of the faithful. Reliable report has it, rather, that they are preaching many and various things contrary to the teachings and examples which we have mentioned, sometimes with scandal to the people. This fact influences our attitude very deeply when we reflect within our self that these preachers, unmindful of their duty, are striving in their sermons not for the benefit of the hearers but rather for their own self-display. They flatter the idle ears of some people who seem to have already reached a state that would make true the words of the Apostle writing to Timothy: For, a time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching but, having itching ears, they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths . These preachers make no attempt whatever to lead back the deceived and empty minds of such people to the path of right and truth. Indeed, they involve them in even greater errors. Without any reverence for the testimony of canon law, indeed contrary to canonical censures, twisting the sense of scripture in many places, often giving it rash and false interpretations, they preach what is false; they threaten, describe and assert to be present, totally unsupported by legitimate proofs and merely following their own private interpretation, various terrors, menaces and many other evils, which they say are about to arrive and are already growing; they very often introduce to their congregations certain futile and worthless ideas and other matters of this nature; and, what is more appalling, they dare to claim that they possess this information from the light of eternity and by the guidance and grace of the holy Spirit .
When these preachers spread this medley of fraud and error, backed by the false testimony of alleged miracles, the congregations whom they ought to be carefully instructing in the gospel message, and retaining and preserving in the true faith, are withdrawn by their sermons from the teaching and commands of the universal church. When they turn aside from the official sacred teachings, which they ought particularly to follow, they separate and move far from salvation those who listen to them. For, as a result of these and similar activities, the less educated people, as being more exposed to deceit, are very easily led into manifold errors, as they wander from the path of salvation and from obedience to the Roman church. Gregory, therefore, who was outstanding in this task, moved by the warmth of his charity, gave a strong exhortation and warning to preachers that, when about to speak, they approach the people with prudence and caution lest, caught up in the enthusiasm of their oratory, they entangle the hearts of their hearers with verbal errors as if with nooses, and while perhaps they wish to appear wise, in their delusion they foolishly tear asunder the sinews of the hoped-for virtue. For, the meaning of words is often lost when the hearts of the audience are bruised by too urgent and careless forms of speech .
Indeed, in no other way do these preachers cause greater harm and scandal to the less educated than when they preach on what should be left unspoken or when they introduce error by teaching what is false and useless. Since such things are known to be totally opposed to this holy and divinely instituted religion, as being novelties and foreign to it, it is surely just for them to be examined seriously and carefully, lest they cause scandal for the christian people and ruin for the souls of their authors and of others. We therefore desire, in accord with the word of the prophet, Who makes harmony dwell in the house, to restore that uniformity which has lost esteem, and to preserve such as remains, insofar as we can with God’s help, in the holy church of God, which by divine providence we preside over and which is indeed one, preaches and worships one God and firmly and sincerely professes one faith. We wish that those who preach the word of God to the people be such that God’s church suffers no scandal from their preaching. If they are amenable to correction, let them abstain in future from these matters into which they have recently ventured. For it is clear that, in addition to the points which we have mentioned, a number of them are no longer preaching the way of the Lord in virtue and are not expounding the gospel, as is their duty, but rather invented miracles, new and false prophecies and other frivolities hardly distinguishable from old wives’ tales. Such things give rise to great scandal since no account is taken of devotion and authority and of its condemnations and rejections. There are those who make attempts to impress and win support by bawling everywhere, not sparing even those who are honoured with pontifical rank and other prelates of the church, to whom they should rather be showing honour and reverence. They attack their persons and their state of life, boldly and without discrimination, and commit other acts of this kind. Our aim is that so dangerous and contagious an evil and so mortal a disease may be thoroughly wiped out and that its consequences may be so completely swept away that not even its memory remains .
We decree and ordain, with the approval of the sacred council, that nobody -whether a secular cleric or a member of any of the mendicant orders or someone with the right to preach by law or custom or privilege or otherwise — may be admitted to carry out this office unless he has first been examined with due care by his superior, which is a responsibility that we lay on the superior’s conscience, and unless he is found to be fit and suitable for the task by his upright behavior, age, doctrine, honesty, prudence and exemplary life. Wherever he goes to preach, he must provide a guarantee to the bishop and other local ordinaries concerning his examination and competence, by means of the original or other letters from the person who examined and approved him. We command all who undertake this task of preaching, or will later undertake it, to preach and expound the gospel truth and holy scripture in accordance with the exposition, interpretation and commentaries that the church or long use has approved and has accepted for teaching until now, and will accept in the future, without any addition contrary to its true meaning or in conflict with it. They are always to insist on the meanings which are in harmony with the words of sacred scripture and with the interpretations, properly and wisely understood, of the doctors mentioned above. They are in no way to presume to preach or declare a fixed time for future evils, the coming of ANTCHRIST or the precise day, (date setting) of judgment; for Truth says, it is not for us to know times or seasons which the Father has fixed by his own authority. Let it be known that those who have hitherto dared to declare such things are liars, and that because of them not a little authority has been taken away from those who preach the truth .
We are placing a restriction on each and all of the said clerics, secular and regular and others, of whatever status, rank or order, who undertake this task. In their public sermons they are not to keep on predicting some future events as (if) based on the sacred writings, nor presume to declare that they know them from the holy Spirit or from divine revelation, nor that strange and empty predictions are matters which must be firmly asserted or held in some other way. Rather, at the command of the divine word, let them expound and proclaim the gospel to every creature, rejecting vices and commending virtues. Fostering everywhere the peace and mutual love so much commended by our Redeemer, let them not rend the seamless garment of Christ and let them refrain from any scandalous detraction of bishops, prelates and other superiors and of their state of life. Yet these they rebuke and hurt before people generally, including the laity, not only heedlessly and extravagantly but also by open and plain reproof, with the names of the evildoers sometimes being stated by them .
Finally, we decree that the constitution of pope Clement of happy memory beginning Religiosi, which we renew and approve by this present decree, must be observed by preachers without alteration, so that, preaching in these terms for the people’s advantage and winning them for the Lord, they may deserve to gain interest on the talent received from him and to win his grace and glory.
But if the Lord reveals to certain of them, by some inspiration, some future events in the church of God [NOT SECOND COMING] , as he promises by the prophet Amos and as the apostle Paul, the chief of preachers, says, Do not quench the Spirit, do not despise prophesying, we have no wish for them to be counted with the other group of story-tellers and liars or to be otherwise hindered. For, as Ambrose bears witness, the grace of the Spirit himself is being extinguished if fervour in those beginning to speak is quietened by contradiction. In that case, a wrong is certainly done to the holy Spirit. The matter is important inasmuch as credence must not be easily given to every spirit and, as the Apostle states, the spirits have to be tested to see whether they come from God. It is therefore our will that as from now, by common law, alleged inspirations of this kind, before they are published, or preached to the people, are to be understood as reserved for examination by the apostolic see. If it is impossible to do this without danger of delay, or some pressing need suggests other action, then, keeping the same arrangement, notice is to be given to the local ordinary so that, after he has summoned three or four knowledgeable and serious men and carefully examined the matter with them, they may grant permission if this seems to them to be appropriate. We lay the responsibility for this decision on their consciences. .