Catholic Info

Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => Topic started by: AJNC on December 06, 2017, 01:42:47 AM

Title: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: AJNC on December 06, 2017, 01:42:47 AM
1.TRADITIO

 On December 4, 2017, Francis-Bergoglio, who couldn't be bothered to respond to his Newcardinals who denounced his March 19, 2016, document Amoris laetitia (The Joy of Sex) as heretical, has now confirmed his heresy by publishing it in Acta Apostolicae Sedis, now the official organ of Newchurch of the New Order. Not only does the organ include Bergoglio's endorsement of the heretical policy of the Newbishops of the Province of Buenos Aires, but also publishes the Argentine guidelines themselves. This publication means that Newrome now officially endorses false teachings that directly contradict the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Now it is no secret why Bergoglio remained silent in the face of his Newcardinals' denunciations of his heresies. It appears that all along he was intending to snooker them by officially publishing the Protestant heresy that divorced and remarried Newchurchers can commit bigamy. Francis-Bergoglio has now openly pleased the Marxists and Leftists of Newchurch by finding the teaching of Christ to be "imperfect" and "in need of correction."

As yet, I have not heard of a single Newcardinal resigning because he cannot perjure his oath and serve a heretic, even huffing-puffing Newcardinal Ray "Bully" Burke. While Burke moves more slowly than grass doth grow, Leftists don't hesitate for an instant. By publishing the Argentine Bishops' heretical guidelines with an endorsement from Bergoglio and the latter's affirmation that there is "no other interpretation possible" of his Amoris laetitia, the conflict is now direct and official. There is no place left for Newcardinals Burke and Brandmuller and Sarah and Muller to squirm to. There is no rabbit-hole or warren left where they can take shelter.

Newcardinal Muller and others are now talking openly about a coming "schism." The problem is that one group of heretics, the Neocons, are about to separate from another, the Leftists. There are schisms and divisions of every kind in Hell also, just as there have been in the Protestant heresy: Methodists break with Anglicans and then Evangelicals break with Methodists, et cetera. The demons agree only in hating God. In this case, it is the Most Blessed Trinity and the Catholic Faith that the Newchurchers all repudiate, when they reject the dogmata and Sacred Liturgy of Holy Mother Church, for it is God the Holy Ghost Who teaches us all things through the Sacred Tradition that Leftists and Neocon Newchurchers both reject.

2. ARISE LET US BE GOING blog:
 https://ariseletusbegoing.com/2017/06/27/amoris-laetitia-officially-published-in-latin-in-acta-apostolicae-sedis-aas-still-a-dialogue-not-any-kind-of-teaching/

 2017-06-27 · 6:35 am

Amoris laetitia officially published in Latin in Acta Apostolicae Sedis (AAS) – Still a dialogue, not any kind of teaching

From paragraph 4:

    Quapropter aequum iudicavimus Adhortationem apostolicam post-synodalem conscribere,quae sententias colligeret duarum proximarum de familia Synodorum, aliis additis considerationibus quae cogitationes, dialogum vel pastoralem actionem dirigere, et eadem opera animum erigere, concitare familiasque iuvare earum in muneribus ac difficultatibus possint.

3.MHFM


    Francis Publishes Key Documents On Amoris Laetitia’s Heretical Teaching In The AAS & Declares Them ‘Authentic Magisterium’



Bro. Peter Dimond

Antipope Francis has directed that key documents relevant to his notoriously heretical teaching in Amoris Laetitia (that people living in open, public, unrepentant adultery may receive Holy Communion) be given even more official status by their publication in the ‘official acts of the Apostolic See’ for the Vatican II Sect. Francis has also elevated these documents to the status of ‘Apostolic Letter’ (Epistula Apostolica) and specifically directed that they be considered part of his ‘authentic Magisterium’! This is another smashing proof that Francis is a notorious heretic and an antipope, and that the Vatican II Sect is not the Catholic Church. As you might expect, this development is causing further dismay and wonder among those who still hope in vain in the Vatican II Sect (the prophesied Whore of Babylon) and its apostate non-Catholic antipopes.

Francis Publishes Heretical Documents On Amoris Laetitia In The AAS

To understand what Antipope Francis did, why it’s so significant, and why false traditionalists are so distressed about this, let’s quickly recap the most important facts here:

    On Sept. 5, 2016, the Argentinian ‘Bishops’ of the Vatican II Sect published a document called: Basic criteria for the application of chapter 8 of Amoris Laetitia. It interprets chapter 8 of Antipope Francis’ ‘Apostolic Exhortation’ Amoris Laetitia and discusses how it should be implemented with regard to people who are “divorced and in a new union” (i.e. those living in what Catholic teaching and the Bible call adultery). The Argentinian ‘Bishops’ state that in some cases (i.e. with some people who are living in adultery) continence “may not, in fact, be feasible”. In other words, avoiding adultery and obeying God’s commandment is simply not an option for some people. They then teach that Amoris Laetitia opens up the possibility for people in such adulterous situations to receive the Eucharist. They write:

    “In other, more complex circumstances, and when it is not possible to obtain a declaration of nullity, the aforementioned option [i.e. “continence”] may not, in fact, be feasible. Nonetheless, it is equally possible to undertake a journey of discernment. If one arrives at the recognition that, in a particular case, there are limitations that diminish responsibility and culpability (cf. 301-302), particularly when a person judges that he would fall into a subsequent fault by damaging the children of the new union, Amoris Laetitia opens up the possibility of access to the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist (cf. notes 336 and 351). These in turn dispose the person to continue maturing and growing with the aid of grace.” (Argentinian ‘Bishops’, Basic criteria for the application of chapter 8 of Amoris Laetitia, #6., Sept. 5, 2016)

According to the Argentinian ‘Bishops’, Amoris Laetitia allows people living in open, public, unrepentant adultery “the possibility of access to the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist”. This is of course blatantly heretical, and it is a totally accurate interpretation of Antipope Francis’ horribly heretical document, Amoris Laetitia.

    Moreover, as we’ve documented repeatedly, in a letter to the delegate of the region, Francis commented on the aforementioned document published by the Argentinian ‘Bishops’. He praised their work and stated that there are “no other interpretations” of Amoris Laetitia than what the Argentinian ‘Bishops’ put forward (i.e. the document cited above). The Counter Church is thus going out of its way to leave no doubt that they approve the distribution of Holy Communion to those living in adultery.

    Francis’ letter to Mons. Sergío Alfredo Fenoy, Delegate of the Buenos Aires Pastoral Region, regarding the Argentinian Bishops’ Basic Criteria for the Application of Chap. 8 of Amoris Laetitia:

    “Beloved brother: I received the document from the Buenos Aires Pastoral Region, ‘Basic Criteria for the Application of Chapter Eight of Amoris Laetitia.’ Thank you very much for sending it to me. I thank you for the work they have done on this: a true example of accompaniment for the priests… and we all know how necessary is this closeness of the bishop with his clergy and the clergy with the bishop. The neighbor ‘closest’ to the bishop is the priest, and the commandment to love one’s neighbor as one’s self begins for us, the bishops, precisely with our priests. The document is very good and completely explains the meaning of chapter VIII of Amoris Laetitia. There are no other interpretations. And I am certain that it will do much good. May the Lord reward this effort of pastoral charity.” (Francis’ Letter To Delegate of Argentinian ‘Bishops’ on Chap. 8 of Amoris Laetitia, Sept. 5, 2016)

As we can see, Francis endorsed the Argentinian Bishops’ interpretation and proclaimed that it properly explains the meaning of the notorious chapter 8 of Amoris Laetitia. He added that: “There are no other interpretations” (“No hay otras interpretaciones”). Hence, the Argentinian ‘Bishops’ are notorious heretics, and Francis is a notorious heretic. That’s very clear to those of good will who consider these facts.

BUT FRANCIS TAKES IT FURTHER

Well, it gets worse. If the aforementioned facts did not make it clear enough to the members of the end-times Counter Church that Antipope Francis and his sect are not Catholic, the two documents cited above (i.e. 1– The Argentinian Bishops’ Basic Criteria For The Application Of Chapter 8 Of Amoris Laetitia; and 2- Francis’ letter to the Argentinian delegate on The Argentinian Bishops’ Basic Criteria For The Application Of Chapter 8…) have now both been published in the ‘Acts of the Apostolic See’ and identified as an ‘Apostolic Letter’. Francis has thus elevated their status.

While it’s true that the presence of a document in the ‘Acts of the Apostolic See’ during the reign of a valid pope does not mean, in itself, that it is infallible, this series of actions by Francis with regard to Amoris Laetitia leaves no doubt that he has attempted to invoke his official magisterial teaching authority to promulgate heresy. That’s because we are dealing with an underlying document (Amoris Laetitia) promulgated in specific form by the so-called ‘pope’ to the entire Church, and it contains blatant heresy. That specific form document to the entire Church has, in turn, been followed up by other officially published documents that are now identified collectively as an ‘Apostolic Letter’ (i.e. Antipope Francis’ letter to the Argentinian ‘Bishops’ and their guidelines), which reaffirm the blatant heresy.  In fact, on June 5, 2017, the Secretary of State, Pietro Card. Parolin, published a ‘Rescript’ (an official response from the ‘Pope’) which declared that Francis “decrees” that both of the previously cited documents (i.e. 1- The Argentinian Bishops’ Basic Criteria; and 2- Francis’ letter agreeing with them) be considered part of the “authentic Magisterium”:

Rescript “from an Audience with Pope Francis”

    ENGLISH:

    Rescript from an Audience with “Pope Francis”

    The Supreme Pontiff decrees that the two documents which precede should be promulgated through publication on the Vatican’s electronic site and in the Acts of the Apostolic See, as authentic Magisterium.

    From the Vatican, June 5, 2017

    Pietro Card. Parolin

    Secretary of State

    LATIN:

    RESCRIPTUM «EX AUDIENTIA SS.MI»

    Summus Pontifex decernit ut duo Documenta quae praecedunt edantur per publicationem in situ electronico Vaticano et in Actis Apostolicae Sedis, velut Magisterium authenticum.

    Ex Aedibus Vaticanis, die V mensis Iunii anno MMXVII

    Petrus Card. Parolin
    Secretarius Status

Antipope Francis has officially promulgated the heresy that adulterers may receive ‘Communion’ to the entire ‘Church’ and decreed that it be considered the teaching of the ‘authentic Magisterium’. In the face of such facts, to profess communion with Antipope Francis is to profess union with a false Church that allows adulterers to receive ‘Holy Communion’. In that regard, it is equivalent to professing communion with the Anglican Sect. A person with even a small amount of insight should recognize that the specificity of this imposition of heresy is not happening by accident. It is apocalyptic.

Francis and the end-times beast are attempting to impose heresy on all who recognize him. They are making it extremely clear and official that their sect endorses evil and teaches heresy on the matter of adultery. The Devil’s goal (through them) is to leave those who cling to the Counter Church with no excuse on Judgment Day.

Those who will be without excuse in the face of such facts include thousands of false traditionalists. Their bad will continues to astound and appall. No matter how much proof comes out to demonstrate that sedevacantists are and have been correct (such as the facts discussed above), many of them still fail to adopt the correct position as a result of faithlessness and impurity of intention.

This Explains The Post-Vatican II Confusion & Crisis

Babylon Has Fallen, Fallen

Francis on Amoris Laetitia: “There are no other interpretations” than Communion for Adulterers

Padre Pio: “Satan Will Come To Rule A False Church”

Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Neil Obstat on December 06, 2017, 02:14:05 AM
.
This is bad news.
.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Alcuin on December 06, 2017, 05:40:26 AM
It is just more proof that the NO church is not the Catholic Church because the Catholic Church cannot possibly promote or approve of evil or sin.
No pope for how many years now? As the years roll on this thesis seems to be more problematic. 
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 06, 2017, 07:17:14 AM

Three views of AL on the internet, but the most lengthy is that of "Brother Diamond." 

Why should a sedevacantist care about this latest turn of events (which comes as no surprise) when sedevacantists believe that there IS NO MAGISTERUIM? Since they believe it's a completely false church and false pope, then why should they care about what they believe to be a false magisterium?
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Ladislaus on December 06, 2017, 08:40:50 AM
.
This is bad news.
.

It's very bad news for the proponents of R&R.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Recusant Sede on December 06, 2017, 09:46:50 AM
Three views of AL on the internet, but the most lengthy is that of "Brother Diamond."

Why should a sedevacantist care about this latest turn of events (which comes as no surprise) when sedevacantists believe that there IS NO MAGISTERUIM? Since they believe it's a completely false church and false pope, then why should they care about what they believe to be a false magisterium?
Meg, with all due respect, we don't hold that there is no magisterium, we believe that the magisterium is not readily accessible. No matter how strange this seems to you and to many people, it does not contradict Church teaching. What is absolutely impossible is that the Church can promote sin or evil. Do you see that?
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Ladislaus on December 06, 2017, 09:48:07 AM
Here's the subtlety of Amoris Laetitia.  It's not so much about approving objectively the reception of Holy Communion when not in a state of grace.  It's about claiming that one can be in a state of grace even if one is aware that what one is doing is objectively a grave sin.

It's about making morality SUBJECTIVE.  So, for example, Bergoglio claims that people can be subjectively in good conscience even if they're in a state where they're objectively committing sin.  I can be divorced and remarried but if I'm in good conscience about it (after my own discernment) that trumps the objective external forum reality of the fact that I am living in sin.

So Bergoglio's predecessors subjectivized faith and doctrine.  Now Bergoglio finishes the job by subjectivizing morality.

Obviously there's a subjective element to conscience and to degree of guilt and culpability in sin.  But this subjective element does not trump and cannot override the objective fact that one is committing a sin.

Someone leaves a thousand dollars on the table.  I pick it up thinking that it's mine (not looking at the amount) and take it home.  Did I commit a sin?  No, because subjectively I did not realize it was a sin.  But the minute I discover my error, if I persist in keeping it, then it becomes a sin subjectively as well.  So believing that I'm not sinning in divorcing and remarrying doesn't fly because the Church tells you otherwise ... just as someone informed me that the money I had was not mine.  At that point it's no longer possible for me to persist in that state without subjective sin as well.  But Begoglio thinks you can.  He's perverted all of moral theology with this.

This kind of thinking has long been applied in the realm of morality particularly to solitary sins of impurity.  Because the person is perhaps to some degree habituated to (or even addicted to) the sin, a lot of Novus Ordo moralists would say that the solitary sin of impurity would not be a mortal sin.  Is it hypothetically possible that under some circumstances, in the internal forum, this sin might not be a mortal sin?  Perhaps.  Nevertheless, since only God can discern degree of guilt in the internal forum, in the external forum people must consider it a mortal sin and confess it as such and work to avoid it as if it were such.  But for Bergoglio the individual can, together with his spiritual director, discern whether or not the person is subjectively committing mortal sin in the internal forum and then apply that to their behavior in the external forum, i.e. receive communion.  By analogy with the solitary sin I mentioned earlier, this would mean the person, after having discerned it not a mortal sin, would be able to receive Communion before confessing it and would not actually be bound to confess it at all ... since it's been deemed not a mortal sin.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 06, 2017, 11:28:20 AM
Meg, with all due respect, we don't hold that there is no magisterium, we believe that the magisterium is not readily accessible. No matter how strange this seems to you and to many people, it does not contradict Church teaching. What is absolutely impossible is that the Church can promote sin or evil. Do you see that?

Don't you believe that the conciliar church is a completely false church?
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: AJNC on December 06, 2017, 12:07:35 PM
Three views of AL on the internet, but the most lengthy is that of "Brother Diamond."

Why should a sedevacantist care about this latest turn of events (which comes as no surprise) when sedevacantists believe that there IS NO MAGISTERUIM? Since they believe it's a completely false church and false pope, then why should they care about what they believe to be a false magisterium?
Brother Dimond's has the most lengthy view because he wants to warn people who are under the misapprehension that the Conciliar Church is the Catholic Church. Sedevacantists believe that the post-Vatican II magisterium is not the magisterium of the Catholic Church. But they have to care as many of them were once either fully Novus Ordo or with R&R, and they feel it is their duty to inform others who are still stuck in those places. The Dimond brothers once attended SSPX chapels. Fr Morrison of Traditio once believed that the 1962 Missal was OK, but he doesn't any more.
Do the R&R factions care? Why are they quiet?
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 06, 2017, 12:16:04 PM
Brother Dimond's has the most lengthy view because he wants to warn people who are under the misapprehension that the Conciliar Church is the Catholic Church. Sedevacantists believe that the post-Vatican II magisterium is not the magisterium of the Catholic Church. But they have to care as many of them were once either fully Novus Ordo or with R&R, and they feel it is their duty to inform others who are still stuck in those places. The Dimond brothers once attended SSPX chapels. Fr Morrison of Traditio once believed that the 1962 Missal was OK, but he doesn't any more.
Do the R&R factions care? Why are they quiet?

But the sedes really have no say in the matter, since they don't believe that the church in Rome, or the Vatican, or the Pope, have anything to do with the Catholic Church or the Catholic faith. 

The Dimonds once attended SSPX chapels. Okay. But they are just laypersons with an opinion. Archbishop Lefebvre was much more than that, so I take his word for the situation. 

I am not at all surprised by this latest turn of events. An idiot conniving modernist pope with few Catholics convictions is trying to make as many progressive changes to the Church while he can. That's how modernism works. 

The sedes can heckle Catholics from the sidelines all they want, but they have left the Church. They have no right to an opinion.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 06, 2017, 12:43:52 PM
Curious, you say, "an idiot conniving modernist pope" , "That's how modernism works"

My question would be: Modernism is defined as heresy by the Catholic Church, right?

As Catholics, shouldn't we say "an idiot conniving heretic..., and "That's how a false sect works'?

Sedevacantists say one thing....Catholics say another. I follow ABL's thinking on the matter. 
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 06, 2017, 12:56:00 PM
I asked a question, and it wasn't whether sedevacantists are going to hell, as you claim.

I don't have to answer a question that is a wrong question to ask in the first place.

Archbishop Lefebvre took the steps that he felt were needed in order to maintain the Catholic priesthood and Tradition. He consecrated four bishops, without a mandate from Rome. This is as far as he went in order to maintain tradition. You'll notice that he did not continually accuse the modernist hierarchy of heresy, nor did he become a sedevacantist. 

There's a theological way of viewing things, which says that we do not take the most extreme measures when confronted with a serious problem. Canon Hesse explained this very well in a video that I think Incredulous posted a few months ago, but I can't remember the name of the thread.

It just isn't Catholic to take the most extreme measures possible in dealing with a severe crisis.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Ladislaus on December 06, 2017, 02:27:50 PM
Sedevacantists say one thing....Catholics say another. I follow ABL's thinking on the matter.

ABL was a sede-doubtist ... just like myself.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 06, 2017, 04:18:36 PM
ABL is not the Catholic Church. He was a fallible and heretical Bishop who believed souls could be saved dying in their false religions.

That's because he himself was a heretic. Whether he was truly a material heretic or not is not the concern of a Catholic (God knows). 

Typical Pharisede response. 

 :jester:
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 06, 2017, 04:35:43 PM
What are you doubting exactly? The conclave? If he is accepted by all the Roman clergy then how can you have doubts?

Good questions. I'd like to see the answers.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 06, 2017, 04:53:24 PM
ABL was a sede-doubtist ... just like myself.


Is that how +ABL described himself? I don't recall that he did.

In +ABL's last book, in 1986 (I think it was his last), which was called "Open Letter to Confused Catholics," he wrote this in the last chapter on page 175:

"I have not ceased repeating that if anyone separates himself from the Pope, it will not be I. The question comes down to this: the power of the Pope within that Church is supreme, but not absolute and limitless, because it is subordinate to the Divine authority which is expressed in Tradition."

+ABL wrote that he had not ceased to repeat that he will not separate himself from the Pope. Is that what sede-doubtists' believe? Though, of course, sede-doubtism is probably a recently made-up term, and may not have been in existence when +ABL was alive.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Ladislaus on December 06, 2017, 07:28:48 PM
What are you doubting exactly? The conclave? If he is accepted by all the Roman clergy then how can you have doubts?

I'll try to explain tomorrow when I have more time.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Ladislaus on December 06, 2017, 07:29:48 PM

Is that how +ABL described himself? I don't recall that he did.

In +ABL's last book, in 1986 (I think it was his last), which was called "Open Letter to Confused Catholics," he wrote this in the last chapter on page 175:

"I have not ceased repeating that if anyone separates himself from the Pope, it will not be I. The question comes down to this: the power of the Pope within that Church is supreme, but not absolute and limitless, because it is subordinate to the Divine authority which is expressed in Tradition."

+ABL wrote that he had not ceased to repeat that he will not separate himself from the Pope. Is that what sede-doubtists' believe? Though, of course, sede-doubtism is probably a recently made-up term, and may not have been in existence when +ABL was alive.

If you look at all of what +Lefebvre wrote, he's a sededoubtists and not a sedeplenist.  I'll explain more tomorrow.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Clemens Maria on December 06, 2017, 10:22:12 PM
Ummm ... presumably because they actually care about people's souls? And this latest news constiutes not only proof that Frankie is a manifest heretic, but it is an unambiguous teaching of heresy through a popes authentic magisterium, which, at the very least if left unchallenged, unrecanted and uncorrected, violates indefectibility?
There's no wiggle room for a get-out-of-jail-free card here as there arguably is for Vatican II. As a Catholic you HAVE TO submit to this teaching. Canon law DEMANDS that you do. The FSSP can't argue the "hemeneutic of continuity " here, because it's unambiguous. The SSPX can't say that this teaching is just some kind of list of suggestions from a get-together of bishops with the Pope. It's not a private opinion expressed in a letter. It's not an off-the-cuff remark during an interview. It's not a blunder in a sermon. This is the Pope teaching as pope and to the Church. It's AUTHENTIC MAGISTERIUM concerning FAITH AND MORALS, in particular the every nature of morality itself.

Submit to the pope's teaching.
The R&R can’t win here.  Either they destroy what they were trying to protect (traditional doctrine) or they submit and lose their identity.  It’s like a Vietnam: “We had to destroy the village in order to save it.”
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: AJNC on December 07, 2017, 12:29:50 AM
Sedevacantists say one thing....Catholics say another. I follow ABL's thinking on the matter.
This site calls itself catholic-hierarchy.org and  it says that ABL left the Church.
Archbishop Marcel-François Lefebvre, C.S.Sp. †
Deceased
Bishop Emeritus of Tulle (http://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/diocese/dtull.html)
Note/Previous Titular See: (left the Church)

http://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/bishop/blefebvre.html
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: 2Vermont on December 07, 2017, 04:42:09 AM
Meg, with all due respect, we don't hold that there is no magisterium, we believe that the magisterium is not readily accessible. No matter how strange this seems to you and to many people, it does not contradict Church teaching. What is absolutely impossible is that the Church can promote sin or evil. Do you see that?
Meg is blinded by her rabid dogmatic anti-sedevacantism.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: 2Vermont on December 07, 2017, 04:45:41 AM
So Bergoglio's predecessors subjectivized faith and doctrine.  Now Bergoglio finishes the job by subjectivizing morality.
Exactly.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: 2Vermont on December 07, 2017, 04:49:46 AM
Sedevacantists say one thing....Catholics say another. I follow ABL's thinking on the matter.
Show me where ABL stated that sedevacantists are non-Catholic, out of the Church or going to Hell.   
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: happenby on December 07, 2017, 09:48:33 AM
From Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio, Pope Paul IV, 1559...

In addition, [by this Our Constitution, which is to remain valid in perpetuity We enact, determine, decree and define:] that if ever at any time it shall appear that any Bishop, even if he be acting as an Archbishop, Patriarch or Primate; or any Cardinal of the aforesaid Roman Church, or, as has already been mentioned, any legate, or even the Roman Pontiff, prior to his promotion or his elevation as Cardinal or Roman Pontiff, has deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into some heresy: the promotion or elevation, even if it shall have been uncontested and by the unanimous assent of all the Cardinals, shall be null, void and worthless; it shall not be possible for it to acquire validity (nor for it to be said that it has thus acquired validity) through the acceptance of the office, of consecration, of subsequent authority, nor through possession of administration, nor through the putative enthronement of a Roman Pontiff, or Veneration, or obedience accorded to such by all, nor through the lapse of any period of time in the foregoing situation.
And yet, Cum Ex assumes a trial.
Cum Ex...

"(vii) if perchance they shall have been Judges, their judgements shall have no force, nor shall any cases be brought to their hearing.;"

So, an HEARING is presumed in Cum Ex. That means, this declaration is only a guideline for determining within an hearing that someone proven guilty of heresy, Pope included, must be treated as written. But an hearing is presumed.

Bellarmine’s thinking regarding this matter is perfectly consistent with the mind of the Church, as we see expressed in Canon 10 of the Fourth Council of Constantinople. In response to the schism of Photius, the Council attached the grave penalty of excommunication to any layman or monk who, in the future, separated himself from his patriarch (the Pope is Patriarch of the West) before a careful inquiry and judgment by a synod.

“As divine scripture clearly proclaims, ‘Do not find fault before you investigate, and understand first and then find fault’. And does our law judge a person without first giving him a hearing and learning what he does? Consequently this holy and UNIVERSAL SYNOD justly and fittingly declares and lays down that no lay person or monk or cleric should separate himself from communion with his own patriarch before a careful inquiry and judgment in synod, even if he alleges that he knows of some crime perpetrated by his patriarch, and he must not refuse to include his patriarch's name during the divine mysteries or offices. (…) If anyone shall be found defying this holy synod, he is to be debarred from all priestly functions and status if he is a bishop or cleric; if a monk or lay person, he must be excluded from all communion and meetings of the church [i.e. excommunicated] until he is converted by repentance and reconciled”.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 07, 2017, 10:22:34 AM
Show me where ABL stated that sedevacantists are non-Catholic, out of the Church or going to Hell.  

I didn't say that I take +ABL's view of whether or not sedes are Catholic or not, or out of the Church. That in itself wasn't the point of the argument.

And I never said that sedes are going to hell. They are just nuts, that's all. And the dogmatic ones aren't Catholic.  
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: happenby on December 07, 2017, 10:33:56 AM
I didn't say that I take +ABL's view of whether or not sedes are Catholic or not, or out of the Church. That in itself wasn't the point of the argument.

And I never said that sedes are going to hell. They are just nuts, that's all. And the dogmatic ones aren't Catholic.  
I was wondering where he came up with that considering what you actually said.  
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 07, 2017, 10:45:38 AM
I was wondering where he came up with that considering what you actually said.  

That's one of the things which makes it difficult to debate with sedes. 
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 07, 2017, 10:51:52 AM
And yet, Cum Ex assumes a trial.
Cum Ex...

"(vii) if perchance they shall have been Judges, their judgements shall have no force, nor shall any cases be brought to their hearing.;"

So, an HEARING is presumed in Cum Ex. That means, this declaration is only a guideline for determining within an hearing that someone proven guilty of heresy, Pope included, must be treated as written. But an hearing is presumed.

Bellarmine’s thinking regarding this matter is perfectly consistent with the mind of the Church, as we see expressed in Canon 10 of the Fourth Council of Constantinople. In response to the schism of Photius, the Council attached the grave penalty of excommunication to any layman or monk who, in the future, separated himself from his patriarch (the Pope is Patriarch of the West) before a careful inquiry and judgment by a synod.

“As divine scripture clearly proclaims, ‘Do not find fault before you investigate, and understand first and then find fault’. And does our law judge a person without first giving him a hearing and learning what he does? Consequently this holy and UNIVERSAL SYNOD justly and fittingly declares and lays down that no lay person or monk or cleric should separate himself from communion with his own patriarch before a careful inquiry and judgment in synod, even if he alleges that he knows of some crime perpetrated by his patriarch, and he must not refuse to include his patriarch's name during the divine mysteries or offices. (…) If anyone shall be found defying this holy synod, he is to be debarred from all priestly functions and status if he is a bishop or cleric; if a monk or lay person, he must be excluded from all communion and meetings of the church [i.e. excommunicated] until he is converted by repentance and reconciled”.

The above is my understanding as well. There needs to be a determination of whether or not heresy or deviation from the Faith exists. That determination isn't made by laymen, but rather by a synod or council (a body made up of members of the hierarchy). The accused must then has chance to recant and repent of his heresy, after the determination is made that heresy exists.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 07, 2017, 11:06:47 AM
So non-Catholics aren't going to Hell?

I had a feeling that one of you were going to ask that.

But hey, I believe in BoD. So there's hope even for dogmatic sedes. ;D

Surely our Lord in His great mercy is not going to let the nutty sedes go to Hell. They have a mental condition, which may be an extenuating factor. 

Not that my opinion is accurate. We're all just laymen, after all. 
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 07, 2017, 11:26:25 AM
Meg,

Yesterday you made this comment... this is why you are being questioned.

You are saying sedevacantists are not Catholics...  non-Catholics are not saved... or are they?

What was that comment specifically about? 
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Ladislaus on December 07, 2017, 11:48:05 AM
Repeat after me: nobody can judge of a pope.

That means that nobody is invested with the authority level official judgments against a pope. It's not possible to drag someone recognised as the Pope before the Inquisition or to have a body of bishops judge him. He can be corrected, but he cannot be judged.

Pope St. Nicholas, epistle (8), Proposueramus quidem, 865: “… Neither by Augustus, nor by all the clergy, nor by religious, not by the people will the judge be judged… ‘The first seat will not be judged by anyone.’"

Pope St. Leo IX, In terra pax hominibus, Sept. 2, 1053, Chap. 32: “… As the hinge while remaining immoveable opens and closes the door, so Peter and his successors have free judgment over all the Church, since no one should remove their status because ‘the highest See is judged by no one.’”

Canon 1556, 1917 Code of Canon Law, On trials in general: “The First See is judged by no one.”

We're not talking about a juridical sentencing but a discernment by the Church about the orthodoxy or lack thereof of a particular Pontiff.  Quite a few theologians hold that the Church would have to make a declaratory statement regarding this discernment.  Rejection of a Pope as a non-Catholic cannot come from Joe Sixpack in the pew.  Yes, yes; once it's been determined that the Pope is a heretic he loses office regardless of whether or not he had received Universal Acceptance as pope.  Problem at hand is how does that determination get made and by whom?
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: happenby on December 07, 2017, 11:48:31 AM
No. You've totally misread those words.
What they plainly state is that if the person in question is a judge, then he has henceforth lost all power to judge and no cases are to be brought before him for judgment.
The "hearing" mentioned is not a hearing held in order to judge the judge; it is rather a case brought before that judge for judgment (case brought to their hearing).
Is English not your first language?
Ok, I'll accept that.  What about the Council of Constantinople?
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: happenby on December 07, 2017, 11:49:40 AM
Yes Meg, we're aware that you have a level of reading comprehension similar to happenby's.
Calm down, you're so crotchety.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Ladislaus on December 07, 2017, 11:51:10 AM
Calm down, you're so crotchety.

Your comment is much kinder than that which I was contemplating.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: happenby on December 07, 2017, 12:08:02 PM
Your comment is much kinder than that which I was contemplating.
Temporary insanity
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Ladislaus on December 07, 2017, 12:08:29 PM
Quote
...  We enact, determine, decree and define ... that if ever at any time it shall appear that ... the Roman Pontiff, prior to his promotion or his elevation as Cardinal or Roman Pontiff, has deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into some heresy ...

It shall appear to WHOM?  To Grandma Jones?  I knew a guy who considered Pius IX a non-pope because it "appeared" to HIM that Pius IX had embraced heresy.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Ladislaus on December 07, 2017, 12:10:33 PM
How should Joe Sixpack in the pew decide which declarations from which bishops to believe?

That's why theologians such as John of St. Thomas felt that one would, practically speaking, need an Imperfect Council to issue a declaration of heresy.  Otherwise, as he said, there would be complete chaos in the Church.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 07, 2017, 12:23:14 PM
Repeat after me: nobody can judge of a pope.

That means that nobody is invested with the authority level official judgments against a pope. It's not possible to drag someone recognised as the Pope before the Inquisition or to have a body of bishops judge him. He can be corrected, but he cannot be judged.

Pope St. Nicholas, epistle (8), Proposueramus quidem, 865: “… Neither by Augustus, nor by all the clergy, nor by religious, not by the people will the judge be judged… ‘The first seat will not be judged by anyone.’"

Pope St. Leo IX, In terra pax hominibus, Sept. 2, 1053, Chap. 32: “… As the hinge while remaining immoveable opens and closes the door, so Peter and his successors have free judgment over all the Church, since no one should remove their status because ‘the highest See is judged by no one.’”

Canon 1556, 1917 Code of Canon Law, On trials in general: “The First See is judged by no one.”

No ONE PERSON can judge a Pope, that's true. And there isn't a set doctrine in regards to how to deal with a heretical Pope. Surely you know that. Various theologians have different formulas for dealing with the possibility for a Pope who is in heresy.

Sedevacantists tend to believe that the Pope is equal to God, but he isn't. He can be judged by a body of men. How it is that they separate a heretic Pope from the papacy is not clear.

You can quote canon law till the cows come home in defense of your position, but quotes can be provided to the contrary.

We do not live in the wild west, where law doesn't matter, and where the populace then takes matters into their own hands and administers frontier justice. That's not how the Church works.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 07, 2017, 12:50:30 PM
Pope St. Nicholas
“… Neither by Augustus, nor by all the clergy, nor by religious, not by the people will the judge be judged… ‘The first seat will not be judged by anyone.’"


What is it about this quote that you don't understand, Meg?  

Alright, so please tell what doctrine tells us EXACTLY how we are to deal with a heretical pope. Please be specific. Notice that I'm asking about how to deal in a practical manner with a Pope who is in heresy. What does the Church teach on how to exactly go about it?
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 07, 2017, 01:02:18 PM
They don't separate anyone; separation is ipso facto an immediate consequence of the heresy itself.
Canon 188.4

“Through tacit resignation, accepted by the law itself, all offices become vacant ipso facto and without any declaration if a cleric: ...n.4. Has publicly forsaken the Catholic Faith.”
(Ob tacitam renuntiationem ab ipso iure admissam quaelibet officia vacant ipso facto et sine ulla declaratione, si clericus: ...4 A fide catholica publice defecerit.)

So what is Church teaching regarding how to deal with a Pope who is in heresy? Where does it say that laypersons are to proclaim that the seat is vacant, and that we then are also required to force others to believe the same thing?
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 07, 2017, 01:26:48 PM
There is no such doctrine. That it doesn't exist doesn't change any facts. It's like asking if doctrine existed specifically to deal with the Western schism and antipopes - that's probably also the best case to look at to guess how things might resolve themselves. If one denies valid orders to the Novus Ordo bishops, it becomes more difficult to imagine.
I'll tell you what wasn't anyone's position during those times, though: we recognise you as the true pope but refuse to submit to you and your teaching.

Are you sure that there's no doctrine on how to deal with those who are in schism? I'm pretty sure that there is.

The situation with the anti-popes is a different situation.

There HAS to be a method (Church teaching), if you are going to adopt the Ipso Facto methodology on how to deal with a heretic Pope, after he is proclaimed by laypersons to no longer be the Pope. Though, of course, there is no doctrine which says that laymen are to proclaim and judge that the Pope is not a Pope, much less on how to treat the non-Pope after laypersons proclaim he is not the pope. Sedes try to force others to adopt their view, through intimidation. What Church teaching says that this behavior is acceptable and needed? 

You are venturing into unknown territory when dealing with a heretical Pope, and yet you sedes act as if the there's a specific doctrine that says that laypersons are to judge and proclaim as to whether the seat is empty or not.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 07, 2017, 01:35:13 PM
There is no doctrine, but there is a precedent that was established in the early Church, and Saint Robert Bellarmine uses this precedent as an example to back up his teaching on the Roman Pontiff.

Let's go back to your original statement where you said: "He can be judged by a body of men."

The POPE cannot be judged by any power on earth - period.  Now, if a pope were to become a manifest (public) heretic, he ceases to be pope, thus he can be judged and punished by the Church.  This is the teaching of St. Robert Bellarmine.  

I understand that there are theologians with differing opinions, but St. Robert's teaching stems from a precedent established during the Arian crisis.  

St. Roberts says in De Romano Pontifice:
"Therefore, the true opinion is the fifth, according to which the Pope who is manifestly a heretic ceases by himself to be Pope and head, in the same way as he ceases to be a Christian and a member of the body of the Church; and for this reason he can be judged and punished by the Church. This is the opinion of all the ancient Fathers, who teach that manifest heretics immediately lose all jurisdiction..."

He continues:
"The foundation of this argument is that the manifest heretic is not in any way a member of the Church, that is, neither spiritually nor corporally, which signifies that he is not such by internal union nor by external union."

He goes on to further explain what happened to Pope Liberius during the Arian crisis:
"In addition, unless we are to admit that Liberius defected for a time from constancy in defending the Faith, we are compelled to exclude Felix II, who held the pontificate while Liberius was alive, from the number of the Popes: but the Catholic Church venerates this very Felix as Pope and martyr. However this may be, Liberius neither taught heresy, nor was a heretic, but only sinned by external act, as did St. Marcellinus, and unless I am mistaken, sinned less than St. Marcellinus.

Then two years later came the lapse of Liberius, of which we have spoken above. Then indeed the Roman clergy, stripping Liberius of his pontifical dignity, went over to Felix, whom they knew [then] to be a Catholic. From that time, Felix began to be the true Pontiff. For although Liberius was not a heretic, nevertheless he was considered one, on account of the peace he made with the Arians, and by that presumption the pontificate could rightly [merito] be taken from him: for men are not bound, or able to read hearts; but when they see that someone is a heretic by his external works, they judge him to be a heretic pure and simple, and condemn him as a heretic."




Seems pretty Catholic to me.  

However, does anyone really believe that the heresiarchs in Rome are going to actually do anything about their fellow heretic?  

Since you admit there's no doctrine, then we do not have to accept the quotes you provide, and therefore we are allowed to form a view from the opposing theologians such as John of St. Thomas and Suarez, correct?
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 07, 2017, 02:07:02 PM
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.

A commentary on this canon by Rev. Eric F. Mackenzie, A.M., S.T.L., J.C.L, states: “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.”

St. Robert Bellarmine,  De Romano Pontifice, II, 30 :  “... for men are not bound, or able to read hearts; but when they see that someone is a heretic by his external works, they judge him to be a heretic pure and simple, and  condemn him as a heretic.

Do the above quotes apply specifically to the Pope? Because the situation with a Pope regarding heresy is different than that of other Catholics. 
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 07, 2017, 02:19:00 PM
How so?  A heretic is a heretic, no?

Well, as sedes are so fond of pointing out, no person can judge the Pope. He technically has no earthly authority above him.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 07, 2017, 02:27:09 PM
Pronouncing juridical judgment - making factual discernment: two different things.

They are not two different things. They are the same thing, since you proclaim that anyone (such as R&R's) who do not not accept your view of the situation is a schismatic. 
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 07, 2017, 02:28:36 PM
Heresy is heresy no matter who preaches it. St. Paul said...

8. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. 9. As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema. (Gal 1:8-9)

This was so important, St. Paul said it twice. When he says "though we", he refers to the apostles (including St. Peter). He then says anyone in verse 9. So when he says, "we", "an angel" and then "anyone", it becomes obvious that Bergoglio is not excluded. He does not say to wait for an official judgement.

St. Francis De Sales (17 th century), Doctor of the Church,  The Catholic Controversy , pp.  305-306: " Now when he [the Pope] is explicitly a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church ..."  

Evidently, you are not aware of Church teaching regarding the Pope.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 07, 2017, 02:30:40 PM
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.

A commentary on this canon by Rev. Eric F. Mackenzie, A.M., S.T.L., J.C.L, states: “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.”

St. Robert Bellarmine,  De Romano Pontifice, II, 30 :  “... for men are not bound, or able to read hearts; but when they see that someone is a heretic by his external works, they judge him to be a heretic pure and simple, and  condemn him as a heretic.

Again, you do not give ANY quotes regarding how to deal with a Pope who is in heresy. I specifically asked about Church teaching regarding how to deal with a Pope who is in heresy. When you provide the quotes I asked for, I'll respond to you further. 
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Meg on December 07, 2017, 02:33:44 PM
Again, you do not give ANY quotes regarding how to deal with a Pope who is in heresy. I specifically asked about Church teaching regarding how to deal with a Pope who is in heresy. When you provide the quotes I asked for, I'll respond to you further.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Ladislaus on December 07, 2017, 03:01:26 PM
That's between him and God. But there is such a thing as manifest heresy which clearly and explicitly contrary de fide teachings. Why is the ability to know this constantly questioned in general because many people don't possess the necessary faculties to discern it?
If my priest stands before the congregation and says:" I've converted to Islam", is his apostasy, in good conscience, not to be taken as an objective fact? If a bishop states publically that Jesus Christ did not come in the flesh and die on the cross, is there some reaosonable doubt left somewhere as to my obligation to shun him as a heretic? And if an apparent pope teaches moral relativism and gradualism as part of his authentic magisterium and, after being corrected, persists in this, what am I to think?

Yes, I've listed the different scenarios before:

1) "I am becoming a Buddhist."  --- ipso facto gone
2) "I know that the Church teaches x but I don't believe it anyway." --- ipso facto gone
3) "I believe x and don't consider it to be heresy." -- complicated

Ratzinger and Wojtyla certainly believed that they were being consistent with Tradition ... in applying their "hermeneutic of continuity".  But Bergoglio seems to know that he's breaking with Church teaching.  In the case of #3, the Church would have to discern that what he's saying is indeed heresy.  Then if he recanted, there would not have been any deposition ... even though the heresy had become "manifest".  If he then persisted, the "Church" could come back and reaffirm her judgment and warn Bergoglio that she would consider him a heretic if he persisted.  Then, after that, if he persisted, the Church could declare him deposed.  Undboutedly he would still have backers, and then what?  Call in someone to forcibly remove him from the Vatican when as a point of law the Pope owns Church property.  This would get messy very quickly.

Ultimately God will need to intervene and solve this mess.

In the meantime, there certainly exists grave positive doubt about their legitimacy.  And that's enough for me to refuse my submission without schism.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: Ladislaus on December 07, 2017, 03:06:33 PM
With regard to +Lefebvre NOT being a sedeplenist, consider this.

Theologians teach that the legitimacy of a pope is dogmatic fact, i.e. that it's known with the certainty of faith.  Otherwise, any dogmas he teaches cannot have the certainty of faith either.  Now, +Lefebvre often mulled over the possibility that the V2 popes might be illegitimate.  BY THAT VERY FACT, he's a sededoubtist and not a sedeplenist.  Papa dubius nullus papa ... in the practical order.  If he were a sedeplenist, he could no sooner question the legitimacy of the V2 papal claimants than he could the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception.

I asked R&R folks here before whether they were as convinced that Bergoglio is pope as they are that Our Lady was Assumed into heaven.  They invariably answered no.  Consequently, they are NOT sedeplenists and are sededoubtists ... even if they don't know it themselves.  If someone were to ask me if I would bet my life on the truth of the Immaculate Conception, I would do it without hesitation.  If someone were to ask me if I would bet my life that Bergoglio is pope, I would run the other way.
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: 2Vermont on December 07, 2017, 04:16:31 PM
I didn't say that I take +ABL's view of whether or not sedes are Catholic or not, or out of the Church. That in itself wasn't the point of the argument.

And I never said that sedes are going to hell. They are just nuts, that's all. And the dogmatic ones aren't Catholic.  
Suddenly it's just the "dogmatic ones" that aren't Catholic.
Meg stated in another thread:
Sometimes people can't see the obvious: that it's the Catholic faith you're giving them, rather than the sedevacantist faith (which isn't the Catholic faith). 

The truth of the matter is that Meg doesn't think ANY sede is Catholic. 
Title: Re: 3 views on the internet: Amoris Laetitia now in the AAS
Post by: AJNC on December 09, 2017, 01:57:57 AM
A couple of years or so ago, an SSPX priest told me that a former confrere of his in this Asia District had quit the priesthood and had got married to a divorcee who was (once?) apparently a Traditional Catholic.
Now, can, under Bergoglio's dispensation, firmly planted in the AAS, this happy couple attend Mass at an SSPX chapel and receive Communion?. In fact, can they attend Mass at the chapel where the ex-husband is a regular attendee, and receive Communion there?