Spiritus, I notice even you could not bring yourself to admit  B16 is a Catholic.

Spiritus, it is an important issue, because if all traditionalist could agree on this pope issue, we could unite and fight against the enemy, the Modernist.

Benedict actually isn't the enemy. Modernism itself is the enemy, which comes straight from the devil. There is no way we ourselves can stop modernism other than to speak out against it, avoid it, and pray. Even if every Catholic in the world became a sede, it would make little difference. Only God can stop the crisis. In the mean time we are wasting our time constantly arguing with people who aren't sedevacantist.

Well good for you, Siqismund!  Now tell us why.

Quote from: MyrnaM

Quote from: roscoe

Myrna-- who specifically has 'insisted that we have a pope but he isn't Catholic'?

So who here thinks B16 is Catholic?

Sign below:

I do.

I have to agree with Sigismund. There can be no such thing as a non-Catholic Pope, and since I think Benedict is Pope I must therefore say he is Catholic. He is not a Traditionalist, but a Catholic Pope regardless.

TKGS-- could U give an example of someone that Pius X kept in the Church even though they did not repent of their Modernist heresy?

This is rather a stupid question.  Pope St. Pius X wrote extensively of the Modernist heresy yet, the heresy survived in Catholic circles for decades until it was openly proclaimed at Vatican II and made the official dogma of the Conciliar Church.  Unless one is prepared to say that Modernism was crushed but then spontaneously appeared in 1962, there must have been an extensive network of Modernists who remained officially in the Church.

Because of what Hermenegild said above, I began some additional research on infamous Moderists of the early XXth Century.  I wrote what I wrote because I have never before read a biography or history mentioning excommunications under Pope St. Pius X.  I found that there were indeed a few notorious Modernists who, under this pope, were stripped of positions and not allowed to act as priests.  Furthermore, at least one such notorious Modernist was denied a Catholic funeral.  So I stand corrected with regards to Pope St. Pius X except that I still could find nothing saying they were formally excommunicated.

I will also say that there is, humanly speaking, some excuse for the hierarchy in regards to finding and expelling Modernists after Pope St. Pius X.  World War I, depresions in Europe and in the United States, nαzι and Fascist rising in Germany and Italy, World War II, reconstruction after the War, and the threat of Communism all held great perils for the Church.

On the other hand, bishops all over the world were negligent throughout the whole time for not expelling the Modernists.  It it inconceivable that many of them were unaware of the problem.  The bishops do not live in vacuums.  Just as most (if not all) bishops knew exactly which priests were molesting children, sodomizing one another, and corrupting the morals of seminarians, so too, I believe (though I have no proof) that they knew who the Modernists were.  In the end, it seems that physical safety of the Church was more important than the doctrinal safety of the Church.

Indeed, it appears I was wrong to castigate Pope St. Pius X and I ask him for his forgiveness.  But the threat of Modernism seemed to be largely ignored, or at least not taken to be the gravest threat facing the Church, after his time.  If it was taken seriously, how did it infect nearly the whole Church?

Pope St. Pius X wrote extensively of the Modernist heresy yet, the heresy survived in Catholic circles for decades until it was openly proclaimed at Vatican II and made the official dogma of the Conciliar Church.  Unless one is prepared to say that Modernism was crushed but then spontaneously appeared in 1962, there must have been an extensive network of Modernists who remained officially in the Church.

The tone of that response is remarkably uncharitable, especially for being in response to a question that seemed genuinely curious.  That said, if we accept that the ultimate aim of the Modernists has been the subversion of Holy Church from the beginning, then their effort has been sustained, generational and, at least for most of its history, carefully and meticulously concealed.

Because of what Hermenegild said above, I began some additional research on infamous Moderists of the early XXth Century.  I wrote what I wrote because I have never before read a biography or history mentioning excommunications under Pope St. Pius X.  I found that there were indeed a few notorious Modernists who, under this pope, were stripped of positions and not allowed to act as priests.  Furthermore, at least one such notorious Modernist was denied a Catholic funeral.  So I stand corrected with regards to Pope St. Pius X except that I still could find nothing saying they were formally excommunicated.

I will also say that there is, humanly speaking, some excuse for the hierarchy in regards to finding and expelling Modernists after Pope St. Pius X.  World War I, depresions in Europe and in the United States, nαzι and Fascist rising in Germany and Italy, World War II, reconstruction after the War, and the threat of Communism all held great perils for the Church.

On the other hand, bishops all over the world were negligent throughout the whole time for not expelling the Modernists.  It it inconceivable that many of them were unaware of the problem.  The bishops do not live in vacuums.  Just as most (if not all) bishops knew exactly which priests were molesting children, sodomizing one another, and corrupting the morals of seminarians, so too, I believe (though I have no proof) that they knew who the Modernists were.  In the end, it seems that physical safety of the Church was more important than the doctrinal safety of the Church.

Indeed, it appears I was wrong to castigate Pope St. Pius X and I ask him for his forgiveness.  But the threat of Modernism seemed to be largely ignored, or at least not taken to be the gravest threat facing the Church, after his time.  If it was taken seriously, how did it infect nearly the whole Church?

The ascendancy of the Modernist heresy such as to cause a defection of most of the Catholic hierarchy, including the man claiming the Seat of Peter, must never be misunderstood as something that just "happened".  It was a concerted and generational effort on the part of diabolical forces, masquerading as atheistic free-thinkers and pantheistic brotherhoods, deifying man in rebellion against God and His Holy Church.  Neither must we despair that the enemies of Christ, whether occult or manifest, gain but an inch of ground against the Church that He does not, in His Justice and Divine, Omniscient Will, allow.

Humbly, I would argue that the syncretic heresy of Modernism can find like roots as far back as the heresy of Luther, inasmuch as that latter purported to return the Church to a more correct and primitive state.  The Enemy of all Christians found in that lecherous monk a fittingly unholy parody of St. Joseph, as he nurtured doctrines odious and offensive to Catholic morality.  In his cunning, while instigating his new and false religion in the spirit of the first sin, he must have understood that the orthodoxy of the day would not tolerate the outright deification of man.  It is my sincere belief that, had that been preached by Luther and his blasphemous ilk, the Catholic nations of the world should by one consent have risen up and stamped them out like the gnostic heretics of old.  Instead, he offered up man's depravity in a profane mime of humility, only using it to justify licentiousness, a creeping species of pride that can be concealed by closed doors, rather than promote the necessity of reforming the will to please God.

This pride would remain veiled until the atheists, agnostics and free-thinkers should pervert the pursuit of knowledge into its own godless dogma, assigning to man and his cognition the summit of the present world and, with pagan eyes and vulgar tongues, look to the day when man should heal himself of his own depravity and render himself perfect in a universe devoid of any beauty or majesty of the divine.

In this final act, the religion of false doctrines and blasphemous ceremonies could shed the last vestiges of recognition of man's ancient guilt and announce to the world its final assumption into the material world by the assimilation of atheism's pride in the deification of man, judiciously renaming it man's inherent dignity.  By this same pride has the false religion rendered its stolen sacraments barren and void of grace; corrupted the sacerdotal priesthood; overturned just law and prudent morality; withdrawn the voice of God in the establishment and operation of government; and built monstrous, iconoclastic lodges to enthrone, by disbelief, by silence and by debasement of faith, the Father of Lies.

The pervasiveness of this heresy cannot but point to God's allowance of the same, in remuneration of man's unceasing pride and vanity.  God had given us His Church, which had spread to every corner of the world; he has taken all but a remnant because we did not humble ourselves in thanksgiving.

SpiritusSanctus, are you saying that there can be different types of Catholics? Isn't the Church one in faith?

If Benedict 16 is a Catholic and pope then how can you as a Catholic resist your head?

There can be different types of Catholics, it has been that way for years. Traditional Catholics, Eastern-Rite Catholics, and more recently, Novus Ordo Catholics. There's a few more but you get the point.

Even Pope St. Pius X merely warned us about the Modernists.  He did not expel them from the Church if they did not repent of their heresy.

Loisy was excommunicated.

I don't have Myrna on hide simply because she claims to be something called a 'sede'-- which term in itself is trivialising and degrading, not to mention the fact that there is No Such Thing. I have Myrna on Hide because of :confused1: