I have repeatedly asked why R&R don't jump on board with Father Chazal?

This is what Fr. Chazal believes, and I don't have a problem with it:

"It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to judge him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

~St. Robert Bellarmine
De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29

This still does not answer what purpose sedeism serves and how it profits souls unto salvation. I've asked this a few times over the last few years and have never gotten an answer. Yes, the Church is in a crisis, yes the popes are heretics, yes the devil wants to destroy the Church - none of these truths answer the purpose of sedeism or how one profits from it.

In this matter, it is par for the course to be contrary to what the Church teaches when we reference wild hypothetical scenarios such as the Dali Lama or women popes or whatever, simply due to the fact that the conciliar popes have all been elected according to the laws of the Church. IOW, if you want to go contrary to the law of the Church, then go right ahead and use wild hypotheticals as a means to do so.

This is to say the only thing using wild hypotheticals can do, is lead to schism and put one in schism.

Ex Quo does not use wild hypotheticals, it states plainly that his name is not to be omitted and why. They say this without any disclaimers or exceptions, and by the words "for whatever reason" they are saying that there are no exceptions. Which means what they are saying is absolute. As such, the presumption must be they were well aware of future heretical popes, not presume that "they only mean "Catholic popes."

All I am attempting to do is point out the teaching of the Church, not my teaching, the Church's teaching, the clear words taught by the Church that cannot err, which is the Magisterium's teaching which is always without error, and the teaching of popes who, per most sedes, cannot teach error - all teach that the name of the pope, for whatever reason, is not to be omitted - and that to do so is the cause of disunity and is an act of schism.

And if you believe and accept the teaching of the Church via Ex Quo without exception, then your meme would not only apply to the conciliar popes, it would also apply to sedes who celebrate Mass non-una cuм - per Ex Quo.

What is the purpose of Sedeism?

Doing our best to preserve the Catholic Faith as it was passed down from the Apostles.


It's very clear that you love the Catholic Church and her teachings, Stubborn.

Yes, I think we both have great reverence for the teaching of the Catholic Church which is not yours or mine,

so this is not a matter of opinion but of trying to follow what she has promulgated

to the very best of our ability during this extraordinarily difficult time.



As for wild hypotheticals...

Well instead of using the Dali Lama, let's use the example of someone who is elected pope with the intention of promulgating the Muslim religion.

Would that be possible?  Sounds crazy!  How on earth could that be?

Is it possible that somebody could become pope and change the Catholic Faith to one where Catholics actually worship Allah?

That's not a hypothetical actually. 

That's reality since Vatican II states that Catholics worship the same god as Muslims.

Do you worship the same god as Muslims, Stubborn?

Do you worship Allah?

I don't.

I guess that means that I am not "una cuм"

the Concilliar Church or their popes.

I'm not "in union with" them

because I don't worship the same gods as they do.

We had Benedict praying for the coming of the Moshiach (antichrist) at a synogogue on Good Friday

and Francis worshiping Pajamamama in the Church.

I can't join my worship to theirs.

To say I worship "in union with" them would be a lie.

There is only one religion and only one God.

To offer the sacrifice of my Dear Lord and Savior in union with them and their gods is just....

well, I can't bear the thought. 

They deny Christ and are antichrists.

I can't offer Our Lord's sacrifice in union with antichrists. 

I just can't stomach it.



Can a non Catholic even become a pope?

Anyone who has the intention of implementing Vatican II

has the intention of promoting the worship of Allah

as a Catholic god.

They are clearly not Catholic and are barred from election.


It would be equivalent to using a potato chip

at the consecration at Mass instead of unleavened bread -

it’s invalid matter and no consecration takes place.


Public heretics or apostates have left the Church.  They are not Catholic and do not intend to promulgate the Catholic Faith.

They are not “valid matter”for any office in the Church and are barred by divine law from the papacy.


Non Catholics cannot become pope.


It's a very hard reality to face, but face it we must.


Fortunately, the Church prepared us for this time through statements from popes, Sacred Scripture, canon law, saints and theologians and prophecies.

I just heard that in his last will, that biiden isn’t invited to the funeral. That is cool. 

Here it is:

https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/non-una-cuм-and-the-resistance/ 

You’ll have to copy/paste the link into your browser.

I only get an error

Cathinfo doesn’t like the weird text on the “cuм,” so you can’t just click the link.  You have to actually copy/paste the whole link into your browser.

Cathinfo doesn’t like the weird text on the “cuм,” so you can’t just click the link.  You have to actually copy/paste the whole link into your browser.

I just read it again, great article! https://tinyurl.com/fr6yy9hd

But there is another one somewhere in CI land, I think maybe you posted it, but maybe not. I will see if I can find it as it went more in depth as to exactly what is being prayed in the canon when the pope's name is mentioned.

Was it this one?

Archbishop Lefebvre and the sedevacantists

(a little known docuмent)
https://dominicansavrille.us/archbishop-lefebvre-sedevacantists/

Concerning the position of Archbishop Lefebvre on the “non una cuм” sedevacantist position, after the Episcopal consecrations of 1988; here is an excerpt from a conference given by Archbishop Lefebvre during a retreat preached to the sisters of Saint-Michel en Brenne 1, France, on April 1st, 1989 (AUDIO excerpt attached).

« … And then, he (Dom Guillou O.S.B. 2) goes through all the prayers of the Canon, all the prayers of the Roman Canon. He goes through them one after the other and then he shows the difference, he gives translations, very good ones. He gives, for example, precisely this famous.. you know, this famous una cuм.., una cuм of the sedevacantists. And you, do you say una cuм? (laughter of the nuns of St-Michel-en-Brenne). You say una cuм in the Canon of the Mass! Then we cannot pray with you; then you’re not Catholic; you’re not this; you’re not that; you’re not.. Ridiculous! ridiculous! because they claim that when we say una cuм summo Pontifice, the Pope, isn’t it, with the Pope, so therefore you embrace everything the Pope says. It’s ridiculous! It’s ridiculous! In fact, this is not the meaning of the prayer.

Te igitur clementissime Pater. This is the first prayer of the Canon. So here is how Dom Guillou translates it, a very accurate translation, indeed :

“We therefore pray Thee with profound humility, most merciful Father, and we beseech Thee, through Jesus Christ, Thy Son, Our Lord, to accept and to bless these gifts, these presents, these sacrifices, pure and without blemish, which we offer Thee firstly for Thy Holy Catholic Church. May it please Thee to give Her peace, to keep Her, to maintain Her in unity, and to govern Her throughout the earth, and with Her, Thy servant our Holy Father the Pope.”

It is not said in this prayer that we embrace all ideas that the Pope may have or all the things he may do. With Her, your servant our Holy Father the Pope, our Bishop and all those who practice the Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox faith! So to the extent where, perhaps, unfortunately, the Popes would no longer have …, nor the bishops…, would be deficient in the Orthodox, Catholic and Apostolic Faith, well, we are not in union with them, we are not with them, of course. We pray for the Pope and all those who practice the Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox faith!

Then he (Dom Guillou) had a note about that to clarify a little:

“In the official translation, based on a critical review of Dom Botte O.S.B. 3, the UNA cuм or “in union with” of the sedevacantists of any shade is no longer equivalent but to the conjunction “and ” reinforced either by the need to restate the sentence, or to match the solemn style of the Roman canon. Anyway, every Catholic is always in union with the Pope in the precise area where the divine assistance is exercised, infallibility confirmed by the fact that as soon as there is a deviation from the dogmatic Tradition, the papal discourse contradicts itself.

Let us collect the good grain, knowing that for the rest, it is more necessary than ever to ask God, with the very ancient Major Litanies, that be “kept in the holy religion” the “holy orders” and the “Apostolic Lord” himself (that is to say the Pope): UT DOMINUM APOSTOLIcuм AND OMNES ECCLESIASTICOS ORDINES IN SANCTA RELIGIONE CONSERVARE DIGNERIS, TE ROGAMUS, AUDI NOS.”

It is a request of the litanies of the Saints, right? WE ASK TO KEEP THE POPE IN THE TRUE RELIGION. We ask that in the Litanies of the Saints! This proves that sometimes it can happen that unfortunately, well, maybe sometimes it happens that… well there have been hesitations, there are false steps, there are errors that are possible. We have too easily believed since Vatican I, that every word that comes from the mouth of the Pope is infallible. That was never said in Vatican I! The Council never said such a thing. Very specific conditions are required for the infallibility; very, very strict conditions. The best proof is that throughout the Council, Pope Paul VI himself said “There is nothing in this Council which is under the sign of infallibility”. So, it is clear, he says it himself! He said it explicitly.

Then we must not keep this idea which is FALSE! which a number of Catholics, poorly instructed, poorly taught, believe! So obviously, people no longer understand anything, they are completely desperate, they do not know what to expect! We must keep the Catholic faith as the Church teaches it. »

Archbishop Lefebvre, retreat at Saint-Michel en Brenne, April 1st, 1989

Yes, that's the one - thanks!