Author Topic: Father Krammer is Sede? (Read 6362 times)

Montfort · « **on:** November 29, 2013, 01:04:35 PM »

Just found this on the Diamonds website. Not sure if true, I guess we'll all find out in time. If it's true it will be interesting to see where he goes from here. He's been with Father Gruner for so many years.

http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/truthreport/fr-paul-leonard-kramer-allegedly-rejects-francis-antipope/#.UpjjjOKmZmM

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #1 on:** November 29, 2013, 01:50:38 PM »

.

The sedevacante position thus far has been one of passive resistance, a rather "wait and see" approach, notwithstanding the fact that some number of men have been going around over the past many years, saying that THEY are pope.

"For many will come in my name saying, I am Christ, and they will seduce many" (Matt. xxiv. 5).

"If therefore they shall say to you : Behold he is in the desert, go ye not out : Behold he is in the closets, believe it not" (Matt. xxiv. 26).

"Behold, I have told it to you, beforehand... he that readeth let him understand" (xxiv. 25; 15 -- "beforehand" was 10 verses before verse 25).

Fr. Kramer's message is a bit different from the typical sede message. He's not for waiting at all. He says something must be done --- as soon as possible! There is an urgency in his words. He says that it wouldn't require all the cardinals to agree. He says that all it would take is a core few who remain faithful to Holy Mother Church to stand up and take action.

It is similar to the theory that any bishops who do not join with all the bishops of the world to do a particular act in religion that is essential and necessary for the Church, by their refusal to participate, they would cease to be Catholic bishops, and therefore all the bishops who DO participate in the necessary action are the only ones who would then remain Catholic bishops.

Two examples of this are with the Collegial Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, and this proposed, necessary election of a Catholic pope to take the place of Francis/Bergoglio (because they would say, he is not Catholic, and desperate times call for desperate measures).

.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #2 on:** November 29, 2013, 02:22:19 PM »

Quote from: Montfort

Just found this on the Dimond's website. Not sure if true, I guess we'll all find out in time. If it's true it will be interesting to see where he goes from here. He's been with Father Gruner for so many years.

http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/truthreport/fr-paul-leonard-kramer-allegedly-rejects-francis-antipope/#.UpjjjOKmZmM

For the record, here is the content of that page (with one link active):

“Fr.” Paul Leonard Kramer Allegedly Rejects Francis as an Antipope

November 28, 2013

MHFM: According to reports, a ‘traditionalist priest’, who for a long time has been closely affiliated with Nicholas Gruner, has taken the sedevacantist position. Apparently Francis’ newest docuмent (which contains a number of massive heresies) was the clincher. Paul Leonard Kramer allegedly posted this on his Facebook page:

[indent]

“Pope” Francis in Evangelii Gaudium n. 247: “We hold the Jєωιѕн people in special regard because their covenant with God has never been revoked”. This text is an explicit profession of heresy, directly opposed to the solemn dogmatic definition of Pope Eugenius III and the Ecuмenical Council of Florence, and the doctrine taught by the supreme magisterium of Pope Benedict XIV in Ex Quo Primum, set forth repeatedly and explicitly citing the definition of Florence, to wit, that the Mosaic covenant has been “revoked” and “abrogated”. I have been saying for years that when a “pope” will officially teach explicit and clear heresy flatly contradicting the infallibly defined dogma of the Catholic faith, then you will know that he is the false pope prophecied in many Church approved prophecies and Marian apparitions. St. Robert Bellarmine, St. Alohonsus Liguori, St. Antoninus and Pope Innocent III all teach that when the pope demonstrates himself to be a manifest heretic, i.e. a plainly manifested public heretic, he ceases to be pope (or, if already was a public heretic he was invalidly elected) because he is not a Catholic — not a member of the Catholic Church. Bellarmine explains that the Roman Pontiff is the visible head of the Church, and the head is a member. One who is not a member cannot be the head, and therefore the election to the supreme pontificate of a public heretic is canonically null & void. The heresy of Bergoglio in no. 247 is such a clear cut case of manifest, public heresy, expressed in stark, unequivocal terms, that it can be said without doubt that if this proposition of no. 247 is not manifestly heretical, then nothing else can be said to be so. It is morally impossible that one who manifestly displays such clearly expressed contempt for a defined dogma of faith by plainly denying it, can be believed to validly hold the office of Roman Pontiff. St. Francis of Assisi foretold of the uncanonically elected pope who would not be “a true pastor but a destroyer”. Bergoglio plainly fits the description.

[/indent]

Now, it must be made clear that Kramer is not a true Catholic. He holds heresies on the salvation dogma; he was ordained in the invalid New Rite of Ordination; and he has not (as far as we know) rejected the previous Vatican II antipopes. He also doesn’t seem to realize that the heresy he mentions in his post (which convinced him that Francis is not pope) was taught in Vatican II itself and by the other previous Vatican II antipopes. That’s proven in this video: Vatican II’s Jєωιѕн Heresy. When Vatican II teaches that Jєωs, despite not belonging to the Church, are not to be considered as rejected by God, that means they remain in a valid covenant with God and can be saved. That’s also how the apostates in the Vatican II sect understood and implemented Nostra Aetate. Francis’ heresy on the Old Covenant is simply a reiteration of the doctrine of Nostra Aetate and the statements of the previous antipopes. It is also a further formalization of that heresy as the official doctrine of the Counter Church, for Francis teaches it openly in an Apostolic Exhortation addressed to the entire Church.

But there were many other heresies taught by the antipopes on various topics that were just as explicit as the one Kramer finds so appalling. He should have been convinced a long time ago. In fact, years ago we personally spoke with Kramer. In one of those conversations he expressed doubts about the validity of John Paul II. However, his rejection of Antipope Francis is interesting because it’s another example of how even some of the most obstinate false traditionalists, who have misled so many for years, are now finding Francis so indefensible that they must reject him as an antipope. It’s a big embarrassment to the false traditionalist crowd.

Over the years Kramer has said some good things. We hope he comes around to the true positions on all the issues. His paragraph is an example of how simple it really should be for people to come to the correct conclusion on Francis (i.e., that he’s without any doubt a heretical non-Catholic antipope) if they are being even slightly honest about the situation.

What Francis Really Believes (3rd Edition)

Tags: "Fr." Paul Leonard Kramer, Fatima, Nicholas Gruner

I find it interesting that while Fr. Pfeiffer's website is blocked on the CI system, this mostholyfamilymonastery website is not blocked.

.

soulguard · « **Reply #3 on:** November 29, 2013, 02:33:02 PM »

Is Fr Kramer a resistance priest?
If so I thought they were all ex SSPX and old rite ordained??

StCeciliasGirl · « **Reply #4 on:** November 29, 2013, 02:35:16 PM »

I'd like to point out that THE VATICAN has removed the text of the encyclical itself,

and now has merely a link to a PDF file you can download. (This is why I keep copies of originals, btw). For everyone who LINKED to a passage in the Evangelii Gaudium, and there were A LOT of hyperlinks in the encyclical itself, all those links are broken. They all redirect to that page. ALL THOSE LINKS, fried.

Someone in the Curia has proven to have a modicuм of sense, at least, though I'd strongly suggest they PROOFREAD BEFORE they let Frank out of his cage.

So ultimately what Fr. Kramer did may have actually HELPED the conciliarists and Frank (which I'm not sure is such a good thing). We'll eventually see what revisions, if any, are made; I'm sure such things will be attributed to "copyist error".

This goes to show that Fr. Kramer is respected. Even by his enemies. :smile:

Luker · « **Reply #5 on:** November 29, 2013, 03:02:12 PM »

Quote from: StCeciliasGirl

I'd like to point out that THE VATICAN has removed the text of the encyclical itself, and now has merely a link to a PDF file you can download. (This is why I keep copies of originals, btw). For everyone who LINKED to a passage in the Evangelii Gaudium, and there were A LOT of hyperlinks in the encyclical itself, all those links are broken. They all redirect to that page. ALL THOSE LINKS, fried.

Someone in the Curia has proven to have a modicuм of sense, at least, though I'd strongly suggest they PROOFREAD BEFORE they let Frank out of his cage.

So ultimately what Fr. Kramer did may have actually HELPED the conciliarists and Frank (which I'm not sure is such a good thing). We'll eventually see what revisions, if any, are made; I'm sure such things will be attributed to "copyist error".

This goes to show that Fr. Kramer is respected. Even by his enemies. :smile:

This is interesting. Seems to be some backtracking going on in rome these days. If fr Kramer came to this conclusion, I wonder if some others in the Conciliar clergy are ready to join him? I will be following this story this could have some legs. Fr Kramer is no dummy and is quite well known. We shall see...

Mabel · « **Reply #6 on:** November 29, 2013, 03:25:02 PM »

I was able to get the PDF. Just scanning it, I was shocked to read his views on marriage.

soulguard · « **Reply #7 on:** November 29, 2013, 03:51:14 PM »

If he is now a SV, expect him to make a video explaining his reasons. Perhaps he is making one now as you all speak.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #8 on:** November 29, 2013, 04:37:30 PM »

.

I don't enjoy quoting myself, and I did read the other posts on this thread, but I have something to say that derives directly from this, my previous post, so rather than presume that readers might know what I'm talking about, I'll quote this first so you can see right away:

Quote from: Neil Obstat

.

The sedevacante position thus far has been one of passive resistance, a rather "wait and see" approach, notwithstanding the fact that some number of men have been going around over the past many years, saying that THEY are pope.

"For many will come in my name saying, I am Christ, and they will seduce many" (Matt. xxiv. 5).

"If therefore they shall say to you : Behold he is in the desert, go ye not out : Behold he is in the closets, believe it not" (Matt. xxiv. 26).

"Behold, I have told it to you, beforehand... he that readeth let him understand" (xxiv. 25; 15 -- "beforehand" was 10 verses before verse 25).

Fr. Kramer's message is a bit different from the typical sede message. He's not for waiting at all. He says something must be done --- as soon as possible! There is an urgency in his words. He says that it wouldn't require all the cardinals to agree. He says that all it would take is a core few who remain faithful to Holy Mother Church to stand up and take action.

It is similar to the theory that any bishops who do not join with all the bishops of the world to do a particular act in religion that is essential and necessary for the Church, by their refusal to participate, they would cease to be Catholic bishops, and therefore all the bishops who DO participate in the necessary action are the only ones who would then remain Catholic bishops.

Two examples of this are with the Collegial Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, and this proposed, necessary election of a Catholic pope to take the place of Francis/Bergoglio (because they would say, he is not Catholic, and desperate times call for desperate measures).

.

From time to time I hear sedes and their critics alike say that the Collegial Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary will not be done, for there will be no conversion of Russia, because A) there is no pope and there are no faithful Cardinals to elect one, and/or B) this pope, like all the other post-conciliar popes has no desire for or likelihood of doing the Consecration so it's a dead letter, "We missed the boat," or it's no longer possible, and we're beating a dead horse, wasting our time, being hopeful for the impossible, etc., etc.

When I remind them that Our Lady of Fatima said that it will be done but it will be late, they have another litany of excuses, which I won't bother to list because they're all too stupid to docuмent. If you believe in the Mother of God and you believe that she really appeared to the Fatima children and spoke these things to her, you don't have any excuse. If you question her words or doubt the veracity of their report, then you don't believe She appeared or spoke or maybe you don't believe She exists. That's a possibility. I mean, people exist who don't believe God exists, so why wouldn't there be people extant who don't believe God's Mother exists?

If what Fr. Kramer suggests takes place, and a core number of Catholic cardinals and/or bishops get together and elect a Catholic Pope, naturally, the first thing they would do is to consecrate Russia to the IHM, in fulfillment of Our Lady's request. IF THEN RUSSIA CONVERTS, would that not be proof to the whole world that this conclave was acceptable to God, and therefore all the other bishops of the world would immediately lose their jurisdiction and authority, and would no longer be Catholic bishops?

Our Lady also said a period of peace would be granted to the world after Russia converts. That would fit in perfectly with the unfaithful bishops losing their bishoprics, and the restoration of the true Church under a truly Catholic pope and a converted Russia.

.

Ambrose · « **Reply #9 on:** November 29, 2013, 04:49:13 PM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

.

I don't enjoy quoting myself, and I did read the other posts on this thread, but I have something to say that derives directly from this, my previous post, so rather than presume that readers might know what I'm talking about, I'll quote this first so you can see right away:

Quote from: Neil Obstat
.

The sedevacante position thus far has been one of passive resistance, a rather "wait and see" approach, notwithstanding the fact that some number of men have been going around over the past many years, saying that THEY are pope.

"For many will come in my name saying, I am Christ, and they will seduce many" (Matt. xxiv. 5).

"If therefore they shall say to you : Behold he is in the desert, go ye not out : Behold he is in the closets, believe it not" (Matt. xxiv. 26).

"Behold, I have told it to you, beforehand... he that readeth let him understand" (xxiv. 25; 15 -- "beforehand" was 10 verses before verse 25).

Fr. Kramer's message is a bit different from the typical sede message. He's not for waiting at all. He says something must be done --- as soon as possible! There is an urgency in his words. He says that it wouldn't require all the cardinals to agree. He says that all it would take is a core few who remain faithful to Holy Mother Church to stand up and take action.

It is similar to the theory that any bishops who do not join with all the bishops of the world to do a particular act in religion that is essential and necessary for the Church, by their refusal to participate, they would cease to be Catholic bishops, and therefore all the bishops who DO participate in the necessary action are the only ones who would then remain Catholic bishops.

Two examples of this are with the Collegial Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary, and this proposed, necessary election of a Catholic pope to take the place of Francis/Bergoglio (because they would say, he is not Catholic, and desperate times call for desperate measures).

.

From time to time I hear sedes and their critics alike say that the Collegial Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary will not be done, for there will be no conversion of Russia, because A) there is no pope and there are no faithful Cardinals to elect one, and/or B) this pope, like all the other post-conciliar popes has no desire for or likelihood of doing the Consecration so it's a dead letter, "We missed the boat," or it's no longer possible, and we're beating a dead horse, wasting our time, being hopeful for the impossible, etc., etc.

When I remind them that Our Lady of Fatima said that it will be done but it will be late, they have another litany of excuses, which I won't bother to list because they're all too stupid to docuмent. If you believe in the Mother of God and you believe that she really appeared to the Fatima children and spoke these things to her, you don't have any excuse. If you question her words or doubt the veracity of their report, then you don't believe She appeared or spoke or maybe you don't believe She exists. That's a possibility. I mean, people exist who don't believe God exists, so why wouldn't there be people extant who don't believe God's Mother exists?

If what Fr. Kramer suggests takes place, and a core number of Catholic cardinals and/or bishops get together and elect a Catholic Pope, naturally, the first thing they would do is to consecrate Russia to the IHM, in fulfillment of Our Lady's request. IF THEN RUSSIA CONVERTS, would that not be proof to the whole world that this conclave was acceptable to God, and therefore all the other bishops of the world would immediately lose their jurisdiction and authority, and would no longer be Catholic bishops?

Our Lady also said a period of peace would be granted to the world after Russia converts. That would fit in perfectly with the unfaithful bishops losing their bishoprics, and the restoration of the true Church under a truly Catholic pope and a converted Russia.
.

Neil,

You are correct about this. I have been saying exactly what you have written in your post for years.

The lawful electors have had it in their power right from the beginning to denounce these heretics and elect a Pope.

The only points to resolve are how to identify who among the lawfully appointed hierarchy and the Clergy of Rome have kept the Faith, and secondly, how will it come about that they will meet in Council to elect a Pope.

Stubborn · « **Reply #10 on:** November 29, 2013, 05:37:09 PM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat

.

Fr. Kramer's message is a bit different from the typical sede message. He's not for waiting at all. He says something must be done --- as soon as possible! There is an urgency in his words. He says that it wouldn't require all the cardinals to agree. He says that all it would take is a core few who remain faithful to Holy Mother Church to stand up and take action.

..........

If what Fr. Kramer suggests takes place, and a core number of Catholic cardinals and/or bishops get together and elect a Catholic Pope, naturally, the first thing they would do is to consecrate Russia to the IHM, in fulfillment of Our Lady's request. IF THEN RUSSIA CONVERTS, would that not be proof to the whole world that this conclave was acceptable to God, and therefore all the other bishops of the world would immediately lose their jurisdiction and authority, and would no longer be Catholic bishops?

Neil,

Does Fr. Kramer think it is possible that the Cardinals did not know who they were electing in the first place? I mean, at least 2/3 of them - and who knows, maybe 9/10 or more of them knew they were electing someone whom they could depend on to be top buffoon, and after 50 years of their audacity, by now certainly we must believe his election was not by accident.

I think it is being extremely naive to think there *even is* a core few cardinals or bishops who remain faithful to Holy Mother Church, much less to stand up and take action - but if there is, who decides how many comprise a core? - and who decides whom these core few even are? - Fr. Kramer? Fr. Cekada? Richard Ibranyi? Peter Dimond? Etc. ad infinitum.

I don't believe that there are any cardinals left who remain faithful to Holy Mother the Church because if there were, they would have either left of their own accord a very long time ago or they would have been discovered, exposed, slandered and expelled from Club NO a long time ago - purged, same as all the others - "those lousy radical schismatics!"

I think the whole idea is too far out, at least at this time.

Ambrose · « **Reply #11 on:** November 29, 2013, 06:37:25 PM »

Quote from: Stubborn

Quote from: Neil Obstat
.

Fr. Kramer's message is a bit different from the typical sede message. He's not for waiting at all. He says something must be done --- as soon as possible! There is an urgency in his words. He says that it wouldn't require all the cardinals to agree. He says that all it would take is a core few who remain faithful to Holy Mother Church to stand up and take action.

..........

If what Fr. Kramer suggests takes place, and a core number of Catholic cardinals and/or bishops get together and elect a Catholic Pope, naturally, the first thing they would do is to consecrate Russia to the IHM, in fulfillment of Our Lady's request. IF THEN RUSSIA CONVERTS, would that not be proof to the whole world that this conclave was acceptable to God, and therefore all the other bishops of the world would immediately lose their jurisdiction and authority, and would no longer be Catholic bishops?

Neil,

Does Fr. Kramer think it is possible that the Cardinals did not know who they were electing in the first place? I mean, at least 2/3 of them - and who knows, maybe 9/10 or more of them knew they were electing someone whom they could depend on to be top buffoon, and after 50 years of their audacity, by now certainly we must believe his election was not by accident.

I think it is being extremely naive to think there *even is* a core few cardinals or bishops who remain faithful to Holy Mother Church, much less to stand up and take action - but if there is, who decides how many comprise a core? - and who decides whom these core few even are? - Fr. Kramer? Fr. Cekada? Richard Ibranyi? Peter Dimond? Etc. ad infinitum.

I don't believe that there are any cardinals left who remain faithful to Holy Mother the Church because if there were, they would have either left of their own accord a very long time ago or they would have been discovered, exposed, slandered and expelled from Club NO a long time ago - purged, same as all the others - "those lousy radical schismatics!"

I think the whole idea is too far out, at least at this time.

I agree there are no Cardinals, but that does not mean that there is no lawful electors.

Stubborn · « **Reply #12 on:** November 29, 2013, 08:11:27 PM »

Quote from: Ambrose

I agree there are no Cardinals, but that does not mean that there is no lawful electors.

Exactly who can or will determine and who is it that will authorize whom these lawful electors, this core group of true faithful Catholic authorities are or should be?

IMO, the only group who would consider any such thing would be only one or two of the SV groups.
The R&R trad groups would consider any such measures to be schismatic or at least wrong, so they are out.
The NO clergy, hierarchy and entire NO population are Conciliar Catholics and would not even want to consider doing such a thing in their wildest dreams - so they're out.

Who picks/authorizes/agrees upon the core group of lawful electors and who is / are the willing papal candidate(s)?

I still think the whole idea is too far out, way too far out, at least at this time.

stevusmagnus · « **Reply #13 on:** November 29, 2013, 08:16:58 PM »

Even if the Trad community somehow agreed upon electors, they'd never agree on a pope. Would Cekada or Pfeifer follow Pope Fellay? Would Fellay or the SSPX follow Cekada? Would any of the sedes follow any of the other sedes? Would anyone follow Pope Dimond? Pope Sanborn? We'd just fracture into a myriad of Trad papal claimants and look ridiculous.

stevusmagnus · « **Reply #14 on:** November 29, 2013, 08:25:06 PM »

Novus Ordo Watch has screenshots from Fr. Kramer's Twitter and Facebook accounts!

http://www.novusordowatch.org/wire/index.htm#.UplL-ZHFneI