Author Topic: Resisting An Infallible Pope? (Read 1087 times)

icarlytradcath · « **Reply #20 on:** **Yesterday** at 01:09:52 PM »

Quote from: Angelus on Yesterday at 11:48:40 AM

The binary thinking you suggest is problematic. One will not be condemned to everlasting Hell simply for not solving "the Pope problem," i.e. for simply professing abstractly that Leo is "the Holy Father."

But who the Pope is has consequences downstream in the realm of faith and morals in the actions of individual Catholics. If you think Leo is the Pope and he says all religions lead to God and ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ relationships can be blessed, then you have a conundrum. You say, "well I don't personally believe that" while at the same time saying that the guy who does say that is the Vicar of Christ on earth.

Do you not see any logical contradiction? You are signaling to all who know you that you don't really think it matters if we have "differences of opinion" on these issues of faith and morals. We are all one big Catholic family under the big tent of synodality. Sure we have disagreements but "can't we all just get along." That is a form of indifferentism. And it is the stated goal of the Freemasonic project.

Do you think that is what Jesus taught? Following Him, we are to testify to the Truth even if it causes us to suffer death. We are not to compromise and prop up corrupt, false authorities who claim to speak in the name of Jesus while contradicting Him. That is to cause scandal, and the theologians call it cooperation with evil, a sin against charity.

So, will those Catholics who cooperate materially with evil be damned to Hell eternally. I don't think so. But they probably won't go straight to Heaven if they have failed to understand one of the fundamental lessons that Jesus taught. Purgatory is not a desirable destination according to the Saints. We should seek to be pleasing to God in all our thoughts, words and deeds. If we do so, and take advantage of the graces supplied by the Church's Sacraments and indulgences, then we have a chance to merit the beatific vision immediately.

How then do we avoid Purgatory? We are, first, to love God with all our mind, soul and strength and, second, to love our neighbor as ourselves. Primarily this consists in keeping the Ten Commandments and striving to avoid even venial sins.

But do we show our love for God when we call someone the Vicar of Christ who contradicts the teachings of Jesus Himself? Do we show our love for our neighbor when we tell other Catholics they must recognize a false prophet as the Pope (or else they will be outside of the Church where there is no salvation)?

The answer, of course, is no. Doing those things we reveal our lukewarmness. To the lukewarm in Apocalypse 3:19, Jesus says "Be zealous therefore, and do penance." Those who cooperate with evil out of laziness or convenience are not practicing zeal. And a person who thinks they are a traditional Catholic, in these times, must be zealous to keep their faith alive.

A zealous Catholic does not call a heretic "the Holy Father."

My 2 cents is that at the end of the day the modern situation is not like the Anglican schism that was totally transparent, it's more like the Western Schism where your average fella was like "I really don't know what's going on man I'm just trying my best to be a good Catholic and get to heaven"

People that go to the FSSP or SSPX or CMRI usually aren't just your typical cultural Catholics going to the nearest church to tick a box, they're clearly thinking about these things and trying their best to do the will of God in good faith.

I'm not a sede myself but I know most sedes are sedes out of a sense of wanting to do the will of God, have valid sacraments and because they believe that's what the Church has taught regarding ipso facto loss of office. I see how someone can reach that position in good faith.

R&R are R&R so out of a sense of wanting to do the will of God, have valid sacraments, remain united to Christ's Church, and because they believe that sedevacantism contradicts the Four Marks of the Church.

I'm certainly not worried about the salvation of either solely on account of their position. Jesus knows that that we live in an upside down clown world and it's all very confusing and weird.

Maybe this reads as relativism or contradicting EENS but does anyone think that when a random miller that died during the Western Schism came to judgement God said "You were a good Catholic and all but sorry, pal, you followed Pope Luna, so no Paradise for you", we know for a fact that that's not the case because we honour multiple saints who followed the antipopes, most namely St. Vicent Ferrer and St. Colette.

In a similar way, if someone has done their best to reach the truth of the matter on this, but they turned out to be wrong, I feel like if they were good Catholic God will say something like "Eh, these things happen, I did choose some confusing times for you to live in, come right in after your purgatory"

icarlytradcath · « **Reply #21 on:** **Yesterday** at 01:37:31 PM »

Quote from: icarlytradcath on Yesterday at 01:09:52 PM

My 2 cents is that at the end of the day the modern situation is not like the Anglican schism that was totally transparent, it's more like the Western Schism where your average fella was like "I really don't know what's going on man I'm just trying my best to be a good Catholic and get to heaven"

People that go to the FSSP or SSPX or CMRI usually aren't just your typical cultural Catholics going to the nearest church to tick a box, they're clearly thinking about these things and trying their best to do the will of God in good faith.

I'm not a sede myself but I know most sedes are sedes out of a sense of wanting to do the will of God, have valid sacraments and because they believe that's what the Church has taught regarding ipso facto loss of office. I see how someone can reach that position in good faith.

R&R are R&R so out of a sense of wanting to do the will of God, have valid sacraments, remain united to Christ's Church, and because they believe that sedevacantism contradicts the Four Marks of the Church.

I'm certainly not worried about the salvation of either solely on account of their position. Jesus knows that that we live in an upside down clown world and it's all very confusing and weird.

Maybe this reads as relativism or contradicting EENS but does anyone think that when a random miller that died during the Western Schism came to judgement God said "You were a good Catholic and all but sorry, pal, you followed Pope Luna, so no Paradise for you", we know for a fact that that's not the case because we honour multiple saints who followed the antipopes, most namely St. Vicent Ferrer and St. Colette.

In a similar way, if someone has done their best to reach the truth of the matter on this, but they turned out to be wrong, I feel like if they were good Catholic God will say something like "Eh, these things happen, I did choose some confusing times for you to live in, come right in after your purgatory"

This reminds me of the Eastern Orthodox and the Oriental Orthodox.

The Eastern Orthodox accept the Council of Chalcedon, which taught that "Christ exists in two distinct natures—one fully divine, one fully human—coexisting in one single person (hypostasis)".

The Oriental Orthodox reject this, they say that Chalcedon was not an ecuмenical council but a heretical pseudo-council, they believe that "Christ's divinity and humanity were completely united into one unique, composite divine-human nature".

Now I believe in the first one because a Council said it, but if I didn't know it and you told me "Here you have a Bible and every Church Father from 33 to 451 A.D, figure out which is true" I don't know that I could if you gave me a 100 years.

I feel like it's the same with the sede question, because it boils down to "Does a heretic pope ipso facto lose his office?" with certain nuances on that loss. Is one is expected to learn ecclesiastical latin and read many brilliant canonists and theologians who disagree on it and somehow decide who was right, I don't know how exactly?

OABrownson1876 · « **Reply #22 on:** **Yesterday** at 01:49:30 PM »

It would be interesting to give a blind question to the seminarians at the current SSPX seminary in Virginia and ask the question, "Given the circuмstances in the Church, do you believe Leo is pope?" Even though the SSPX seminary is far different than during my days in the mid 90's under Bp. Williamson, I would bet that perhaps half the seminarians would say Leo is not the pope, or possibly not the pope. The whole situation with the new rites of priesthood and episcopal consecration changes things. With John Paul II in the mid 90's at least we all knew that he was a valid priest and bishop, so then the argument changes a bit. Then the Sede must say, JP II is a valid bishop who parades as the pope. Also, there were a few Pius XII cardinals still in the Conclave in '78.

Angelus · « **Reply #23 on:** **Yesterday** at 01:54:49 PM »

Quote from: icarlytradcath on Yesterday at 01:09:52 PM

My 2 cents is that at the end of the day the modern situation is not like the Anglican schism that was totally transparent, it's more like the Western Schism where your average fella was like "I really don't know what's going on man I'm just trying my best to be a good Catholic and get to heaven"

People that go to the FSSP or SSPX or CMRI usually aren't just your typical cultural Catholics going to the nearest church to tick a box, they're clearly thinking about these things and trying their best to do the will of God in good faith.

I'm not a sede myself but I know most sedes are sedes out of a sense of wanting to do the will of God, have valid sacraments and because they believe that's what the Church has taught regarding ipso facto loss of office. I see how someone can reach that position in good faith.

R&R are R&R so out of a sense of wanting to do the will of God, have valid sacraments, remain united to Christ's Church, and because they believe that sedevacantism contradicts the Four Marks of the Church.

I'm certainly not worried about the salvation of either solely on account of their position. Jesus knows that that we live in an upside down clown world and it's all very confusing and weird.

Maybe this reads as relativism or contradicting EENS but does anyone think that when a random miller that died during the Western Schism came to judgement God said "You were a good Catholic and all but sorry, pal, you followed Pope Luna, so no Paradise for you", we know for a fact that that's not the case because we honour multiple saints who followed the antipopes, most namely St. Vicent Ferrer and St. Colette.

In a similar way, if someone has done their best to reach the truth of the matter on this, but they turned out to be wrong, I feel like if they were good Catholic God will say something like "Eh, these things happen, I did choose some confusing times for you to live in, come right in after your purgatory"

You seem to think what we are just experiencing is a bump in the road. But this is nothing like the Western Schism, which was a crisis of authority, not of the Faith.

No, we are living in the prophesied final days of the Church just prior to the return of Jesus Christ. Jesus said to pay attention to the signs of the times.

The primary sign according to Jesus is the abomination of desolation in the holy place (Matthew 24). St. Paul describes the period (2 Thessalonians 2) by focusing on the "man of sin" who sets himself up in the temple of God, acting as if he has God authority but condones sin. St. John describes it in the Apocalypse using the image of the Beast and False Prophet, who lead those who follow them to destruction (Apocalypse 13). This is a consistent pattern and the Church Fathers and Doctors have confirmed this scriptural interpretation.

All of these examples point to a false leader who deceives "the elect" (Catholics) and his counterfeit Catholic Church (Babylon). In Apocalypse 18, we are told to flee this man and his institution so that we do not share in its sins. Synodality is the satanic inversion of the Faith and it is being promoted in full by the false Church.

If you will read these warnings, you will see that God does not sound anything like the final quote in your post. He says the consequences for some in his Church during this period will be severe. He says the deception/confusion will not be avoidable for those who do not love the truth (2 Thessalonians 2). But for those who do love the truth and refuse to consent to the evil doers, there will be salvation.

DecemRationis · « **Reply #24 on:** **Yesterday** at 01:55:26 PM »

Quote from: Angelus on Yesterday at 11:48:40 AM

Do you think that is what Jesus taught? Following Him, we are to testify to the Truth even if it causes us to suffer death. We are not to compromise and prop up corrupt, false authorities who claim to speak in the name of Jesus while contradicting Him. That is to cause scandal, and the theologians call it cooperation with evil, a sin against charity.

. . .

A zealous Catholic does not call a heretic "the Holy Father."

Angelus,

You're certainly not lukewarm, but your zeal overshoots the mark.

This is what Jesus taught, and how the Apostles acted accordingly:

Quote

Matthew 16:11-12 Why do you not understand that I said not of bread to you: Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, & Sadducees? Then they understood that he said not they should beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees.

Matthew 23: 15 Woe to you Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites: because you go round about the sea and the land, to make one proselyte: and when he is made, you make him the child of hell double more than yourselves.

Acts 2:7-9 And when they had brought them, they set them in the Council. And the high Priest asked them, saying: Commanding we commanded you that you should not teach in this name: and behold you have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and you will bring upon us the blood of this man. But Peter answering and the Apostles, said: God must be obeyed, rather than men.

Acts 25:2-5 And the high priest Ananias commanded them that stood by him to strike him on the mouth. Then Paul said to him: God shall strike thee, thou whited wall. For sittest thou to judge me according to the law, and contrary to the law commandest me to be struck? And they that stood by said: Dost thou revile the high priest of God? And Paul said: I knew not, brethren, that he is the high priest. For it is written: 1Thou shalt not speak evil of the prince of thy people.

Matthew 23:1-3 Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to his disciples, Saying: The scribes and the Pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses. All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works do ye not; for they say, and do not.

I changed the order, putting Matthew 23:1-2 last, because, despite them being "children of hell," whose "doctrine" one must beware of, Our Lord said the Pharisees sat in Moses' seat, and should be listened to by virtue of the seat. Yet obviously not when they command contrary to God, as with certain traditions of theirs which "transgress" or "make void" the commandment of God. Matthew 15, Mark 7.

Peter and Paul were confronted by those on "the chair of Moses." Did they tell those "whited sepulchres,"you lost all authority, and have no power over me? No. Peter said, they ought to obey God rather than them, and Paul said he didn't know he was insulting the high priest.

God took care of the High Priest and the Pharisees on His own, abolishing their office and destroying their Temple while some of that generation still lived.

He'll take care of this group of Pharisees as well.

In the meantime, they sit in the seat, and we obey God.

**********************************************************************************************************

I believe the current Pharisees are in that nowhere land that the High Priest and Pharisees inhabited between the Crucifixion, when the Temple veil was torn, and the destruction of Jerusalem. They are leaders in an Assembly being emptied of God and being made void, and ready to vanish away:

Quote

Heb. 8:13 Now in saying a new, he hath made the former old. And that which decayeth and groweth old, is near its end.

The Church age of the spread of the gospel and an indefectible hierarchy is gone, and the eternal age of a new heaven and earth is in the offing.

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: Resisting An Infallible Pope? (Read 1087 times)

icarlytradcath

Re: Resisting An Infallible Pope?

icarlytradcath

Re: Resisting An Infallible Pope?

OABrownson1876

Re: Resisting An Infallible Pope?

Angelus

Re: Resisting An Infallible Pope?

DecemRationis

Re: Resisting An Infallible Pope?