Author Topic: That The Novus Ordo Liturgical Reform Is “Irreversible”  (Read 4489 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Stubborn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8250
  • Reputation: +2971/-553
  • Gender: Male
Re: That The Novus Ordo Liturgical Reform Is “Irreversible”
« Reply #90 on: August 29, 2017, 10:22:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • You quoted it.  You deny that you must be subject to his magisterium.
    Which dogma are you referring to that says "we must be subject to his magisterium"? Please quote it or explain in what way you claim I am denying it.


    Also, I will try one more time to see if I can pry an answer out of you, or at least garner some acknowledgement from you of the question I asked......

    ...we remain the pope's good subjects, but God's first. With this as the primary principle, what good can it do for our eternity or what need is there to ever denounce the pope as pope?
    I say that it is licit to resist the Roman Pontiff by not doing what he orders and by impeding the execution of his will; it is not licit, however, to judge, punish or depose him, since these are acts proper to a superior." St. Robert Bellarmine

    Offline An even Seven

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1726
    • Reputation: +723/-490
    • Gender: Male
    Re: That The Novus Ordo Liturgical Reform Is “Irreversible”
    « Reply #91 on: August 30, 2017, 08:15:51 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Which dogma are you referring to that says "we must be subject to his magisterium"? Please quote it or explain in what way you claim I am denying it.


    Also, I will try one more time to see if I can pry an answer out of you, or at least garner some acknowledgement from you of the question I asked......

    ...we remain the pope's good subjects, but God's first. With this as the primary principle, what good can it do for our eternity or what need is there to ever denounce the pope as pope?
    What good would it be for your eternity to be publically united or in the same "church" as Billy Graham or the Dali Lama(?) or any number or of infidels/pagans/jews/protestants?
    What does it mean to be subject to the Pope?
    "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."


    Offline An even Seven

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1726
    • Reputation: +723/-490
    • Gender: Male
    Re: That The Novus Ordo Liturgical Reform Is “Irreversible”
    « Reply #92 on: August 30, 2017, 10:43:31 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Can anyone identify the authority for rejecting the pope qua pope?

    I don't mean not going along with this or that - which the logicians extrapolate to rejecting the pope, even when the "rejector" denies rejecting - basically saying the the denier is full of . . .

    I mean authority for "if the pope is a heretic, don't follow him, not only in his heresy, but period. Consider the seat vacant."

    I'm aware of the logicians extrapolating per Bellarmine that a heretic is not a member of the Church, so the pope is not the pope, since he's not a member of the Church . . . " etc. Very interesting. Got it.

    But again - authority for Catholics rejecting the pope as pope and considering the see vacant? Authority beyond the logicians. Like Scripture, Church teaching, even theologians.

    Not the "can the pope be a heretic, and if so the upshot?" speculation. Straight forward teaching to guide us.

    Very curious.
    There is a difference between a Pope who becomes a heretic and a heretic who has the appearance of becoming Pope. Cum ex is explicit as to what we must do if a heretic is seemingly elected:

    Pope Paul IV, Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio:
    6. Adding that if at any time it will be found that some bishop, even conducting himself as an archbishop or patriarch or already mentioned cardinal of the Roman Church, even, as shown, a legate, or even a Roman Pontiff, before his promotion or assumption as cardinal or as Roman Pontiff had deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into some heresy, before his promotion or assumption as Cardinal or as Roman Pontiff, that promotion or assumption concerning him, even if made in concord and from the unanimous assent of all the cardinals, is null, void and worthless; not by the reception of consecration, not by the ensuing possession of the office and administration, or as if, either the enthronement or homage of the Roman Pontiff, or the obedience given to him by all, and the length of whatever time in the future, can be said to have recovered power or to be able to recover power, nor can (the assumption or promotion) be considered as legitimate in any part of it, and for those who are promoted as bishops or archbishops or patriarchs or assumed as primates, or as cardinals or even as Roman Pontiff, no faculty of administration in spiritual or temporal matters may be thought to have been attributed or to attribute, but may all things and each thing in any way said, done, effected and administered and then followed up in any way through them lack power and they are not able to attribute any further power nor right to anyone; and they themselves who are thus promoted and assumed by that very fact, without any further declaration to be made, are deprived of every dignity, place, honor, title, authority, function and power; and yet it is permitted to all and each so promoted and assumed, if they have not deviated from the Faith before nor have been heretics, nor have incurred or excited or committed schism.

    In the first part of Cum Ex, Pope Paul quickly discusses the issue of a Pope who becomes a heretic:



    Pope Paul IV, Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio: "

    1. We, considering these same things to be very grave and dangerous, that the Roman Pontiff, who rules the offices of God and our Lord Jesus Christ on earth and who holds the fullness of power over kingdoms and kings, and who judges all, and by no one at this time is judged, must, if found deviating from the Faith, be confuted, and that, where the greater the danger is intended, there it must be more fully and diligently reflected, lest pseudo prophets and others even having secular jurisdiction should wretchedly entrap simple souls and thereby drag innumerable peoples who are committed to their care and rule in spiritual and temporal matters with them into perdition and the ruin of eternal damnation, nor at some time should the abomination of desolation, which was spoken by Daniel the prophet as he was standing in the holy place, reach Us..."



    Pope Paul is telling us basically to resist a Pope's heretical teachings and correct them. The closest example to this in the history of the Church would be Honorius' failures and condemnation. This is disputed as to whether he was a formal heretic. All of this is moot as there is ample evidence that the recent claimants to the Papacy were proven heretics before election and the above teaching is the relevant one. In this case, the election is null and void and we continue in a state of vacancy.





    "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

    Online Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8250
    • Reputation: +2971/-553
    • Gender: Male
    Re: That The Novus Ordo Liturgical Reform Is “Irreversible”
    « Reply #93 on: August 31, 2017, 06:31:13 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • What good would it be for your eternity to be publically united or in the same "church" as Billy Graham or the Dali Lama(?) or any number or of infidels/pagans/jews/protestants?

    So yet again, not even one the sedes can't answer a clear question with a clear answer, at least you acknowledged it.
    Per the dogma, we are to be subject to the pope for our hope of salvation, not Billy Graham or the Dali Lama or etc. - but God first. Always, we are to be subject God first.

    The dogma clearly states that this is a necessary requirement for our salvation - there is no proviso for whether one thinks, believes, opines or even believes he has indisputable evidence that the pope is the pope or not.



    Quote
    What does it mean to be subject to the Pope?

    Because it is such a simple answer, I must admit that for a Catholic to even ask this question dumbfounds me, especially when they ask it repeatedly. I have tried to explain this many times but it is quite apparent that I cannot explain what it means to be subject to the pope, but God first - or subject to our parents, but God first, or subject to any of our superiors and all authority, but God first, always God first. So the best I can offer is below, if this is still insufficient, then you had best get praying.


    I'm guessing that most sede's do not already pray the nine day novena to the Holy Ghost every day, something I used to think, that, like the Morning Offering or the rosary, all Catholics did every day of their life. If I am guessing correctly, I suggest as strongly as possible that you start praying it every day with your family, and teach them to pray it every day of their life.

    Anyway, when we get to the Third Day, before we pray for it, we learn about the Gift of Piety:


    Quote
    The Gift of Piety begets in our hearts a filial affection for God as our most loving Father. It inspires us to love and respect for His sake persons and things consecrated to Him, as well as those who are vested with His authority, His Blessed Mother and the Saints, the Church and its visible Head, our parents and superiors, our country and its rulers. He who is filled with the gift of Piety finds the practice of his religion, not a burdensome duty, but a delightful service. Where there is love, there is no labor.


    It then concludes with the prayer:

    Come, O Blessed Spirit of Piety, possess my heart. Enkindle therein such a love for God, that I may find satisfaction only in His service, and for His sake lovingly submit to all legitimate authority. Amen.

    The Forward in the little booklet says:

    The novena in honor of the Holy Spirit is the oldest of all novenas since it was first made at the direction of Our Lord Himself when He sent His apostles back to Jerusalem to await the coming of the Holy Spirit on the first Pentecost. It is still the only novena officially prescribed by the Church. Addressed to the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity, it is a powerful plea for the light and strength and love so sorely needed by every Christian.
    I say that it is licit to resist the Roman Pontiff by not doing what he orders and by impeding the execution of his will; it is not licit, however, to judge, punish or depose him, since these are acts proper to a superior." St. Robert Bellarmine

    Offline TKGS

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4221
    • Reputation: +3607/-198
    • Gender: Male
    Re: That The Novus Ordo Liturgical Reform Is “Irreversible”
    « Reply #94 on: August 31, 2017, 07:04:57 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • So yet again, not even one the sedes can't answer a clear question with a clear answer...
    Actually, you have been given very clear answers to your questions.  It's the fog in your own head that prevents you from seeing them.


    Online Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8250
    • Reputation: +2971/-553
    • Gender: Male
    Re: That The Novus Ordo Liturgical Reform Is “Irreversible”
    « Reply #95 on: August 31, 2017, 07:35:33 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Actually, you have been given very clear answers to your questions.  It's the fog in your own head that prevents you from seeing them.
    Actually, you have never answered the question, you never answer questions I ask so what else is new? Not surprising since answering honestly would at least compromise your position, possibly clear up the fog in your own mind - can't have that now can we? It's obvious that you figure it's best that you keep not answering.

    Were you ever taught as a child, or ever, that we are not bound to obey anyone, not even the pope, if by obeying means sinning?
    I say that it is licit to resist the Roman Pontiff by not doing what he orders and by impeding the execution of his will; it is not licit, however, to judge, punish or depose him, since these are acts proper to a superior." St. Robert Bellarmine

    Offline An even Seven

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1726
    • Reputation: +723/-490
    • Gender: Male
    Re: That The Novus Ordo Liturgical Reform Is “Irreversible”
    « Reply #96 on: August 31, 2017, 08:34:20 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • So yet again, not even one the sedes can't answer a clear question with a clear answer, at least you acknowledged it.
    Per the dogma, we are to be subject to the pope for our hope of salvation, not Billy Graham or the Dali Lama or etc. - but God first. Always, we are to be subject God first.

    AES: This is quite a non-answer. The question you asked, I've answered many times. We must denounce the man claiming to be Pope because of many reasons. One big one is converts to the faith. If we are converting someone and are telling them about the Dogma about subjection to the Roman Pontiff or Pope Pius IX's teaching about obedience to the Pope, how can we expect them to adhere to these teachings when we claim we don't "always" need to be obedient? We would have to tell them that we can determine when we have to be obedient, that's not Catholic. This is where the teaching about membership in the Church comes in and the fact that we are not in communion with heretics nor should we ever consider heretics our Pope.
    As far as your "we are to be subject to God first" statement, this implies that it is not something that God revealed to us, that we must be subject to his Vicar on Earth. You act as though being subject to the Pope is not being subject to God or vice-versa. Being subject to the Pope IS being subject to God.


    The dogma clearly states that this is a necessary requirement for our salvation - there is no proviso for whether one thinks, believes, opines or even believes he has indisputable evidence that the pope is the pope or not.

    AES:This is because it is not relevant to the situation. That's why I bring up the other religions as examples. Do you not get this? Being subject to the Pope is DIFFERENT than being subject to a non-Pope or protestant minister etc... If they are not Catholic, what subjection do we owe. Professing the faith and Baptism are the two requirements for being Catholic. If one is lacking on the part of another, we are not in communion with them. You claim the opposite when you state that we must be subject to a heretic.

    Because it is such a simple answer, I must admit that for a Catholic to even ask this question dumbfounds me, especially when they ask it repeatedly. I have tried to explain this many times but it is quite apparent that I cannot explain what it means to be subject to the pope, but God first - or subject to our parents, but God first, or subject to any of our superiors and all authority, but God first, always God first.

    AES: This is why I don't like arguing this with you. You ignore what the argument is and the one I'm making. You ignore the teaching in cum ex and often cite a different part that is not relevant. A person who's a heretic before election cannot be elected. Even if he could, as soon as the election is over, he would still be a heretic and have no lawful authority in the Church since he is not part of it. You argue with me as if I believe these recent claimants somehow were elected, were valid Popes, and then lost their office. I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS. They were never elected in the first place since the election of a heretic is null and void. Citing a novena, which I do not disagree with, only shows you cannot argue your own point. Especially with the admissions you've had in the past. For instance, you believe that these claimants are heretics and you also recently admitted that heretics are not in the Church. This makes it very hard for you to still claim that these men can still be Popes. You have to really distort the Church and break it up into multiple Churches to do this. To claim that the Pope is head of the Catholic Church and separately the head of a different "conciliar" "church" is not Catholic and can be supported by no Church teaching.
    "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

    Online Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8250
    • Reputation: +2971/-553
    • Gender: Male
    Re: That The Novus Ordo Liturgical Reform Is “Irreversible”
    « Reply #97 on: August 31, 2017, 10:51:03 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • AES: This is quite a non-answer. The question you asked, I've answered many times. We must denounce the man claiming to be Pope because of many reasons. One big one is converts to the faith. If we are converting someone and are telling them about the Dogma about subjection to the Roman Pontiff or Pope Pius IX's teaching about obedience to the Pope, how can we expect them to adhere to these teachings when we claim we don't "always" need to be obedient? We would have to tell them that we can determine when we have to be obedient, that's not Catholic. This is where the teaching about membership in the Church comes in and the fact that we are not in communion with heretics nor should we ever consider heretics our Pope.


    This is already way, way beyond ridiculous. You asked: "If we are converting someone and are telling them about the Dogma about subjection to the Roman Pontiff or Pope Pius IX's teaching about obedience to the Pope, how can we expect them to adhere to these teachings when we claim we don't "always" need to be obedient?"  Because you must start with the elementary and fundamental Catholic principle that we are not permitted to obey anyone, not even the pope if by obeying means sinning. Exactly what is it about this simple Catholic principle that you do not understand anyway?

    Were you ever taught as a child, or ever, that we are not bound to obey anyone, not even the pope, if by obeying means sinning?


    AES: As far as your "we are to be subject to God first" statement, this implies that it is not something that God revealed to us, that we must be subject to his Vicar on Earth. You act as though being subject to the Pope is not being subject to God or vice-versa. Being subject to the Pope IS being subject to God.

    WHAT?? This probably the most ridiculous thing you have EVER posted. The pope is NOT God - give me a flipping break! The pope did not create the universe out of nothing, nor did he split the Red Sea, do any miracles or etc. ad nausem. We MUST disobey him if obeying him means sinning - were you ever taught this?

    I take for granted that all Catholics know this or were taught this and live by this basic Catholic principle, but I am obviously wrong, particularly for those not born and raised in the true faith. But now that you know this, I do not understand how you cannot apply this to the whole "pope problem" you sede's have - and the reason you would apply it is in order to be in adherence with the dogma. 



    AES: This is why I don't like arguing this with you. You ignore what the argument is and the one I'm making. You ignore the teaching in cum ex and often cite a different part that is not relevant. A person who's a heretic before election cannot be elected. Even if he could, as soon as the election is over, he would still be a heretic and have no lawful authority in the Church since he is not part of it. You argue with me as if I believe these recent claimants somehow were elected, were valid Popes, and then lost their office. I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS.

    I do not ignore what the argument is, nor the teaching of Cum ex. I am simply trying to convince you that we have no authority *or reason*, nor are we even permitted  to decide the status of the pope.

    I am arguing the core, which is the fact that you do not understand or refuse to accept the indisputable fact that it does not matter whether you "believe this" or not - per the dogma. We have no choice in the matter - per the dogma. You cannot prove the pope is not the pope, and if you could, because you are nobody, it still would not matter - per the dogma. You must be subject to the man elected and accepted as pope - that is dogma.

    The Church has never given anyone the luxury or option of deciding the status of the man elected by all the cardinals and accepted as pope by the whole world - that man is the pope. No matter how heretical or how evil, no matter how great or holy, after he is elected we have no reason, absolutely, positively zero reason whatsoever to decide his status as long as we remain faithful and faithful to the fundamental Catholic principle that teaches if obeying him means sinning, we are not bound to obey him.

    What is so difficult to accept about this?




    I say that it is licit to resist the Roman Pontiff by not doing what he orders and by impeding the execution of his will; it is not licit, however, to judge, punish or depose him, since these are acts proper to a superior." St. Robert Bellarmine


    Offline An even Seven

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1726
    • Reputation: +723/-490
    • Gender: Male
    Re: That The Novus Ordo Liturgical Reform Is “Irreversible”
    « Reply #98 on: August 31, 2017, 12:13:16 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • AES: As far as your "we are to be subject to God first" statement, this implies that it is not something that God revealed to us, that we must be subject to his Vicar on Earth. You act as though being subject to the Pope is not being subject to God or vice-versa. Being subject to the Pope IS being subject to God.

    WHAT?? This probably the most ridiculous thing you have EVER posted. The pope is NOT God - give me a flipping break!
    This seems ridiculous to you because you do not know what it means to be subject to the Pope.

    Quote
    AES: This is why I don't like arguing this with you. You ignore what the argument is and the one I'm making. You ignore the teaching in cum ex and often cite a different part that is not relevant. A person who's a heretic before election cannot be elected. Even if he could, as soon as the election is over, he would still be a heretic and have no lawful authority in the Church since he is not part of it. You argue with me as if I believe these recent claimants somehow were elected, were valid Popes, and then lost their office. I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS.

    I do not ignore what the argument is, nor the teaching of Cum ex. I am simply trying to convince you that we have no authority *or reason*, nor are we even permitted  to decide the status of the pope.
    What gives you the authority to decide the status of the "pope" as a heretic? Where is the teaching that a formal/manifest/public heretic remains in the Church?
    "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

    Online Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8250
    • Reputation: +2971/-553
    • Gender: Male
    Re: That The Novus Ordo Liturgical Reform Is “Irreversible”
    « Reply #99 on: August 31, 2017, 01:47:29 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • This seems ridiculous to you because you do not know what it means to be subject to the Pope.
    What gives you the authority to decide the status of the "pope" as a heretic? Where is the teaching that a formal/manifest/public heretic remains in the Church?
    No, it does not *seem* ridiculous to me, it absolutely *is* completely ridiculous because the pope can (and obviously) has been wrong to the point of preaching and promoting obvious, multiple heresies while going out of his way to ridicule and denounce true Catholicity on numerous different occasions - no one disputes this.

    There is no teaching that a "formal/manifest/public heretic remains in the Church" as far as I or anyone here knows, I looked and could not find it - but who cares - that is NOT the issue. This is an issue of true obedience to the highest authority on earth, not blind obedience to a man you make into a god, which is forbidden.

    What possible good does it do to parade around proclaiming, as if you imagine that the Church has already proclaimed it, that the pope is not the pope? You've lived without the benefit of a holy pope, with popes hell bent on the destruction of the Church your whole life - has this been a source of scandal such as the Church has never seen? - yes. Besides praying for him, is there anything you can do about it? - no. Are you in hell? - no.  Has the Church been destroyed? - no. Have others gone to hell on account of the scandal - yes, but why? Because they were offered the wide road and even though they knew better, took it. Yet, they ALL had the same chances as you. Without exception, everyone of the souls in hell cannot blame anyone except themselves for their eternal perdition - even those who died since V2. 

    It is DOGMA that we, each and every human being without exception, must be subject to him or we end up in hell. If you guess wrong about his status - and all evidence points to you being absolutely wrong, then you will never get to heaven. THAT IS DOGMA. If you guess wrong, you just guessed yourself into hell forever  FOR ABSOLUTELY NO REASON because all you actually need to do is live the true faith, and intrinsic within it is the fundamental principle that we cannot obey anyone, not an angel and not even the pope, if obeying means sinning. 

    If he ever utters something Catholic that we need to obey, and no one is holding their breath for this, but what problem would a Catholic have obeying? Would you purposely disobey a command given for the general good of the Church because you think he's not the pope? Do you see the rampant stupidity involved in the "pope problem"?
    I say that it is licit to resist the Roman Pontiff by not doing what he orders and by impeding the execution of his will; it is not licit, however, to judge, punish or depose him, since these are acts proper to a superior." St. Robert Bellarmine

    Offline An even Seven

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1726
    • Reputation: +723/-490
    • Gender: Male
    Re: That The Novus Ordo Liturgical Reform Is “Irreversible”
    « Reply #100 on: August 31, 2017, 02:27:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • No, it does not *seem* ridiculous to me, it absolutely *is* completely ridiculous because the pope can (and obviously) has been wrong to the point of preaching and promoting obvious, multiple heresies while going out of his way to ridicule and denounce true Catholicity on numerous different occasions - no one disputes this.

    AES: I dispute this. JXXIII-F1 have preached and promoted heresies, a Pope has not because a true Pope cannot.

    There is no teaching that a "formal/manifest/public heretic remains in the Church" as far as I or anyone here knows, I looked and could not find it - but who cares - that is NOT the issue.

    AES: The fact that you looked says a lot about you. Especially since there are numerous and obvious teachings that a heretic is separated from the Church.

    What possible good does it do to parade around proclaiming, as if you imagine that the Church has already proclaimed it, that the pope is not the pope?

    AES: Again, I do not do this. I parade around proclaiming that a man claiming to be pope is not the Pope. Someday you'll understand I hope.


    It is DOGMA that we, each and every human being without exception, must be subject to him or we end up in hell.

    AES: What does it mean to be subject to him?


    If he ever utters something Catholic that we need to obey, and no one is holding their breath for this, but what problem would a Catholic have obeying?

    AES: The Pope judges all and is judged by no one, but you seem to believe that you can sit and judge the orthodoxy of everything he has to say. To determine what you judge is worthy to obey or disregard.
    "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."


    Offline DZ PLEASE

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2934
    • Reputation: +735/-773
    • Gender: Male
    • "Lord, have mercy."
    Re: That The Novus Ordo Liturgical Reform Is “Irreversible”
    « Reply #101 on: August 31, 2017, 02:41:16 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

  • 1. Obstinate: "It is DOGMA that we, each and every human being without exception, must be subject to him or we end up in hell. If you guess (?) wrong about his status ...then you will never get to heaven. THAT IS DOGMA. If you guess wrong, you just guessed yourself into hell forever  FOR ABSOLUTELY NO REASON because all you actually need to do is live the true faith..."

     1. see, e.g., "The Great Western Schism"


    "Lord, have mercy".

    Offline graceseeker

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 813
    • Reputation: +91/-128
    • Gender: Male
    Re: That The Novus Ordo Liturgical Reform Is “Irreversible”
    « Reply #102 on: August 31, 2017, 02:58:26 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Francis Proclaims “With Certainty” And “Magisterial Authority” That The Novus Ordo Liturgical Reform Is “Irreversible”


    On Thursday, Aug. 24, 2017, during an address to the 68th National Italian Liturgical Week, Francis affirmed “with certainty” and “with magisterial authority” that the post-Vatican II Liturgical form (which of course includes the abominable New Mass) is “irreversible”.Francis’ statement is another devastating blow to false traditionalists and to non-sedevacantists who still hope in vain in the Vatican II sect and its apostate antipopes.  It again smashes the myth under which so many of them operate: namely, that the Vatican II antipopes have not tried to authoritatively impose any of the evils or false doctrines of the Vatican II sect (such as the New Mass and Vatican II).  Yes, they have; but they have not been protected by God because they are not valid popes.
    Francis’ statement is another confirmation that the Vatican II sect is not the Catholic Church, but a Counter Church led by heretical antipopes.  Catholics who hold that the Chair of St. Peter is vacant are correct, and there’s no way to obstinately recognize the Vatican II antipopes and be truly traditional.  There is hope in the true Catholic Church, but there is no hope in the Vatican II sect.  That’s because it’s not the Catholic Church, but the prophesied end-times Counter Church.

    From MHFM
    I agree
    and I don't see how anyone can disagree.. 
    you could say what you just said
    and/or what I say
    Satan has taken over the Church

    Online Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8250
    • Reputation: +2971/-553
    • Gender: Male
    Re: That The Novus Ordo Liturgical Reform Is “Irreversible”
    « Reply #103 on: August 31, 2017, 03:20:06 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • AES: I dispute this. JXXIII-F1 have preached and promoted heresies, a Pope has not because a true Pope cannot.

    Disputing it does not equate to anything at all. It certainly will not excuse you.


    AES: The fact that you looked says a lot about you. Especially since there are numerous and obvious teachings that a heretic is separated from the Church.

    Yes, it says that I make mistakes and will readily admit as much when it happens.


    AES: Again, I do not do this. I parade around proclaiming that a man claiming to be pope is not the Pope. Someday you'll understand I hope.

    As I said, Disputing it does not equate to anything at all. It certainly will not excuse you.


    AES: What does it mean to be subject to him?

    Do you pray your novena to the Holy Ghost? If not, start.

    It means to "love and respect for His sake persons and things consecrated to Him, as well as those who are vested with His authority, His Blessed Mother and the Saints, the Church and its visible Head, our parents and superiors, our country and its rulers. He who is filled with the gift of Piety finds the practice of his religion, not a burdensome duty, but a delightful service. Where there is love, there is no labor."


    AES: The Pope judges all and is judged by no one, but you seem to believe that you can sit and judge the orthodoxy of everything he has to say. To determine what you judge is worthy to obey or disregard.

    Here is an excuse I can hardly believe is popular among Catholics who are supposed to know better. I assume you are well aware of what displeases God, but were you ever taught that we are not bound to obey even the pope if obeying means sinning?


    Do you realize that what you are actually doing, is you are seeing a world of NOers reject graces as a rule, then you are blaming the pope for their rejecting the graces. So, what's the difference between you and them? What's your excuse for accepting the graces to keep the faith of your own free will while they choose of their own free will to reject those exact same graces? Or do you suppose you have a superior intellect?  
    I say that it is licit to resist the Roman Pontiff by not doing what he orders and by impeding the execution of his will; it is not licit, however, to judge, punish or depose him, since these are acts proper to a superior." St. Robert Bellarmine

    Online Stubborn

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8250
    • Reputation: +2971/-553
    • Gender: Male
    Re: That The Novus Ordo Liturgical Reform Is “Irreversible”
    « Reply #104 on: August 31, 2017, 03:23:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 1. Obstinate: "It is DOGMA that we, each and every human being without exception, must be subject to him or we end up in hell. If you guess (?) wrong about his status ...then you will never get to heaven. THAT IS DOGMA. If you guess wrong, you just guessed yourself into hell forever  FOR ABSOLUTELY NO REASON because all you actually need to do is live the true faith..."

     1. see, e.g., "The Great Western Schism"
    So do you expect a prize because you think you've figured out how to circumvent the dogma and get away with it?
    I say that it is licit to resist the Roman Pontiff by not doing what he orders and by impeding the execution of his will; it is not licit, however, to judge, punish or depose him, since these are acts proper to a superior." St. Robert Bellarmine

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16