Once upon a time an evil witch visits a kingdom and poisons the central well with a potion that drives people mad. The next morning all who drink from that well go crazy. The king, however, knew about this in advance, and didn’t drink from the communal well. The next day, those who drank the poisoned water came to the king and accused him of being the crazy one. The king, aware of what had transpired, was faced with a dilemma: drink from the well and lose his sanity like the rest of his subjects, but remain king; or don’t drink, remain sane, but be swept from power by those who would view his very sanity as madness.


Lets talk real world. We have  a Pope Francis who may not even be a priest due to being ordained in the new rite by a new rite consecrated bishop who may not be a bishop. He is a heretic (all progressivists are heretics), acting as the pope, ruling over a hierarchy of heretics who will not call Francis or themselves heretics, and we laymen do not have the authority to declare them heretics. That is the reality.

All progressivists are heretics. Modernism and progressivism was called by Pius X  the synthesis of all heresies. That means THE heresy of all heresies!
In scripture, the term gates of hell has been explained by the Fathers to mean heretics. They fool the sheep into hell.

Like the fable above we have to decide, do we not make waves or join the insane, the progressivists, and return to a normal life, or do we continue to separate ourselves from them and expose them for what they are, insane?

All of the Ecclesia Dei groups have joined the insane or chosen to not make waves. Now, Bp. Fellay and his XSSPX followers have decided to do the same.

All progressivist have lost the faith or their marbles (one has to have lost at least one of the two to become a progressivist). Call a spade a spade.

Only an insane person would allow this to be done to them:

I don't have the time anymore to post much on CI, however, the few times now that I post has been in response to people defending the accord. Everytime I've posted I've said basically the same thing and I never get a response, why no response? Because it is undeniable that B16 and Francis are progressivists and modernists the synthesis of ALL Heresies, thus they are heretics. It is undeniable that they are progressivists. So, why should we join with heretics?

Here's an example from another thread, and no response again.

Quote from: Nishant

Quote from: Bowler

Francis who may not be a priest, who is a progressivist (all progressivists are heretics), acting as the pope, ruling over a hierarchy of progressivists who will not call themselves heretics, and we laymen do not have the authority to declare them heretics.

Have you carefully considered before you "talk real world" the relevant Catholic principles you must be aware of if you are not to come to an incorrect conclusion? For example things like, all offices in the Church cannot simultaneously be vacant, only the Pope can appoint Bishops to an office etc. Your statements taken literally would imply you do not take that into consideration. These timeless and certain truths must inform our judgment of the present situation, otherwise we are so much the more liable to err.

Here is what I said, in other words:
1) Is Francis a progressivist? Yes or No? If he is, then he is a heretic.

2) I said, he may not be a priest, is that possible? Yes it is.

Your "Catholic principals" have nothing to do with those two observations, it is irrelevant.


Besides, the Church can have bishops without they being appointed by the pope. It has in the past, it has them now. ...Your thoughts are really irrelevant, they have nothing to do with what I said. (and I am not a sedevacantes). You are not thinking right, and your conclusion will be ... (that) He is the pope, therefore, what he does can somehow be explained in a Catholic light.

The Resistance!  The uprising against the possible moving over of SSPX to Rome.

Every word was worth reading, excepting harsh uncharitable ones.

My words may be simple, and I have no doubt mis-read by some clever clogg!

But, here in England, we do NOT have any watering down (that I have heard) of the Faith.  We do not want to join Rome.  We do not believe in the heresies being spoken / demonstrated from the Top down.  Two miracles and we get a Saint???  (the list is endless on the problems / heresies which are illustrated elsewhere).

But neither do you have the right to denigrate, ridicule, and generally be rude (calling people 'insane') and make the judgement that they have 'gone over' to modernist Rome.  How dare you judge with your sweeping statements all SSPX faithful.  You sound like the Pharisee who pays his tithes, knows right from wrong, and judged the poor sinner unworthy.  Be careful your words are not your downfall.

Your words appear full of pride.

We are not blind. We can see the sad descent of Rome.  Some of us were the victims of the 70s and 80s; Deo Gratias we were brought to the True Faith by the SSPX.  But we can pray, it is our FIRST DUTY to pray, for who knows when God will answer or how He will answer.  And that includes praying for our enemies!

To speak truthfully of the heresies is one thing; to make aware of the shortcomings, the pitfalls, the watering down of the Faith in some areas, Great!  But to pour scorn over others simply because they do not jump into your boat is quite another.

Your attitudes are unwelcoming, closed, and disparaging.  While you are RIGHT about the many matters you have brought up and for which I personally am grateful, you make me hesitate and want never to jump ship.

Lets talk real world. We have  a Pope Francis who may not even be a priest due to being ordained in the new rite by a new rite consecrated bishop who may not be a bishop. He is a heretic (all progressivists are heretics), acting as the pope, ruling over a hierarchy of heretics who will not call Francis or themselves heretics, and we laymen do not have the authority to declare them heretics. That is the reality.

This, I believe, is a factual error.  What we laymen do not have the authority to do is to bind the consciences of others as to the status of these people claiming to be Catholic priests, bishops, and popes.  On the other hand, we not only have the authority, but also the responsibility to speak the truth when we see it.  

The layman, Eusebius, did not have any authority when he publicly declared that the bishop, Nestorius, had lost his office because of a single heretical declaration in his Christmas sermon.  The Church never disciplined any layman who did not follow Eusebius's declaration and who remained faithful to Nestorius until he was formally deposed due to heresy.  But the Church did punish anyone who adhered to the heresy of Nestorianism and the Church praised all, and most especially Eusebius, who saw through the errors of Nestorius and remained faithful to the Apostolic Catholic faith.  

I will declare, right here, that we have no pope for Bergoglio is not a Catholic any more than the Queen of England or the President of the United States is a Catholic.  He is a fraud, a deceiver, and is leading many people into the pits of hell.  I do not understand why everyone does not see it, but I do not condemn anyone who does not see it but still rejects (or is ignorant of) his heresies.

Quote from: bowler

Lets talk real world. We have  a Pope Francis who may not even be a priest due to being ordained in the new rite by a new rite consecrated bishop who may not be a bishop. He is a heretic (all progressivists are heretics), acting as the pope, ruling over a hierarchy of heretics who will not call Francis or themselves heretics, and we laymen do not have the authority to declare them heretics. That is the reality.

This, I believe, is a factual error.  What we laymen do not have the authority to do is to bind the consciences of others as to the status of these people claiming to be Catholic priests, bishops, and popes.  On the other hand, we not only have the authority, but also the responsibility to speak the truth when we see it.  

The layman, Eusebius, did not have any authority when he publicly declared that the bishop, Nestorius, had lost his office because of a single heretical declaration in his Christmas sermon.  The Church never disciplined any layman who did not follow Eusebius's declaration and who remained faithful to Nestorius until he was formally deposed due to heresy.  But the Church did punish anyone who adhered to the heresy of Nestorianism and the Church praised all, and most especially Eusebius, who saw through the errors of Nestorius and remained faithful to the Apostolic Catholic faith.  

 

I know the Eusebius / Nestorius story, and agree with what you wrote, it is what I meant. So, next time I'll put:

"it is just that we laymen do not have the authority to officially declare them heretics"

From The Litugical Year by Abbot Gueranger;

It was then that Satan produced Nestorius, crowned with a fictitious halo of sanctity and knowledge. This man, who was to give the clearest expression to the hatred of the serpent for the woman, was enthroned in the Chair of Constantinople amid the applause of the whole East, which hoped to see in him a second Chrysostom. The joy of the good was of short duration. In the very year of his exaltation, on Christmas Day 428, Nestorius, taking advantage of the immense concourse which had assembled in honour of the Virgin Mother and her Child, pronounced from the episcopal pulpit the blasphemous words: 'Mary did not bring forth God; her Son was only a man, the instrument of the Divinity.' The multitude shuddered with horror. Eusebius, a simple layman, rose to give expression to the general indignation, and protested against this impiety. Soon a more explicit protest was drawn up and disseminated in the name of the members of this grief-stricken Church, launching an anathema against anyone who should dare to say: I The Only-begotten Son of the Father and the Son of Mary are different persons.' This generous attitude was the safeguard of Byzantium, and won the praise of Popes and Councils. When the shepherd becomes a wolf, the first duty of the flock is to defend itself. It is usual and regular, no doubt, for doctrine to descend from the bishops to the faithful, and those who are subject in the faith are not to judge their superiors. But in the treasure of revelation there are essential doctrines which all Christians, by the very fact of their title as such, are bound to know and defend. The principle is the same whether it be a question of belief or conduct, dogma or morals. Treachery like that of Nestorius is rare in the Church, but it may happen that some pastors keep silence for one reason or another in circuмstances when religion itself is at stake. The true children of Holy Church at such times are those who walk by the light of their baptism, not the cowardly souls who, under the specious pretext of submission to the powers that be, delay their opposition to the enemy in the hope of receiving instructions which are neither necessary nor desirable.

Quote from: bowler

All progressivist have lost the faith or their marbles.

Well, there you go! Bishops are the elders described in scripture, they are the wise men that the laity go to for wisdom. What kind of a wise man would act like those bishops? Not a one. More proof that all progressivist have lost the faith and thus their marbles, they are truly insane.

An old aunt sent me the official picture of Pope Francis that is to be displayed at churches, it is signed by him. It says "A Pope for Our Times", I guess that's his logo?

All her friends email each other articles praising Pope JPII, then B16, and now I guess it'll be Francis. Nothing you can say to them, as they are old and will not understand.

It dawned on me to ask them why they think so highly of those popes who were there to teach the faith to all of their children and grandchildren during all of those years, and ALL of them lost the faith! What good were those popes to your family? Had all of those popes never existed, it would have been of no consequence to their children and grandchildren. Totally useless popes.

Of course I can't say that, because it would hurt them to realize that their entire family to the very last are a spiritual disaster. Everyone is divorced multiple times, or married outside of the Church, or living together, and who knows what else.

The Vatican II popes, had they never existed, it would have been of no consequence to all of them.