“So, you know, when we have a new priest who comes to us, we typically receive the ordination video and then I send that on to [US District Superior] Fr. Fullerton and Bishop Fellay and they make the judgement, they assess what they think.”
“Very dear Mr. Wilson, thank you very much for your kind letter. I agree with your desire to re-ordain conditionally these priests, and I have done this reordination many times. All sacraments from the modernists bishops or priests are doubtful now. The changes are increasing and their intentions are no more [i.e. no longer] Catholic. We are in the time of great apostasy. […]”
“This letter does not prove that Archbishop Lefebvre decided that he was going to universally conditionally ordain all [Novus Ordo] priests.”
“He [i.e. Lefebvre] did consider the new rites doubtful. Not invalid, but doubtful.”
“Like, even in that letter, Archbishop Lefebvre says they’re doubtful. So if they’re doubtful, that means some of them are valid, right?”
“We cannot, of course, accept this new sabotaged rite of ordination which poses doubts about the validity of many ordinations according to the new rite. … So this new rite of ordination is not Catholic. And so we will of course continue faithfully transmitting the real and valid priesthood – made valid by the traditional rite of ordination.”
“He’s not saying ‘We think its invalid’. … So he’s not really saying anything different here from Archbishop Lefebvre and the position of the SSPX. … Again, this is not the position of the SSPX, that the new rite is invalid.”
“If people want to find quotations that will establish that sort of position, they have to find a quote that says the new rites are intrinsically invalid or all the ordinations in the new rites are invalid.”
“If you watch the video of the ordination and you see nothing wrong, then you shouldn’t conditionally ordain. And sometimes I say to people: if you came to me and said, ‘Please re-baptise me, I was baptised in the new rite,’ and you give me a video of your baptism and I look at it and I was like, there’s nothing wrong, then it would obviously be wrong for me to re-baptise you.”
“Seems the gnostic tendency is creeping from the Sedevacanist [sic] to deny the reality of things and thus a continued doubt and uncertainty arises.”
“Misleading title. It should say, ‘Why the SSPX Rarely Conditionally Ordains after Nearly Reconciling with Rome in 2012’ ”
“Would the SSPX have Traditional SSPX friendly Novus Ordo Bishops consecrate new Bishops for the SSPX?”
“It’s just not the position of the faithful to tell us what to do in that case. Because we’re the ones who have to be responsible for that, just as we have to be responsible for what we say in the confessional of what we say from the pulpit and how we guide the faithful. So it’s just, I guess, one of the purposes here is to say: this is our position and you can agree with it or not agree with it but that’s what it is. So if you come to our chapels, it’s just expected that you’re going to accept the priests that we have say public Mass and trust that we’re making good decisions.”
“I do understand there’s a lack of trust today. The Church has lost credibility, priests have lost credibility…”
“You have to trust. There’s something to be said for just accepting that sometimes things are OK. … Sometimes we just have to be able to trust that Christ is watching over the Church still.”
Quote from: Matthew (https://www.cathinfo.com/index.php?topic=77694.msg996988#msg996988) 2025-08-25, 12:38:25 PMWe are in an Information Age. The Crisis is not “old news” because the Neo-SSPX continues to mislead countless souls. Every day, more faithful are leaving the Neo-SSPX, and many report that they were drawn to Tradition, intending to attend what they thought was the society +Archbishop Lefebvre founded, but after discovering evidence online, they now understand the betrayal and refuse to participate, avoiding being trapped in its compromise. Publishing this information is not about shocking the already awake; it is about alerting the unaware, warning the faithful, and strengthening the fight for the Faith. +Archbishop Lefebvre never compromised, and neither can we. Silence is complicity. True Resistance is growing, and the fight for the Faith continues.
Agree with Mark79.
But here is my hot-take: what is the point of publishing nonsense from the SSPX like this, "Novus Ordo Watch" style? Novus Ordo Watch cranks out a steady stream of "Look at this nonsense! You can see there's a Crisis in the Church!"
Now a Traditional Catholic like me has ZERO need for such content. I've been convinced of a Crisis in the Church since I was a child.
Now apply that to a Catholic who is awake to the downfall of the SSPX. The evidence is literally everywhere, just like evidence of a Crisis in the Church at large. It's old news now!
Once you're awake to the fact that Fr. Robinson, all of the SSPX leadership, many of its priests, and all of its younger priests, have gone a completely different direction than +Lefebvre -- What's the point of paying attention to them any more?
What's the point of constantly putting your face in the dung pile, just to make sure it's still dung?
But here is my question: who is this supposed to be for, exactly? Someone who was born yesterday, but they are going to wake up EXACTLY TODAY after reading THIS bit of news, leave the SSPX, and start attending Resistance-affiliated Masses? Somehow they missed the first 15,000 such pieces of evidence, but THIS ONE is going to do the trick, I tell ya!
If someone hasn't left the SSPX at this point, THEY AREN'T LEAVING, not even if they switched over to the Novus Ordo Missae at all their chapels. Their leadership and media engine would have some believable-sounding excuse, people would be loathe to leave their "investment" (donations over many years), they'd want a place to send their children to school ("no way I can homeschool!"), etc. Not to mention they just don't care. Most of them understood NOTHING of +ABL and his mission to begin with. They are barely attached to the "Latin Mass", much less the broader Traditional Movement. And they are far too worldly to be on any crusade for the Holy Catholic Faith.
Agree with Mark79.
But here is my hot-take: what is the point of publishing nonsense from the SSPX like this, "Novus Ordo Watch" style? Novus Ordo Watch cranks out a steady stream of "Look at this nonsense! You can see there's a Crisis in the Church!"
Now a Traditional Catholic like me has ZERO need for such content. I've been convinced of a Crisis in the Church since I was a child.
Now apply that to a Catholic who is awake to the downfall of the SSPX. The evidence is literally everywhere, just like evidence of a Crisis in the Church at large. It's old news now!
Once you're awake to the fact that Fr. Robinson, all of the SSPX leadership, many of its priests, and all of its younger priests, have gone a completely different direction than +Lefebvre -- What's the point of paying attention to them any more?
What's the point of constantly putting your face in the dung pile, just to make sure it's still dung?
If someone hasn't left the SSPX at this point, THEY AREN'T LEAVING, not even if they switched over to the Novus Ordo Missae at all their chapels. Their leadership and media engine would have some believable-sounding excuse, people would be loathe to leave their "investment" (donations over many years), they'd want a place to send their children to school ("no way I can homeschool!"), etc. Not to mention they just don't care. Most of them understood NOTHING of +ABL and his mission to begin with. They are barely attached to the "Latin Mass", much less the broader Traditional Movement. And they are far too worldly to be on any crusade for the Holy Catholic Faith.You are quick to mouth off about what we think, Sir. And you are extremely unfair. And you are wrong.
Agree with Mark79.The participation in the Novus Ordo Jubilee is the Last straw for me. I officially separated myself from the SSPX. My children and grandchildren will probably continue attending while the kids are in school as there is no alternative near them. It's up to the parents and especially the father to keep informed and resist the incremental changes coming into the chapels. The choir at our SSPX mission are all sedevacantists and will not show up if a doubtful priest is scheduled to fill in.
But here is my hot-take: what is the point of publishing nonsense from the SSPX like this, "Novus Ordo Watch" style? Novus Ordo Watch cranks out a steady stream of "Look at this nonsense! You can see there's a Crisis in the Church!"
Now a Traditional Catholic like me has ZERO need for such content. I've been convinced of a Crisis in the Church since I was a child.
Now apply that to a Catholic who is awake to the downfall of the SSPX. The evidence is literally everywhere, just like evidence of a Crisis in the Church at large. It's old news now!
Once you're awake to the fact that Fr. Robinson, all of the SSPX leadership, many of its priests, and all of its younger priests, have gone a completely different direction than +Lefebvre -- What's the point of paying attention to them any more?
What's the point of constantly putting your face in the dung pile, just to make sure it's still dung?
But here is my question: who is this supposed to be for, exactly? Someone who was born yesterday, but they are going to wake up EXACTLY TODAY after reading THIS bit of news, leave the SSPX, and start attending Resistance-affiliated Masses? Somehow they missed the first 15,000 such pieces of evidence, but THIS ONE is going to do the trick, I tell ya!
If someone hasn't left the SSPX at this point, THEY AREN'T LEAVING, not even if they switched over to the Novus Ordo Missae at all their chapels. Their leadership and media engine would have some believable-sounding excuse, people would be loathe to leave their "investment" (donations over many years), they'd want a place to send their children to school ("no way I can homeschool!"), etc. Not to mention they just don't care. Most of them understood NOTHING of +ABL and his mission to begin with. They are barely attached to the "Latin Mass", much less the broader Traditional Movement. And they are far too worldly to be on any crusade for the Holy Catholic Faith.
The participation in the Novus Ordo Jubilee is the Last straw for me. I officially separated myself from the SSPX. My children and grandchildren will probably continue attending while the kids are in school as there is no alternative near them. It's up to the parents and especially the father to keep informed and resist the incremental changes coming into the chapels. The choir at our SSPX mission are all sedevacantists and will not show up if a doubtful priest is scheduled to fill in.
The participation in the Novus Ordo Jubilee is the Last straw for me. I officially separated myself from the SSPX. My children and grandchildren will probably continue attending while the kids are in school as there is no alternative near them. It's up to the parents and especially the father to keep informed and resist the incremental changes coming into the chapels. The choir at our SSPX mission are all sedevacantists and will not show up if a doubtful priest is scheduled to fill in.That takes real courage, and I admire your stand. The first few weeks are always the hardest, but with prayer you will find that God gives the grace. We are seeing more family and friends wake up to this as well.
The participation in the Novus Ordo Jubilee is the Last straw for me. I officially separated myself from the SSPX. My children and grandchildren will probably continue attending while the kids are in school as there is no alternative near them. It's up to the parents and especially the father to keep informed and resist the incremental changes coming into the chapels. The choir at our SSPX mission are all sedevacantists and will not show up if a doubtful priest is scheduled to fill in.What are sedevacantists doing in an una-cuм Mass location in the first place?
What are sedevacantists doing in an una-cuм Mass location in the first place?Could it be that, like all tradecuмenists, they are simply trying to attend whatever Mass is validly offered?
..............Given the two thumbs down I received for this, am I to take it that you do not have a problem with pedophile priests being on the Resistance circuit with young families? Am I to take it that you believe young children should be indoctrinated to be distrustful of the Papacy and the Vatican? That it is better to leave a place where they get nothing but solid Catholic doctrine and a thriving Catholic community, and go to a Resistance center (I'm talking about our side of the world now) where our children could be abused, where they would be taught to fear the Church, and where there is absolutely no accountability if things go wrong. I'm writing this in defense of my position; it is not an attack on yours.
We as a family have home-schooled all our children and found tradition through a lot of prayer and study. We care very much about our faith and would only go to a traditional Mass. And if we choose not to leave the chapels of the SSPX, it's because we have no reason to. Our priest is rock solid and shows great respect for the Holy Father. This is extremely important for the well being of children. I did not want a priest who mocked the Church and mocked the Papacy and taught my children to do that. It is unhealthy for young minds. I had to have words with a Resistant minded priest who crossed this line. I approached him politely and privately and he stood there and bellowed at me like a four year old child having a tantrum. I exaggerate not. I also am not impressed with the pedo priests being put on the UK/Irish Resistance circuit. I understand this has happened in the SSPX too - trust me I am well aware and yes, Bishop Fellay should be held accountable - however, the Resistance circle is very small and very dependent on its priests, making the danger all the greater. Perhaps it is better in America, but it is not safe here....
So what the SSPX did -processing through the streets of Rome into the Vatican, with hundreds and hundreds of traditional priests and seminarians - was truly amazing. It made a statement to the world. It made a statement to our enemies. It made a statement to the Pope.Just get over yourself. Your posts lack principles, just like the new-sspx. All you care about are the exterior smells-n-bells, just like the new-sspx.
Just get over yourself. Your posts lack principles, just like the new-sspx. All you care about are the exterior smells-n-bells, just like the new-sspx.You're spot on. I would not attend the Fraternity of Saint Peter because they compromised and that is exactly why I left the SSPX. It's all become superficial and defending true doctrine has disappeared. There is no more opposition to errors of the Newchurch.
You believe that “St JP2 the great” was so good, (though he heretically kissed the Quran in public) and wrote the heretical “theology of the body” among a hundred other heretical acts. Yet +ABL had to disobey a SAINT POPE in order to save Tradition. WHAT? This is so comically schizophrenic.
You want the fruits of the hard-work of Tradition but without the “pressure” of being “fringe”. You want the comfort of new-Rome’s “legitimacy” but then want the freedom of Tradition to avoid new-Rome's errors.
Boru, what you don’t get is that the sspx offers what you want (freedom to worship, security of Faith) PRECISELY because they are INDEPENDENT of new-Rome. As the new-sspx keeps inching closer to new-Rome, the more they compromise the faith. Just like the FSSP you left. Because they weren’t Trad enough. Because they were infected by new-Rome.
So quit championing the sspx’s actions (the cracks in the foundation are starting to show) and start realizing the danger they are in. Start fighting FOR them to WAKE UP. If they don’t change quickly and reject new-Rome, you’re gonna find yourself sitting in a pew of the FSSP 2.0 real soon.
It’s happened to every, single Trad group that went to new-Rome. Once they gave up their freedom, they had to obey 100% and lost everything.
Right, these last couple of attempts by SSPX to justify their indefensible position have been so replete with logical fallacy, gaslighting, absurdly-poor arguments, and other forms of blatant dishonesty ... that it PROVES without any shadow of a doubt their bad will, deception, and ... in so many words ... LYING. I didn't think priests would lie, but they are in fact lying through their teeth.
But, should that come as a surprise from the Modernist Heretic Robinson, who openly rejects the inerrancy of Sacred Scriture and therefore its divine authorship. St. Robert Bellarmine would have had Robison burned at the stake. Robinson also refused to sign letters during the Plandemic attesting to the fact that Traditional Catholics had religious objections to the jab. This is STRIKE THREE.
Robinson' needs to be given a chance to recant. If he does, he needs to be consigned to a monastery to life, prevented from any public preaching, reduced to a simplex priest. If he does not recant, he should be defrocked and excommunicated. In any case, his book needs to be at the top of the Index.
What makes Robinson that much more pernicious is that he parades around not only in a Roman collar, but posing as a Traditional Catholic ... while denying the inerrancy of Sacred Scripture every bit as much as any foaming-at the-mouth Jesuit (I know, since I battled them for 7 years at their institutions), except that he dresses up his heresies in the smells and bells of the Tridentine Rites. At least the Jesuits don't hide who they are, and just go have their clown Masses, and so there's little deception.
What makes it evern worse is that the SSPX as an organization have endorsed his heretical monstrosity of a book, and keep appointing him to positions of "leadership". I wouldn't be surprised if he becomes the next US District Superior or even Seminary Rector. Meanwhile, the old guard, such as Father Kevin Robinson or Father Peter Scott ... they're hidden away.
That tells me everything I need to know about neo-SSPX. 100% infiltrated and taken over.
So what the SSPX did -processing through the streets of Rome into the Vatican, with hundreds and hundreds of traditional priests and seminarians - was truly amazing. It made a statement to the world. It made a statement to our enemies. It made a statement to the Pope.By their fruits you shall know them Pax :)
And I do absolutely DESPISE this heretical teaching of Father Paul Robinson. I've actually seen the destructiveness of this in action, after 7 years of being taught the exact same garbage by the Jesuits, first in High School, then at University (both Jesuit). I saw many young men at the Jesuit High School lose the faith because they were immediately taught that the Book of Genesis was a myth, there weren't a real Adam and Eve, that these are all stories to make a point, that the Bible didn't intend to teach about history or science, that the parting of the Red Sea was just because at certain times this marsh they walked through would recede, and on and on and on. That's where the Modernists got their start, attacking Sacred Scripture. What else was just something "not intended by Scripture". Oh, St. Paul, in his misogynistic passages, was just reflecting the attitude of his times, and that wasn't the Holy Ghost teaching that (for those who even believed that the Holy Ghost had anything to do with Sacred Scripture). What's next? This type of crap shattered the faith of countless young men at my Jesuit All-Boys' High School.
.....
NO !!! Father Paul Robinson is a Modernist Heretic, and his book belongs on the Index. And the SSPX should be condemned for approving of and promoting his book. People have been burned at the stake for FAR LESS than what he holds and teaches.
You fail to make the distinction between Formal Heretic and Material heretic. Robinson has been publicly warned by many individuals and continues to hold these heresies. So, the time is over to give the benefit of the doubt that he just a confused Catholic.
However, he cannot be accused of being a heretic. A heretic is someone who knowingly rejects or wilfully doubts a doctrine of the Church that must be believed by faith. Which is why Modernism is so dangerous; people succuмbing to it do not seem to realise that they are succuмbing. They think, as Fr. Robinson thinks, that Science and religion come from the same source. Which is true if it is real science. Sadly, Fr. Robinson is not using real science.
You fail to make the distinction between Formal Heretic and Material heretic. Robinson has been publicly warned by many individuals and continues to hold these heresies. So, the time is over to give the benefit of the doubt that he just a confused Catholic.Publicly warned by whom? I have a battalion of Cathinfo posters calling moi a heretic too. Without the correct authority it means nothing. Moreover, only a belief that directly contravenes an Article of Faith, or that has been explicitly rejected by the Church, is labelled as actual "heresy." The confusion Fr. Robinson suffers from seems to stem from the confusion that the Church herself was/is suffering from; the subject matter is not a clear-cut article of faith.
The participation in the Novus Ordo Jubilee is the Last straw for me. I officially separated myself from the SSPX. My children and grandchildren will probably continue attending while the kids are in school as there is no alternative near them. It's up to the parents and especially the father to keep informed and resist the incremental changes coming into the chapels. The choir at our SSPX mission are all sedevacantists and will not show up if a doubtful priest is scheduled to fill in.Your decision is your business but applauding the subversive actions of this sede-vacantist choir is abhorrent. If they feel that strongly about the SSPX's policy of using Novus Order priests who have not been re-ordained (I'm assuming that is what you mean by 'doubtful' priests), then leave. It is unfair to the rest of the congregation to do what they are planning to do. It's unfair to have a group of parishioners who are bent on controlling the parish by such games.
Publicly warned by whom? I have a battalion of Cathinfo posters calling moi a heretic too. Without the correct authority it means nothing. Moreover, only a belief that directly contravenes an Article of Faith, or that has been explicitly rejected by the Church, is labelled as actual "heresy." The confusion Fr. Robinson suffers from seems to stem from the confusion that the Church herself was/is suffering from; the subject matter is not a clear-cut article of faith.He was warned by his fellow sspx priests, like Fr. Black. He can't claim ignorance. So, once again you fail to make the distinction between formal vs. Material. If we have to wait for authority to make this claim, then I guess you think it is not prudent to consider the novus ordo mass as a sacrilege and sinful to attend either.
He was warned by his fellow sspx priests, like Fr. Black. He can't claim ignorance. So, once again you fail to make the distinction between formal vs. Material. If we have to wait for authority to make this claim, then I guess you think it is not prudent to consider the novus ordo mass as a sacrilege and sinful to attend either.I know Fr. black very well; good friend of the family. But is Fr. Black his superior? Has Fr. Black ever been his superior? Also, you have not addressed my other point: 'Moreover, only a belief that directly contravenes an Article of Faith, or that has been explicitly rejected by the Church, is labelled as actual "heresy." The confusion Fr. Robinson suffers from seems to stem from the confusion that the Church herself was/is suffering from; the subject matter is not a clear-cut article of faith.'
You fail to make the distinction between Formal Heretic and Material heretic. Robinson has been publicly warned by many individuals and continues to hold these heresies. So, the time is over to give the benefit of the doubt that he just a confused Catholic.Right. One can be a heretic without (and before) the Church declaring them so. Just like one can be guilty of murder before the trial ends and the jury decides. Boru is way too legalistic on heresy. Canon law has all sorts of spiritual penalties for heresy, even that which isn’t formal.
Publicly warned by whom? I have a battalion of Cathinfo posters calling moi a heretic too. Without the correct authority it means nothing. Moreover, only a belief that directly contravenes an Article of Faith, or that has been explicitly rejected by the Church, is labelled as actual "heresy." The confusion Fr. Robinson suffers from seems to stem from the confusion that the Church herself was/is suffering from; the subject matter is not a clear-cut article of faith.One of Fr Robinson’s relatives wrote a book and long time ago which was pro-creation and pro-egocentrism. Fr has no excuse for his scientific heresies. He knows the truth.
I know Fr. black very well; good friend of the family. But is Fr. Black his superior? Has Fr. Black ever been his superior? Also, you have not addressed my other point: 'Moreover, only a belief that directly contravenes an Article of Faith, or that has been explicitly rejected by the Church, is labelled as actual "heresy." The confusion Fr. Robinson suffers from seems to stem from the confusion that the Church herself was/is suffering from; the subject matter is not a clear-cut article of faith.'Martin Luther was a heretic LONG before he was excommunicated. The “proclamation” you keep harping about is a legal thing. It’s not wrong to call someone a heretic before the church decides it legally. The judgment of the Church simply confirms what everyone already knew. Just like a canonization confirms that everyone already knew person A was a saint.
So yes, we have to wait for authority. We are not Protestants. We do not go around declaring as if we were Pope. We can say he skirts with heresy - what he teaches seems heretical - but we have no authority to proclaim Fr. Robinson a heretic.
Right. One can be a heretic without (and before) the Church declaring them so. Just like one can be guilty of murder before the trial ends and the jury decides. Boru is way too legalistic on heresy. Canon law has all sorts of spiritual penalties for heresy, even that which isn’t formaNo. One is suspected of murder but no one is guilty until it goes to trial. You cannot go around labeling people murderers and heretics because YOU think they are guilty. And just as well. I'm sure all of you here would have me strung up, tarred and feathered, and burnt at the stake, if you had your way :laugh1:
No. One is suspected of murder but no one is guilty until it goes to trial. You cannot go around labeling people murderers and heretics because YOU think they are guilty. And just as well. I'm sure all of you here would have me strung up, tarred and feathered, and burnt at the stake, if you had your way :laugh1:
One of Fr Robinson’s relatives wrote a book and long time ago which was pro-creation and pro-egocentrism. Fr has no excuse for his scientific heresies. He knows the truth.
No. One is suspected of murder but no one is guilty until it goes to trial. You cannot go around labeling people murderers and heretics because YOU think they are guilty. And just as well. I'm sure all of you here would have me strung up, tarred and feathered, and burnt at the stake, if you had your way :laugh1:
No. One is suspected of murder but no one is guilty until it goes to trial. You cannot go around labeling people murderers and heretics because YOU think they are guilty. And just as well. I'm sure all of you here would have me strung up, tarred and feathered, and burnt at the stake, if you had your way :laugh1::facepalm: You continue to miss the forest for the trees. There's such a thing as "the court of public opinion" and it's a real thing. There's also the judgement of GOD, right at the point of sin. The legal courts (either secular or ecclesiastical) are simply playing catch-up to what really happened.
Your decision is your business but applauding the subversive actions of this sede-vacantist choir is abhorrent. If they feel that strongly about the SSPX's policy of using Novus Order priests who have not been re-ordained (I'm assuming that is what you mean by 'doubtful' priests), then leave. It is unfair to the rest of the congregation to do what they are planning to do. It's unfair to have a group of parishioners who are bent on controlling the parish by such games.This family choir has been at this mission chapel since it's foundation 30+ years ago. Their position has always been known and there is no "subversion" on their part. Our priest knows their opinion and he posts on the white board the names of all priests who will be substituting for him if he has to be away. But it is precisely because they protest that we don't get doubtful priests at our chapel.
But it is precisely because they protest that we don't get doubtful priests at our chapel.
The problem with Robinson is that his false arguments, such as “Novus ordo sacraments are valid” is doing the bidding for the SSPX’s (Jaidhoff bought) corrupt leadership.
This family choir has been at this mission chapel since it's foundation 30+ years ago. Their position has always been known and there is no "subversion" on their part.Yep. The new-sspx is called NEW for a reason. Tradition is the same. The sspx has changed. God will judge the sspx in due time. They are the subversives to Tradition and God's true Faith.
Your decision is your business but applauding the subversive actions of this sede-vacantist choir is abhorrent.I love how anyone who disagrees with the new-sspx is a "sede" and a subversive.
I love how anyone who disagrees with the new-sspx is a "sede" and a subversive.
Correct. That's textbook gaslighting. Earlier Borat even claimed that not just sedevacantists in general but the Dimond Brothers specifically invented these doubts about the Conciliar Rites, pretty much out of thin air.Yes, this is an outright lie and revisionist history. Boru doesn't know anything about the origins of Tradition or the 70s. I pity the people who listen to her. She's an agenda-driven, sspx-cultist.
Yes, this is an outright lie and revisionist history. Boru doesn't know anything about the origins of Tradition or the 70s. I pity the people who listen to her. She's an agenda-driven, sspx-cultist.
If I see someone commit a murder, I know that they are a murdererAnd you tell me. And then I find out it was actually self-defence and that what YOU thought you saw was in fact not quite the whole picture. This is why we have trials and do not let the individual string someone up to the nearest tree.
If I hear someone say something heretical, I know that they are a heretic
You are guilty of a sin when you commit it. A sentence of guilt from the state or Church merely confirms that you are responsible for the crime
:facepalm: You continue to miss the forest for the trees. There's such a thing as "the court of public opinion" and it's a real thing. There's also the judgement of GOD, right at the point of sin. The legal courts (either secular or ecclesiastical) are simply playing catch-up to what really happened.These 'ipso facto' penalties do not come from you. They are spiritual and come form God. God decides, not you. We cannot attempt to read another mans soul without a proper trial. It's that simple. Again, you can say that his works smacks of heresy etc but YOU cannot declare him a heretic and try and get everyone else to declare him a heretic as you would be stepping outside your competence and committing the sin of usurpation as outlined by St. Thomas Aquinas. All your justifications have no place here.
Canon law has plenty of "ipso facto" penalties (spiritual) that happen immediately, even if the judgmenent of the Church (temporal) needs time to catch up.
......................
And you tell me. And then I find out it was actually self-defence and that what YOU thought you saw was in fact not quite the whole picture. This is why we have trials and do not let the individual string someone up to the nearest tree.That's not what I said. I didn't say "If I think I see", but "If I see". And anyways, my testimony, being a firsthand witness, would be used as evidence of said murderers guilt.
These 'ipso facto' penalties do not come from you. They are spiritual and come form God. God decides, not you. We cannot attempt to read another mans soul without a proper trial. It's that simple. Again, you can say that his works smacks of heresy etc but YOU cannot declare him a heretic and try and get everyone else to declare him a heretic as you would be stepping outside your competence and committing the sin of usurpation as outlined by St. Thomas Aquinas. All your justifications have no place here.No court, civil or ecclesiastical, can "attempt to read another man's soul". That is reserved to God alone, as only He knows the disposition of someone's soul. Humans judge outward actions.
These 'ipso facto' penalties do not come from you. They are spiritual and come form God. God decides, not you. We cannot attempt to read another mans soul without a proper trial. It's that simple. Again, you can say that his works smacks of heresy etc but YOU cannot declare him a heretic and try and get everyone else to declare him a heretic as you would be stepping outside your competence and committing the sin of usurpation as outlined by St. Thomas Aquinas. All your justifications have no place here.No. Not all ipso facto are spiritual. It’s in canon law, which is human law.
No court, civil or ecclesiastical, can "attempt to read another man's soul". That is reserved to God alone, as only He knows the disposition of someone's soul. Humans judge outward actions.Exactly. There are various levels of heresy. The church only decides on the top-tier cases.
Very simple:
Christ teaches X
Bob says Y, which is contrary to X
Bob is a heretic
No. Not all ipso facto are spiritual. It’s in canon law, which is human law.
You’re basically arguing the same thing as Siscoe/Salza. Nothing happens until the Church decides. So that means (stupidly) that Biden and Peℓσѕι are Catholics in good standing.
Ladislaus, is Boru either Sisco or Salza??
Borat continues to lie by claiming this is a sedevacantist concern ... earlier claiming it was made up by the Dimonds, and having been duly corrected, can no longer be accused of not lying.
Indeed, SSPX can do what they want. They always have, since their hubris prevents them from acknowledging that anyone who disagrees with them ever has any legitimate point.
We're calling them out for being wicked and evil, and they will be judged by God for subjecting the faithful to Sacraments laboring under positive doubt. God will hold them accountable, and we're calling them out. It goes without saying that they will do whatever they will do, so Borat can keep bloviating as long as she wants.
Borat too will be judged, since she defends and thereby helps to enable this wickedness.
You sir are extremely vocal and aggressive about getting everyone to desert the Church, leave the SSPX, leave the Resistance even, and become a Sede-vacantist like yourself. What is your real agenda?Do you reject Vatican 2?
Perhaps you need a lesson in basic catechism: Article IX, The Catechism of the Council of Trent, TAN book:
"First, as St. Augustine observes, the Prophets spoke more plainly of the Church than Christ, foreseeing that on this a much greater number may err and be deceived than on the mystery of the Incarnation. For in after ages there would not be wanting wicked men, who, like the ape that would fain pass for a man, would claim that they alone were Catholics, and with no less impiety than effrontery assert that with them alone is the Catholic Church."
"For a person is not to be called a heretic as soon as he shall have offended in matters of faith; but he is a heretic who, having disregarded the authority of the Church, maintains impious opinions with pertinacity."
"The Church..as the scriptures and writings of the Saints testify, includes within her fold the good and the bad..Hence there are but three classes of persons excluded from the Church's pale: infidels, heretics and schismatics, and excommunicated persons...but with regard to the rest...even the lives of ministers debased by crime, they are still within the Church, and therefore lose nothing of their power."
"...the Church is known and is compared to a city built on a mountain, and visible from every side. As all must yield obedience to her authority, it is necessary that she be known by all."
"The Church has but one ruler and one governor, the invisible one, Christ, whom the eternal Father hath made over all the Church, which is His body; (and) the visible one, the Pope, who as legitimate successor of Peter..fills the Apostolic chair."
"St. Jerome...'Following no chief but Christ, I am united in communion with your holiness, that is, the chair of Peter. I know that on that rock is built the Church. Whoever will eat the lamb outside this house is profane; whoever is not in the ark of Noah shall perish in the flood'."
"Christ (is) not only the author of all the Sacraments, but also their invisible minster - He it is who baptizes, He it is who absolves...although men are appointed by Him the external ministers of the Sacraments...so has He placed over His Church, which he governs by His invisible Spirit, a (visible) man to be His vicar and the minister of His power. A visible Church requires a visible head..."
"Be careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace; one body and one Spirit."
In 1884, satan challenged Christ to test His Church. Pope Leo XIII heard him ask for 100 years. Christ agreed.
In 1884 the Fabian society (Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ by infiltration) was set up to infiltrate government, schools and the Church. Agents by the hundreds were sent undercover to flood these establishments. The plan? Stealth mode; pretend to be what you are not in order to slowly change the establishment to your way of thinking from within. Thanks to Pope Pius X, this test was checked somewhat and calmed the storm. But the enemies resurfaced at Vatican II. This is a test. What we are going through is that very test that Christ agreed to. Its a test of faith, of trust and a test of loyalty. It is the flood of old. We know what the Church is. The Body of Christ; visible and invisible. Head and members. Good and bad. Peter and Judas. And as it is divine, it is indefectable and eternal. Satan could only touch the human element; he could not touch the divine.
Since around 1984, the traditional movement within the Church has blossomed. Satan failed as Christ knew he would. The storm has been receding and its only a matter of time before the Church regains her former glory.
We must stay with the Ark and ride out the final throes of the debasing storm.
You sir are extremely vocal and aggressive about getting everyone to desert the Church, leave the SSPX, leave the Resistance even, and become a Sede-vacantist like yourself. What is your real agenda?
Since around 1984, the traditional movement within the Church has blossomed. Satan failed as Christ knew he would. The storm has been receding and its only a matter of time before the Church regains her former glory.
We must stay with the Ark and ride out the final throes of the debasing storm.
Do you reject Vatican 2?
Before posting again, Borat ... recalling that it's a lie to sin ...Good call
1) Are you Salza, Siscoe, or some close ally to one of these?
2) Are you the poster formerly known by various names, such as Xavier, XavierSem, Nishant, and others ... or someone associated with him?
3) Do you even attend SSPX chapels or are you an "Ecclesia Dei" type ... FSSP / ICK/ Motu, one of those "approved" varieties?
Do you reject Vatican 2?I do reject Vatican too!
I do reject Vatican too!
Let's start a group called Trad Ilk. Well you see: there's Lefebvrists, Williamson supporters
How are you dealing with the Crisis in the Church may I ask?
What group are you associated with? You act like you're above it all.
I'm seeing a pattern on almost all Catholic forums, Youtube comments, x spaces, etc., spamming the same bullshitBoru is the definition of a spam bot. Never responds to arguments. Re-posts same points. Makes crazy claims with no proof.
Catholics looking into traditionalism and the objective in-your-face apostasy with careful research.
Then,
Every one of those spaces getting infiltrated by plants, like the usual pope-splaining suspects in Cathinfo for instance.
How are you dealing with the Crisis in the Church may I ask?I don't mean to bash groups, I was simply showing some groups that are not happy with Modernist Rome.
What group are you associated with? You act like you're above it all.
It's a huge red flag when anyone starts bashing the Traditional Movement, criticizing its lack of unity for example. That is to be expected when we don't have a Pope.
How is it that you refuse to stop with the lies and the gaslighting? I've said very little about sedevacantism during this time other than stating that the question of Holy Ordrers is NOT a sedevacantist issue, but also troubles many R&R. In fact, I regularly attend the chapel of an R&R priest, an independent priest, and he holds NO Orders to be invalid. And the other point I raised is where your principle of disciplinary infallibility is one you share with the sedevacantists (including myself).
* Stop the equivocating. You never stop pounding us with how all the new rite sacraments are invalid, how the Pope is not the Pope, how "evil and wicked" the SSPX is. And where do you do it - here on a forum full of Resistance faithful; grooming your audience. If any one crosses you, they get a string of aggressive name-calling that makes Luther sound like a gentleman.
If my point was to have everyone go sedevacantist, I wouldn't have even bothered, but would have just said, "See, doubtful Orders, immediately leave SSPX and go to your nearest SV chapel." This thing was precisely in order to do a service to those who do in fact attend SSPX chapels, i.e. making it possible for them to continue going their with peace of soul ... therefore exactly the opposite of trying to get them to leave the SSPX.
Nor have I said a word about the Resistance.
I'm actually "persona non grata" to many SVs, since I also believe in the necessity of Baptism for salvation.
I have NEVER adhered to any single group, and my opinions are extremely eclectic, where I agree and disagree with just about every single "group" out there on one point or another
My "agenda" is truth, and the truth of this matter is obvious. But your arguments are so utterly absurd, that it is clearly YOU who have the agenda. I am quite open to persuasion that there's no positive doubt regarding NO Orders, except that nothing that even remotely resembles a convincing argument has ever been offered.
* Your agenda Sir is ensure the truth is distorted. Any time someone makes a negative comment about the Church or the SSPX, you get in there and drive the nail home no matter how slanderous it is; you literally jump at any opportunity and put your own spin on it.
You continue to lie and to gaslight.
* I assure you I try never to lie. Lying is cowardly.
Before posting again, Borat ... recalling that it's a lie to sin ...Ask me again nicely without the juvenile name-calling. Let us see if you can act like a gentleman.
1) Are you Salza, Siscoe, or some close ally to one of these?
2) Are you the poster formerly known by various names, such as Xavier, XavierSem, Nishant, and others ... or someone associated with him?
3) Do you even attend SSPX chapels or are you an "Ecclesia Dei" type ... FSSP / ICK/ Motu, one of those "approved" varieties?
Ask me again nicely without the juvenile name-calling. Let us see if you can act like a gentleman.Dodge #1.
Dodge #1.
Right ... the answer to at least one and most likely 2 of the questions is a Yes. I've been calling this Conciliar troll Borat (aka Jew Sacha Cohen) for a while, and NOW s/he uses it as an excuse not to answer a post. I can't decide if s/he is Salza or Nishant just yet.Nishant's posts weren't as coherant as Borat's.
[blah… blah… blah…]^^^ The latest shit-disturber.
Ask me again nicely without the juvenile name-calling. Let us see if you can act like a gentleman.My mother would say this when she 100 percent was wrong on something. :laugh1:
My mother would say this when she 100 percent was wrong on something. :laugh1:
*Sounds more like your mother was a lovely person who deserved more respect than someone gave her ...
Modern woman for ya
*Blame it on my love of horses! :laugh2:
And I do absolutely DESPISE this heretical teaching of Father Paul Robinson. I've actually seen the destructiveness of this in action, after 7 years of being taught the exact same garbage by the Jesuits, first in High School, then at University (both Jesuit). I saw many young men at the Jesuit High School lose the faith because they were immediately taught that the Book of Genesis was a myth, there weren't a real Adam and Eve, that these are all stories to make a point, that the Bible didn't intend to teach about history or science, that the parting of the Red Sea was just because at certain times this marsh they walked through would recede, and on and on and on. That's where the Modernists got their start, attacking Sacred Scripture. What else was just something "not intended by Scripture". Oh, St. Paul, in his misogynistic passages, was just reflecting the attitude of his times, and that wasn't the Holy Ghost teaching that (for those who even believed that the Holy Ghost had anything to do with Sacred Scripture). What's next? This type of crap shattered the faith of countless young men at my Jesuit All-Boys' High School.
So, I will not hold punches, I will not be "nice" or "nithe" ... since the fact that he poses at a Traditional priest makes him THAT MUCH MORE DANGEROUS, since the more dressing you put on top of the poison, the more likely people are to swallow it. If the same thing were said by some Jesuit wearing a rainbow stole while officiating a clown Mass, people of good faith would immediately recognize it as heresy and reject it outright. But put the same nonsense behind a Trad priest using all the smells and bells, and "well, I guess it must be OK to think this way".
NO !!! Father Paul Robinson is a Modernist Heretic, and his book belongs on the Index. And the SSPX should be condemned for approving of and promoting his book. People have been burned at the stake for FAR LESS than what he holds and teaches.
Galileo was condemned as a heretic for FAR LESS, for something that could even be debated slightly more, i.e. by claiming that when Sacred Scripture says that the sun moved or the sun stopped, this really means that the earth stopped, etc. In a sense, motion is relative, so one could make a better case for that.
But Sacred Scripture clearly teaches that during the Great Deluge, the ENTIRE earth was covered with water, the peaks of ALL the mountains, and that ALL flesh was destroyed from the earth except those in the ark ... that does not mean there was a local flood in the Mediterranean basin that wiped out maybe 10% of all humanity, covered NO mountain peaks (since the water would quickly dissipate below that level) ... and where instead of spending decades building an Ark, Noah could have just packed up and moved a couple hundred miles. There's no way to RESCUE that without having to attribute error to Sacred Scripture. That's heresy. St. Robert Bellarmine declared that Galileo was heretical not because scientific matters themselves can be heretical, but because by implication he denied the inerrancy of Sacred Scripture, by contradicting it, i.e. his positions were heretical not ex parte objecti, sed ex parte Dicentis, not because of the objective content but because of WHO TAUGHT IT, namely, the Holy Ghost.
Now if I say ... "Well ... in my opinion, it's just that, I think Father Robinson is mistaken." and of course I add, "oh, but I have the greatest respect for him, and he's a wonderful Trad priest, just that he's wrong about this." ... what would I be doing? I'd be CONDONING THE HERESY, saying it's just opinion, and that it's no big deal and does nothing to detract from how great a priest he is, etc. etc. Sorry. No can do. I call out heresy as heresy.
I mentioned that the Councils declared anathemas against heretics. Well, they often added anathemas against those who TOLERATED heresies and effectively being complicit in them and enabling them. If I "softened" up against Father Robinson, I'd become an enabler of his heresies, and I refuse to do that. I will not be party to the wreckage of faith his errors can cause and have caused. Also, even charity toward the heretic requires being blunt and direct. Had the Dubia "Cardinals" just come straight out and said he was teaching heresy ... I think that could have caused a massive cascading effect in the Church. Instead, most of those who self-identify as Catholic might have mentioned a thing or two about it on X, until they got bored, and moved on with a yawn.
...A Realist Guide to Religion and Science, Gracewing, 2018. Based on this book alone, it is obvious Fr Robinson teaches heretical stuff, and even atheistic stuff according to St Augustine, stuff lauded on this book's website.
Here are a few examples:
‘Does the Bible want us to read it like a science textbook using scientific language? Or is it meant to be read in another way? The answer is obvious from the very beginning of the Bible; which presents serious challenges for anyone seeking to find properly scientific information about the formation of the world, at least anyone possessing today’s extensive knowledge of the universe’s true architecture.’--- Fr Paul Robinson SSPX. p.247-8.
So, according to Fr Robinson, ignore that supernatural creation of Genesis, and believe my scientific version.
‘Galileo’s aggressiveness at a sensitive time about a delicate issue, combined with his lack of scientific proof, drew down upon him a condemnation of the Church. That condemnation admittedly went too far, but in no way did it involve the Church’s infallibility or make geocentrism a dogma of Catholic belief.’ (Reference given was Arthur Koestler’s, The Sleepwalkers) --- Fr Paul Robinson: Ibid, p.284.
‘As Fr Stanley Jaki (1924-2009) points out, it was not really until a statistically significant parallax shift was observed that heliocentrism was grounded in strict scientific evidence.’--- Fr Paul Robinson; p. 282.
Given stellar parallax is found in a geocentric universe it is NOT proof that the decrees for Biblical geocentrism was ever proven wrong.
‘This position on the Flood as being graphically universal meets with serious scientific difficulties. For one, how can you get enough rain to cover the entire earth?…Clearly this is popular, not a scientific description….To impose a scientific sense upon the Bible then is to do violence to the sacred text and the divinely intended meaning.’--- Fr Paul Robinson: pp. 274-5.
In his book, The City of God, St Augustine replies to the likes of Fr Robinson:
‘Who but an atheist, first they imagine it impossible that any flood should become so huge as to exceed the height of any mountain fifteen cubits.’(Ch. XXVII)
So, according to Fr Robinson, not even God could ‘get’ enough water to cover all mountains of the entire Earth. Why then did Moses tell us in Genesis chapter nine that there will never be another such ‘cataclysmos’ flooding of the Earth like that of Noah’s and that God created the rainbow under the clouds as a sign of this promise? Given that local floods happen all the time on Earth, are they inferring God went back on His word thereafter?
‘From a scientific perspective, the universe began its infancy at time 0, 13.7 billion years ago, it is now in its middle age, and it is heading toward old age billions of years in the distant future. The triumph of the Big Bang theory was a triumph for science, for the universe corresponding to it can be explored by the scientific mind to an astonishing level of detail.’---Fr Paul Robinson SSPX: Realist Guide, p.366-7.
No wonder the supernatural creation of Genesis is long gone. On the 16th June, 2025, the newly elected Pope, Leo XIV, addressed young astronomy students learning at the Vatican Observatory, encouraging them to share their discoveries and the joy of learning about the universe. He then tells them they will confirm every secular theory of a natural evolved Creation.
‘Students will focus on the telescope’s contributions over the last three years to the evolution of galaxies, birth of stars, and planetary systems and the origin of life. “For the first time, we are able to peer deeply into the atmosphere of exoplanets where life may be developing and study the nebulae where planetary systems themselves are forming.” Pope Leo said “The authors of sacred scripture, writing so many centuries ago, did not have the benefit of this privilege, yet their poetic and religious imagination pondered what the moment of creation must have been like.” Pope Leo discussed scientists’ ability to trace “the ancient light of distant galaxies,” which he said “speaks of the very beginning of our universe’--- EWTN website.
On goes Fr Robinson's heresies, those that caused Bruno to be burned at the stake, now passed on to the next generation.
"..... From the 17th to the 19th centuries, certain men embarked on a mission that would change how persons in both Church and State perceived this geocentric universe and man’s place in it, a comprehension that gave witness to the omnipotent God of the Bible and the Catholic faith. Their intent was to implement the beginning of the great reset, the hermetic principle ‘as above, so below,’ an ancient pagan belief that would first question and then remove this sacred understanding of the Holy Trinity, the Creator of all, from the minds of many, ................ it can be classed as the most ingenious ‘scientific,’ intellectual, metaphysical, doctrinal, and heretical deception in mankind’s history. When popes from 1757 to 1835 submitted to this Galilean reformation in Biblical understanding, Modernism entered the womb of the Catholic Church. It was this Galilean reformation that led to the rejection of the supernatural for a natural interpretation of Genesis, that in turn: 'contributed, and is still contributing to the destruction of the church...'"
Excellent summary. And gives depth and historical background to the key point that the reviewer observed in regards to Fr. Robinson's book:I think Fr. Paul Robertson is in charge of the Angelus press.
"--Thus, Fr. Robinson’s explanation of cosmic evolution tends to coincide with the Deist / Freemasonic idea that God should be seen as the Great Architect of the Universe, Who simply sets everything in motion for cosmic evolution after the Big Bang—by the “fine-tuning of the universe necessary for stars, galaxies and planets to form.”
Which tells us where this Modernism - "synthesis of all heresies" - has originated from.
Am I surprised? Upset, yes. Surprised, not so much. I firmly believe that when satan thought he had the Church hierarchy in the palm of his hand with generations of this nonsense, Archbishop Lefebrvre and Bishop de Castro Mayer emerged as out of nowhere as Soldiers of Christ. Caught off guard, he quickly rallied his Fabian spies, and sent a number into the SSPX seminary to rise up through the ranks and plant this Modernist philosophy yet again. This is no doubt. We would be very naive to think that the Freemasons would leave the SSPX to work away doing all the good they have been doing. Does this mean that SSPX is corrupt? No. No more than the Church. It means that there are (past and present) infiltrators - a corrupt element inside - setting the groundwork for such ideas to be accepted. And these infiltrators are in EVERY organization. I'm not saying that Fr. Robinson is one - he is a product of his pre-seminary education - but I am suggesting there is someone far more subtle, with authority to pass this book, who is either directly one of them, or has been groomed from old to think this way. I know of many SSPX priests who do not hold with theses views, including our own parish priest. But, yes, its a worry that such error is being allowed to free range by the SSPX authorities.
Cassini, you mentioned that Cathinfo was the only place that allowed you to air your book. By that I take it you have approached the SSPX and they have refused to engage. So the answer is that someone who has the means needs to publish your book and get it on the main-stream outlets to counteract against this poison. Will keep this in our family prayers.
I think Fr. Paul Robertson is in charge of the Angelus press.I see. And the district Superior since 2020 has been a Fr. John Fullerton. Who was the District Superior when Fr. Robinson's book was first published? I think it was 2018 if I remember correctly.
A big issue with Fr Paul Robinson and his evolutionary views is not just the fact he was allowed to publish a book that one may read or not: he teaches at the school. Even though my daughter was already homeschooled at this point, she had friends in the school telling her that he was having a debate on the subject in his book. Evidentially then he is pushing these ideas on the youth, much as Ladislas has mentioned regarding his experience with Jesuits (not all that long ago). My own father was taught by Domincans in the 1950's that Scripture is just stories.Seriously?!! Do you know what school he is teaching at?
Who is protecting these young minds at the school?
Based on a Mass I watched from St Isidore in Watkins Co two weeks back (too ill to attend Mass at neochapel) there is a new priest who is now the principal of the neoS school for this September. Whether or not Fr Robinson, whom I have also heard preaching on the livestream of the Sunday Mass, is still teaching I know not. But he is still preaching and is the prior I believe of said parish. He might also be doing the online parish catechism. I have seen one of those as well.If you're talking about the livestream from August 17, that's Fr. Joseph Haynos. He was just transferred from Syracuse, NY.
If you're talking about the livestream from August 17, that's Fr. Joseph Haynos. He was just transferred from Syracuse, NY.Indeed tis he 😀
A big issue with Fr Paul Robinson and his evolutionary views is not just the fact he was allowed to publish a book that one may read or not: he teaches at the school. Even though my daughter was already homeschooled at this point, she had friends in the school telling her that he was having a debate on the subject in his book. Evidentially then he is pushing these ideas on the youth, much as Ladislas has mentioned regarding his experience with Jesuits (not all that long ago). My own father was taught by Domincans in the 1950's that Scripture is just stories.
Who is protecting these young minds at the school?
. Hate the sin; love the sinner.I've never liked this slogan. Scripture says God hates and sinner and his sins alike.
But to God the wicked and his wickedness are hateful alike.
[Wisdom 14:9]
With one girl, age six, I was very impressed. Sensing by othe kids’ reactions, she knew what was on the phone, that “Jesus did not like it,” she closed her eyes and refused to touch the phone despite a particular older boy calling her a baby. Her response to him, “My parents say if you see something, it stays in your brain forever. I’m not putting garbage in my brain.” And she refused to open her eyes until the kids were off the bus and the driver told her to get off.How very true
I've never liked this slogan. Scripture says God hates and sinner and his sins alike.If God hated the sinner, He wouldn’t want him to repent. He wouldn’t have sacrificed His Son for sinners’ sake.
If God hated the sinner, He wouldn’t want him to repent. He wouldn’t have sacrificed His Son for sinners’ sake.It's because they are certain kinds of people who use the quote to deny that people need to repent and change their ways.
Maybe the is a cliché, but there’s truth to it. No doubt God hates seeing the sinner in the act of sinning, but ultimately, He longs for his conversion.
Consider this Bible verse,
11 (https://www.drbo.org/cgi-bin/d?b=drb&bk=31&ch=33&l=11-#x)Say to them: As I live, saith the Lord God, I desire not the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way, and live. [Ezechiel 33:11]
It's because they are certain kinds of people who use the quote to deny that people need to repent and change their ways.