CowboyKen
Oops, I meant to type "@Dr Reiss - it is clear you DO NOT understand what the Priest in the video is stating."

In the timeless phrase of Buddy Epson, "Whoa Doggies!" - this is getting good. I'm gonna get a bowl of popcorn and see how this turns out!

If I may quote a compadre of mine, "The phrase "duel of wits with an unarmed man" comes to mind."
Dr. John Smythe
@Gregory - I would argue, based upon actions JPII did not, in fact, exert himself to any great extent. The reason for this may well be the same as B. XVI - pressure from the more, shall we say, "liberal" elements of the curia (read the same heretics who are promoting homosexual "marriage" and communion for "remarried" divorcees. Yes, heretical as heresy is defined as, " the obstinate post-…More
@Gregory - I would argue, based upon actions JPII did not, in fact, exert himself to any great extent. The reason for this may well be the same as B. XVI - pressure from the more, shall we say, "liberal" elements of the curia (read the same heretics who are promoting homosexual "marriage" and communion for "remarried" divorcees. Yes, heretical as heresy is defined as, " the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same" (2089 CCC).

The SSPX, from all the documents I could find, gave certain pre-conditions to holding talks - based upon the previous open and blatant discrimination and bigotry the faithful who followed them had faced (i.e. fake excommunications which B. XVI as Card. Ratzinger had to repeatedly clarify were invalid as those who attended SSPX Sacraments attended valid Sacraments by validly ordained Priests (rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/…/ecclesia-dei-ss…) [*Note how I reference my points to show their validity.]

In fact, note what the decree states about the SSPX "not been "sufficient to constitute the crime of schism"".

The CDF openly stating the SSPX building their own chapel in Hawaii and celebrating the Sacraments and preaching and teaching the way the SSPX does is not considered by the CDF to be schismatic. Hmm. Yet, you proclaim to be of an higher authority than the CDF by refuting their openly publicized documents regarding the SSPX. Very interesting.

I have not put forth any efforts to "prove" anything about the SSPX beyond the efforts to have you attempt to "prove" your points - which you have not - merely resorted to unsubstantiated here-say. It is not an "he said, she said"; and if it were, that is invalid in any realm of logic and reason.

Now, how is the SSPX NOT remain united to the Holy See? That is what I have been asking all along. Show the evidence - NONE has been shown. Your opinion does not count, nor does mine.

Where EXACTLY has the SSPX been ordered by the Holy See to do something and they have refused? One clear, concrete example, please. That is all I have been asking and it has either fallen on deaf ears (eyes, technically, in this case as it is in writing) or there is none. For if there way, I am sure you would be gladly flaunting it.

As for error, I see you blatantly disregard the valid points brought up previously regarding various liturgical and sacramental abuses that have come out of Vatican II - a council that B. XVI clarified was merely "pastoral", by the way (catholicknight.blogspot.ca/…/vatican-ii-was-… www.ewtn.com/…/zben16vat2.HTM; www.cfnews.org/…/original_sin_of…) .

It seems that any errors are far more promulgated by those modernists who claim to be within the Church. Yet, as the Vatican clearly, and in this case infallibly states, modernism is heresy and those who follow its tenets are heretics (w2.vatican.va/…/hf_p-x_enc_1907…) and it they who are, in fact, outside the Church.

You may not like what something says or is, but that does not invalidate it.
Gregory
The Successors of Peter, His Holiness John Paul II and Benedict XVI exerted themselves to a great extent to ensure the full communion with the Church of the SSPX; and their exhausted efforts were to no avail. The SSPX behaved superficial in their reconciliation process and have not fulfilled the grave duty of remaining united to the Vicar of Christ; in fact as time goes by, 30 years, the SSPX …More
The Successors of Peter, His Holiness John Paul II and Benedict XVI exerted themselves to a great extent to ensure the full communion with the Church of the SSPX; and their exhausted efforts were to no avail. The SSPX behaved superficial in their reconciliation process and have not fulfilled the grave duty of remaining united to the Vicar of Christ; in fact as time goes by, 30 years, the SSPX have only become more emboldened in their error.

Yet, rightly has the distinction been made here between the Catholic and the SSPX; and the distinction is apparent to all; if the SSPX were in full communion with the Church you would not have to put forth such efforts to prove it, the whole world would know it; it is really that simple.

Veritatem in Caritate
Dr. John Smythe
@Dr Stuart Reiss Reiss - You audaciously claim, " the above two (myself and Chancia), have resorted making personal attacks"! Yet, it was you who sent me the scholarly private message that contained exactly the entirety of, "You're an idiot!".

You honestly believe you can make the claim that I made a "personal attack" against you after doing that and then completely pretending that it was I who …More
@Dr Stuart Reiss Reiss - You audaciously claim, " the above two (myself and Chancia), have resorted making personal attacks"! Yet, it was you who sent me the scholarly private message that contained exactly the entirety of, "You're an idiot!".

You honestly believe you can make the claim that I made a "personal attack" against you after doing that and then completely pretending that it was I who made the personal attack?!
CowboyKen
@Gregory, the SSPV was only formed as a counter to the Tradition of the SSPX - you can thank the SSPX for them, as well.

You make the claim of the SSPX, "breaking the ecclesial bond with the Pope". Please provide the evidence of the claim.

You made the claim, you back it up. Previous people have asked you to do so and all you do is brush it off and never give any evidence.
CowboyKen
@Dr Reiss - it is clear you understand what the Priest in the video is stating. Your previous posts stated you wouldn't even bother to watch Part I (ep. 14) let alone the introduction in Episode 13. So, by your own admission you are trying to talk about something you don't know about. That's a bit ridiculous, to say that least. That's like someone talking about a medical procedure who didn't …More
@Dr Reiss - it is clear you understand what the Priest in the video is stating. Your previous posts stated you wouldn't even bother to watch Part I (ep. 14) let alone the introduction in Episode 13. So, by your own admission you are trying to talk about something you don't know about. That's a bit ridiculous, to say that least. That's like someone talking about a medical procedure who didn't even learn the 2/3 of it but just caught the tail end of it.

You know what the they say about assume and what that makes a person ...

The Priest is not telling people not to attend Mass - he is saying do not attend the modernist Mass with all it's errors. He did not say it was invalid, he repeated the reports of Cardinals Alfredo Ottaviani and Antonio Bacci coupled with decades of experience of what the novos ordo has done to (what is left) of the Church.
Gregory
This SSPX priest is clearly of a schismatic mentality; and takes no care to avoid and free himself from his heresy, he seems anxious to deter right minded Christians from their Sunday obligation. This being so, what wonder is it if we see today the constant fracturing of the One True Church. without doubt, this SSPX priest is deserving of admonition here, and rightly so, for he shows no true …More
This SSPX priest is clearly of a schismatic mentality; and takes no care to avoid and free himself from his heresy, he seems anxious to deter right minded Christians from their Sunday obligation. This being so, what wonder is it if we see today the constant fracturing of the One True Church. without doubt, this SSPX priest is deserving of admonition here, and rightly so, for he shows no true love for the Bride of Christ.
Gregory
I am happy to inform that John Paul II established The Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter; thankfully, and the FSSP are attached to the Traditional Roman Rite, the Tridentine Mass. Also, you can thank the Supreme Pontiff Benedict XVI for the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum, not the SSPX.

Also, It is impossible for the SSPX to remain faithful to the Tridentine Mass while breaking the ecclesial …More
I am happy to inform that John Paul II established The Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter; thankfully, and the FSSP are attached to the Traditional Roman Rite, the Tridentine Mass. Also, you can thank the Supreme Pontiff Benedict XVI for the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum, not the SSPX.

Also, It is impossible for the SSPX to remain faithful to the Tridentine Mass while breaking the ecclesial bond with the Pope, the Successor to the Apostle Peter. The Holy See decides the question regarding the Mass not the SSPX.
CowboyKen
@Gregory - it seems to me your post smacks of the same.

If it was not for the SSPX there would be no Moto Proprio for the Tridentine Mass. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Where are the thank you's? Or would you rather people have to put up with clown "masses" and "liturgical dancing" and communion for homosexuals and remarried divorced and those living in sin? What about speaking out against …More
@Gregory - it seems to me your post smacks of the same.

If it was not for the SSPX there would be no Moto Proprio for the Tridentine Mass. None. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Where are the thank you's? Or would you rather people have to put up with clown "masses" and "liturgical dancing" and communion for homosexuals and remarried divorced and those living in sin? What about speaking out against artificial contraception? What about providing ALL the Sacraments that go along with the Mass? (i.e. Confession before Mass with solid orthodox advice and actions, First Communion only after First Confession which is only after a proper catechism and testing?)

You will never find those abuses and heretical acts with the SSPX, yet, you can go to any local diocese and pretty much guarantee the local diocesan Fr. "Nice" will be doing those abuses and giving Holy Communion to those living in a state of mortal sin and NOT advising the (few remaining) parishioners of the mortal sin artificial conception is and of living in sin being the same level of sin - for fear of offending.

This is all part and parcel of the Mass - it is not much use to provide a Mass in Latin but then tell the diocese that it's okay to live together (as long as you feel you love each other) and it's okay to use contraception and tell the diocese that a general absolution prior to Mass is just the same as Confession.

That is what the SSPX is warning people against - Priests and Bishops who do not act like Priests and Bishops and teach the fullness of the Faith.
yuitrel likes this.
Gregory
The devil makes strenuous efforts to deter the faithful from receiving grace on Sundays; and the SSPX are exerting themselves in like manner by inspiring the faithful with indifference and aversion towards the Mass; they wound the Bride of Christ, the Catholic Church, and they wound Christ Himself with this heresy…
CowboyKen
Reading through all the posts on here I find a few people attacking and accusing and then a couple of people asking for clarification and justification with none given. Unless more attacks count in the minds of the first group. (?)
michael newman
@Dr. John Smythe. I'm afraid I shall not return to this thread, and gladly concede the last word to you sir, and if you are now cured of the condition you had, perhaps it might just be one word..ah well, we live in hope. Thank you @Dr Stuart Reiss and @Gregory and @father P Nicholson and @AC Lumsden and @Gibbs212521 and @Chris P. P and @Letitia Maria and @Vox Populi and @Unitate …More
@Dr. John Smythe. I'm afraid I shall not return to this thread, and gladly concede the last word to you sir, and if you are now cured of the condition you had, perhaps it might just be one word..ah well, we live in hope. Thank you @Dr Stuart Reiss and @Gregory and @father P Nicholson and @AC Lumsden and @Gibbs212521 and @Chris P. P and @Letitia Maria and @Vox Populi and @Unitate and @Adeste fidelis, all of whom the good @Dr. John Smythe considers reincarnations of the same individual. But, I'm glad he's taken to praying..hopefully he will be Ex Umbris et Imaginibus in Veritatem (to quote our other great Englishman)
michael newman
@Dr. John Smythe To quote our great wartime leader churchill "Its best if you say what you have to say and the first time you come to a sentence with a grammatical ending --- stop" follow this man's advice, and you'd get yourself out of a sticky wicket.
Dr. John Smythe
@michael newman - where the heck did I ever call the Mass "satanic"?! That was Fr. Paul Nicholson in his blog that I linked - actually, he stated the Tridentine Mass was "worse" than the satanic mass.
Gregory
Of course the SSPX is not Catholic, as Fellay is not a Catholic Bishop, Willianson is not a Catholic Bishop either, as a Bishop is only Catholic when he is in full communion with the Pope, the Successor of Peter, which Fellay and Williamson clearly are not. Moreover, the Catholic Church does not excommunicate Her heroes.
michael newman likes this.
michael newman
@chancla your argument here is inconsistent. you want the papal bull quo premum to be upheld, and the pontificate of Pius V upheld, but you'd want us to disregard Pope Liberius's bull of excommunication of St Athanasius, and JPII's pontificate and his papal bull of excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre et al? do you have a personal magisterium that decide which pope is ok and which pope is not?…More
@chancla your argument here is inconsistent. you want the papal bull quo premum to be upheld, and the pontificate of Pius V upheld, but you'd want us to disregard Pope Liberius's bull of excommunication of St Athanasius, and JPII's pontificate and his papal bull of excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre et al? do you have a personal magisterium that decide which pope is ok and which pope is not? or do you get your instruction from the SSPX? either way, you are a protestant. thats no laughing matter either. The SSPX didn't save anything in the Church. they didn't need to. all what they've done is divide the church. Our church itself, has safeguarded and nourished the Tridentine Mass.
michael newman
@Gregory you've made your point very clearly (short and sweet too)
One more comment from michael newman
michael newman
@Dr. John Smythe no need to look for evidence, the chap on the video says it all. and you sir, as a mouth piece of the SSPX have called the Mass Satanic, and insulted a Catholic priest, calling him a bigot. It may be your style to be personally aggressive and insulting in an argument, but we here in England prefer to be Gentlemanly. And Dr Reiss is correct in his diagnosis, you do have verbal …More
@Dr. John Smythe no need to look for evidence, the chap on the video says it all. and you sir, as a mouth piece of the SSPX have called the Mass Satanic, and insulted a Catholic priest, calling him a bigot. It may be your style to be personally aggressive and insulting in an argument, but we here in England prefer to be Gentlemanly. And Dr Reiss is correct in his diagnosis, you do have verbal diarrhoea..come back to the post when thats cured.
Dr. John Smythe
@Gregory - Rarely are matters never so properly defended. You claim the SSPX is counterfeit but what evidence do you offer?

Inquiring minds want to know - that is why so many questions have been asked and proof for stances, but nothing offered; merely the same unsupported rhetoric.

There are some of us who really would like to know exactly how the SSPX causing all the troubles in the Church, …More
@Gregory - Rarely are matters never so properly defended. You claim the SSPX is counterfeit but what evidence do you offer?

Inquiring minds want to know - that is why so many questions have been asked and proof for stances, but nothing offered; merely the same unsupported rhetoric.

There are some of us who really would like to know exactly how the SSPX causing all the troubles in the Church, etc, especially when Dr. Judy Meissner so rightfully pointed out the "position expressed by this spokesman of the SSPX is simply a reaffirmation of the doctrinal and theological principles found in the Critical Study of the Novus Ordo Missae (New Mass) expressly prepared for Pope Paul VI in 1969 by Cardinals Alfredo Ottaviani and Antonio Bacci, along with 20 other Catholic bishops and theologians faithful to the Church’s Magisterium."

Mind you, instead of actually providing any evidence of my rhetoric (sophistry) I could always open multiple email accounts on yahoo or hotmail or gmail and then have multiple accounts on this site too just to support my other "personalities".
Dr. John Smythe
@Dr Stuart Reiss Reiss - Haters be hating'.

You still have not answered any questions posed to you with evidence.
Gregory
Rarely are matters so clear; Dr Stuart Reiss is the Catholic and Dr. John Smythe, like the SSPX, is counterfeit; like false, worthless money put into circulation in the place of the pure gold of truth. The SSPX have only fractured the Catholic Church once more, and have been the reason for other fractures as well.
michael newman likes this.
Dr. John Smythe
@Chancia - I am afraid Stuart Reiss is reaping what he is sowing. Please do not let his attacks offend you personally. I am sure he needs our prayers.
Dr. John Smythe
@Dr Stuart Reiss Reiss - Sending someone (myself) private messages resorting to calling me an "idiot" because I do not agree with what you stated clearly demonstrates your lack of an authentic argument; especially when compared to your postings on here.

I'm not sure why I'm wasting my time, I guess it is in case someone reading your posts may be deceived by what you claim. You stated, "I can't …More
@Dr Stuart Reiss Reiss - Sending someone (myself) private messages resorting to calling me an "idiot" because I do not agree with what you stated clearly demonstrates your lack of an authentic argument; especially when compared to your postings on here.

I'm not sure why I'm wasting my time, I guess it is in case someone reading your posts may be deceived by what you claim. You stated, "I can't be bothered to read [your posts]". Yet, you respond as if you know what I am writing about. As if that makes sense. Maybe you will come to the realization and understanding of your erroneous behaviour.

You questioned if I was even Catholic, yet state to Michael Newman I am a follower of the SSPX (?!). I can imagine the "foaming at the mouth" you would respond with if I questioned if you were, in fact, Catholic. Kind of like how you condemn the SSPX based on Part TWO of a video which is really part three of a series obviously done in a certain order to answer questions before they began and to help alleviate and mass reactionaries from reacting (exactly what you have done - you stated openly you refuse to watch the other two videos yet you rant and rave on here claiming to know what was being said without even taking the time to listen to what was being said?!). Where is the logic in that?

Socrates spent his life developing what we know as the Socratic Method. You obviously have never heard of it - that is what is the natural progression from criterion based thinking (aka Critical Thinking). If you have, you have not demonstrated any type of practice of it - at least not on here.

Sadly, I see you have continued your attacks on others, as well. In fact, it was your attack on the video's message that prompted me to question your stance - a stance that appears to be merely reactionary and not based on evidence - merely your personal individual opinion. An opinion you have not even tried to defend.

You accuse me of "personal criticisms" yet, that is what you did to me, in fact. Not to mention the Priest in this video, the Priestly Fraternity to which he belongs and even all those members and faithful of the SSPX! Yet, you accuse me of "personal criticisms"?! That is not even the pot calling the kettle black.

In trying to dialogue as an educated individual to no avail, I believe that only applicable response to your posts is the vernacular terminology of, "Haters be hatin'".
chancla
@Dr.StuartReiss"Pope Liberius was a weak man and was imprisoned and probably had been tortured to force him to support the Arian heresy,.. He was therefore obviously acting under duress."

He was PROBABLY tortured yet OBVIOUSLY acting under duress? How is it obvious? We don't know if he was tortured, but it is obvious that he was acting under duress. I'm sorry, but that argument is extremely …More
@Dr.StuartReiss"Pope Liberius was a weak man and was imprisoned and probably had been tortured to force him to support the Arian heresy,.. He was therefore obviously acting under duress."

He was PROBABLY tortured yet OBVIOUSLY acting under duress? How is it obvious? We don't know if he was tortured, but it is obvious that he was acting under duress. I'm sorry, but that argument is extremely unsound, sir.
chancla
@Dr.StuartReiss"Don't use Quo Primum, to justify your protestant position"!!!

Wow. You're funny. You casually disregard a Papal Bull (from a saint, no less) and I'M the protestant!! Hilarious. Oh, and "living authority"? Really? You want me to be believe that "living authority" trumps the ancient, unchangeable Truths of the Catholic Faith?? Are you serious? That is perhaps the worst argument I …More
@Dr.StuartReiss"Don't use Quo Primum, to justify your protestant position"!!!

Wow. You're funny. You casually disregard a Papal Bull (from a saint, no less) and I'M the protestant!! Hilarious. Oh, and "living authority"? Really? You want me to be believe that "living authority" trumps the ancient, unchangeable Truths of the Catholic Faith?? Are you serious? That is perhaps the worst argument I have ever heard. Very modernist, indeed, Doctor.
As for BXVI's motu proprio, that would have never, ever happened if the SSPX hadn't insisted on keeping the Faith alive and (mostly) untouched. Tradition would have disappeared 45 years ago. Of course, God would never allow His True Church to disappear, so he sent Archbishop Lefebvre to help keep it alive.
One more comment from chancla
chancla
Hmmm, who has been obedient to past pope and saint -- Pius V? The Novus Ordo Church or the SSPX? Papal bull Quo Primum makes that clear.

I think I'll stick with true Catholics like Saint Athanasius (who despite his "excommunication" continued to ordain bishops against the pope's wishes), Pope Saint Pius V, and of course Archbishop Lefebvre.

Thank God for the SSPX, without which we would have …More
Hmmm, who has been obedient to past pope and saint -- Pius V? The Novus Ordo Church or the SSPX? Papal bull Quo Primum makes that clear.

I think I'll stick with true Catholics like Saint Athanasius (who despite his "excommunication" continued to ordain bishops against the pope's wishes), Pope Saint Pius V, and of course Archbishop Lefebvre.

Thank God for the SSPX, without which we would have seen the near complete annihilation of the true Roman Catholic Rite of Mass. Thanks to the SSPX we have Ecclesia Dei, the FSSP, the Motu Proprio and thousands of souls who have been able to uphold their Catholic Faith these past 45 years. None of that would have happened if it hadn't been for the "rebellion" of Lefebvre. (Speaking of rebels, the current occupants of the Vatican hold heretic Martin Luther in high regard, yet call Lefebvre a heretic!!??)

Forget Father Z and all the "conservative" Vatican 2 fans. Go to the source and read Quo Primum.
yuitrel likes this.
Dr. John Smythe
@michael newman - what exactly are you referring to? The SSPX offering a Mass being worse than the satanic desecration of it?
Dr. John Smythe
@ Dr Reiss - if you have not bothered to even read anything, then you cannot refute it.
michael newman
too many doctors in this discussion. can the doctor who could write a prescription own up, and the others stop bigging themselves up please? @Dr. John Smythe are you a catholic? in this website its more catholic the better, so tone down your aggression a bit towards a fellow catholic. its ugly to see personal attacks, when you can't argue a pointless point. @Dr Stuart Reiss you are right, SSPX…More
too many doctors in this discussion. can the doctor who could write a prescription own up, and the others stop bigging themselves up please? @Dr. John Smythe are you a catholic? in this website its more catholic the better, so tone down your aggression a bit towards a fellow catholic. its ugly to see personal attacks, when you can't argue a pointless point. @Dr Stuart Reiss you are right, SSPX are not in the catholic church because they choose not be, so we shouldn't really be listening to some one who calls themselves a catholic priest when they have no valid ministry. @pnicholson you too have been personally attacked by this "dr" john smythe, I apologise on his behalf, for his irreverence to a good catholic priest. what you said was spot on.
Gregory likes this.
Gibbs212521
@Dr. Judy Meissner,

I shan't pretend to be doctoral of theology nor a lawful protector of the teaching of Christ's Immaculate Bride, i.e. solely the bishops. However, I am rather certain that "ChurchMilitant.com" and Mr. Voris does not claim to be distributing the sacraments nor anything requiring obedience to a bishop of a diocese beyond namesake. As it is the responsibility of the faithful to …More
@Dr. Judy Meissner,

I shan't pretend to be doctoral of theology nor a lawful protector of the teaching of Christ's Immaculate Bride, i.e. solely the bishops. However, I am rather certain that "ChurchMilitant.com" and Mr. Voris does not claim to be distributing the sacraments nor anything requiring obedience to a bishop of a diocese beyond namesake. As it is the responsibility of the faithful to preach at all times and in all mediums, they're doing just that. If the bishop of Detroit puts forth an excommunication, then they're no longer legitimate. However, if confession is possible without receiving encouragement to sin by a legitimate priest, then no extraordinary grounds exist to confess to any priest without jurisdiction. Moreover, if there is a lawful parish within reasonable limits which celebrates Mass without abuse and the pastor does not spout heresy then again, there is not ground for regular attendance to an SSPX parish, and that's being generous.
If SSPX recognizes il Papa, SSPX recognizes the bishops he recognizes. If such is true, then their members would have the hair-splitting endeavor of examining every priest at their most immediate parish[s] in communion with Rome; furthermore, even Pope Benedict XVI did not recognize SSPX as being in communion though he lifted excommunication with the hopes of encouraging full communion. He said in 2009 to clarify his lifting of excommunication, the Holy Father said this, " In order to make this clear once again: until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church" (w2.vatican.va/…/hf_ben-xvi_let_…).
Gregory likes this.
Dr. Judy Meissner
Where does the SSPX’s Position on the New Mass Come From?

TRUTH BE TOLD, the position expressed by this spokesman of the SSPX is simply a reaffirmation of the doctrinal and theological principles found in the Critical Study of the Novus Ordo Missae (New Mass) expressly prepared for Pope Paul VI in 1969 by Cardinals Alfredo Ottaviani and Antonio Bacci, along with 20 other Catholic bishops and …More
Where does the SSPX’s Position on the New Mass Come From?

TRUTH BE TOLD, the position expressed by this spokesman of the SSPX is simply a reaffirmation of the doctrinal and theological principles found in the Critical Study of the Novus Ordo Missae (New Mass) expressly prepared for Pope Paul VI in 1969 by Cardinals Alfredo Ottaviani and Antonio Bacci, along with 20 other Catholic bishops and theologians faithful to the Church’s Magisterium.

This Critical Study, which explicitly condemns the New Mass as “schismatic,” was NEVER been refuted by Paul VI nor has it been refuted by any other subsequent Pope. It has, however, been conveniently hidden away from the Catholics by the Modernist churchmen and the controlled-media.

These are the words found in the Critical Study of the Novus Ordo Missae written by prelates whose fidelity, orthodoxy and theological competency is above reproached:

<< “Today, division and schism are officially acknowledged to exist not only outside the Church, but within her as well. The Church's unity is not only threatened, but has already been tragically compromised. Errors against the Faith are not merely insinuated, but are--as has been likewise acknowledged--now forcibly imposed through liturgical abuses and aberrations.

To abandon a liturgical tradition which for four centuries stood as a sign and pledge of unity in worship, and to replace it with another liturgy which, due to the countless liberties it implicitly authorizes, cannot but be a sign of schism--a liturgy which teems with insinuations or manifest errors against the integrity of the Catholic Faith--is, we feel bound in conscience to proclaim, an incalculable error.” >>

Now you know. Want to read the Critical Study for yourself? Check it out at: www.facebook.com/note.php

BTW: Please note that there are many in the Church who would agree that my good friends at “Church Militant” and “The Vortex,” along with the SSPX, also “do not exercise any legitimate ministry in the Catholic Church.”
St Turibio Romo likes this.
Dr. John Smythe
@ "Dr" Reiss - You have merely reposted my post from before (the clarification by Bp Schneider).

If you truly hold an advanced degree you (should) know how important proper and authentic discussion is. This includes ensuring one's argument is backed with facts (that is the whole point of an essay - present an argument and prove it (although traditionally it also includes refuting any counter …More
@ "Dr" Reiss - You have merely reposted my post from before (the clarification by Bp Schneider).

If you truly hold an advanced degree you (should) know how important proper and authentic discussion is. This includes ensuring one's argument is backed with facts (that is the whole point of an essay - present an argument and prove it (although traditionally it also includes refuting any counter evidence and NOT just trying to justify your own personal stance - otherwise it really is not very valid, is it?)

You use "BOLD" lettering as if that alone adds any credence to your words. It does not - it actually makes you look like you are "SCREAMING" and the Japanese have a saying, "He who yells in an argument has just lost". It's also basic "netiquette"...

Anyway, you make (yet another) baseless claim (you provide no evidence whatsoever and you really should know better ...) that "THEY ARE OUT".

It is also a pretty strong statement, one that by it's very nature requires you to support objectively and beyond any doubt.

So, if I may be so bold, put your money where your "mouth" is. Show, objectively and authentically they really are "out" (mind you, you never did state out of what, but I think you were trying to allude to the Church).

As for Fr. Nicholson, he has shown his own personal prejudice and bigotry many times and, like you, has never backed up his claims or statements with any evidence; just unproven claims and hearsay. For instance, his blog post on how the "SSPX Mass is worse than the black mass" [fatherpaulnicholson.blogspot.ca/…/there-is-someth…]. That was simply ridiculous and he just cut off the ability to comment on his statement without actually taking the time to even respond to any of the valid questions regarding his scandalous statements! That kind of "response" is very telling.

If anyone actually had any clue, in the least, as to what goes on a black mass and the blasphemy that takes place they would never make such statements and if they ever did, especially publicly, they would, in all good conscience repent and recant their mistruths.

If anyone wants just a shadow of what really goes on at a black mass, they merely need to read William Peter Blatty's novel, 'The Exorcist' in which he takes a couple paragraphs to give the readers some insight into the horrific actions that take place at such an event. I will not repeat what he stated, because of the scandal involved, nor do I recommend anyone read what he wrote - except for Fr. Nicholson so he can then meditate upon his statements and realize the horrible scandal he perpetrated by making such an outrageous and bigoted claim.

As for yourself Stuart, please show your comprehension of your statements by proving their validity.

As it stands now, anyone reading what you have written has realized you have not proven such claims, just repeated them; seemingly in the hope that they will be accepted and believed. It is like a two year old sticking their fingers in their ears and closing their eyes, jumping up and down and screaming.
MsPandevida
EL PADRE TEODORO "EL MIEDO" PARTE 1
Bede and one more user like this.
Bede likes this.
onda likes this.
Irapuato
Aún no lo he hecho hoy..
Grazie,Don Minutella ! Perseveri !
Very good. Thanks Father for your evangelization on the internet!
Virgina
Durch die Gospa zu Jesus🙏 Alleluja❤
GOKL015 and one more user like this.
GOKL015 likes this.
Tina 13 likes this.
GOKL015
Es ist stets die Rede vom Urteil der Kirche gegenüber zB. Medjugorje. Ja wir schulden der Kirche und den Repräsentanten selbiger unseren Gehorsam. Das ist zur Zeit eben genau dass Problem. Es gibt, so sieht es im Moment aus Repräsentanten die es dem "Kleide"nach sind, aber dem Geiste der Katholischen Kirche sich wie "Wölfe im Schafspelz" verhalten. Daher ist dass, sich hinter der Fassade der …More
Es ist stets die Rede vom Urteil der Kirche gegenüber zB. Medjugorje. Ja wir schulden der Kirche und den Repräsentanten selbiger unseren Gehorsam. Das ist zur Zeit eben genau dass Problem. Es gibt, so sieht es im Moment aus Repräsentanten die es dem "Kleide"nach sind, aber dem Geiste der Katholischen Kirche sich wie "Wölfe im Schafspelz" verhalten. Daher ist dass, sich hinter der Fassade der Kirche oder dem "Urteil"...., selbiger, sich zu verstecken und sich dort auszuruhen für Christen in dieser Zeit eine Sünde wie ich finde. Es ist der "Papismus " unserer Zeit, der Tod des rechten Glaubens ! Ist es doch Christus unser Herr dem wir folgen und seinen Dienern im Gehorsam zu sein, die SEINEN Willen tun. Bitte dies auch mal so zu überdenken. Daher bin ich der Ansicht dass Medjugorje gerade deswegen ins Fadenkreuz geraten ist weil es eben echt ist. OPFER-GEBET-Buße ! Thats it !
a.t.m
@Maria lieben an Medjugorje ist eben die Unheilige Frucht des "UNGEHORSAMS" welche vom unseligen VK II heraufgeschworen wurde, am besten zu erkennen. Wer hält sich den in der heutigen Zeit noch an die Entscheidungen Weisungen und Anordnungen der irdischen kirchlichen Obrigkeit, aber genauso werden viele Seelen von Gott dem Herrn und seiner Einen, Heiligen, Katholischen und Apostolischen Kirche …More
@Maria lieben an Medjugorje ist eben die Unheilige Frucht des "UNGEHORSAMS" welche vom unseligen VK II heraufgeschworen wurde, am besten zu erkennen. Wer hält sich den in der heutigen Zeit noch an die Entscheidungen Weisungen und Anordnungen der irdischen kirchlichen Obrigkeit, aber genauso werden viele Seelen von Gott dem Herrn und seiner Einen, Heiligen, Katholischen und Apostolischen Kirche wegegeführt. Kommunion für Ehebrecher von der Kirche verboten - Völlig egal wir leisten Ungehorsam, usw.

Gottes und Mariens Segen auf allen Wegen
Fantasticmax
@Maria lieben Ich schaue mir in solchen Fällen halt gerne beide Seiten an, ansonsten warte ich geduldig auf ein Urteil der Kirche.

Im Übrigen glaube ich, dass 2017 Fatima noch wichtig sein könnte gegen das "Lutherjahr".
a.t.m likes this.
GOKL015
Mal eine Frage? Was ist wichtiger die Erscheinung selber , oder die Botschaft- "Umkehr-Gebet-Buße"! Wer kann was gegen diese Botschaften in unserer Zeit haben ? Seit über 30Jahren wird dies gesagt! Wer hat es in seinem Leben getan ? Was wenn diese Botschaft Gottes Wille ist ?
Tina 13 likes this.
Fantasticmax
Frau Küble hilft mir immer wieder, in Nüchternheit und Wachsamkeit nicht nachzulassen.
Ich liebe übrigens Rue de Bac, Lourdes und Fatima und vertraue auf das Urteil der einen, heiligen und apostolischen Kirche, welche nicht irren kann.
VERTRAUEN likes this.
a.t.m
Jeder von uns kann erkennen ob nun eine NEUE noch nicht kirchlich Überprüfte "Privatoffenbarung" himmlischen Ursprungs ist oder eben nicht, man braucht sich nur an die Weisungen der Kirche halten, siehe Auszug aus dem KKK

67 Im Laufe der Jahrhunderte gab es sogenannte ,,Privatoffenbarungen", von denen einige durch die kirchliche Autorität anerkannt wurden. Sie gehören jedoch nicht zum Glaubensgu…More
Jeder von uns kann erkennen ob nun eine NEUE noch nicht kirchlich Überprüfte "Privatoffenbarung" himmlischen Ursprungs ist oder eben nicht, man braucht sich nur an die Weisungen der Kirche halten, siehe Auszug aus dem KKK

67 Im Laufe der Jahrhunderte gab es sogenannte ,,Privatoffenbarungen", von denen einige durch die kirchliche Autorität anerkannt wurden. Sie gehören jedoch nicht zum Glaubensgut. Sie sind nicht dazu da, die endgültige Offenbarung Christi zu ,,vervollkommnen" oder zu ,,vervollständigen", sondern sollen helfen, in einem bestimmten Zeitalter tiefer aus ihr zu leben. Unter der Leitung des Lehramtes der Kirche weiß der Glaubenssinn der Gläubigen zu unterscheiden und wahrzunehmen, was in solchen Offenbarungen ein echter Ruf Christi oder seiner Heiligen an die Kirche ist.

Der christliche Glaube kann keine ,,Offenbarungen" annehmen, die vorgeben, die Offenbarung, die in Christus vollendet ist, zu übertreffen oder zu berichtigen, wie das bei gewissen nichtchristlichen Religionen und oft auch bei gewissen neueren Sekten der Fall ist, die auf solchen ,,Offenbarungen" gründen.

Ergo, wenn nun in einer Privatoffenbarung etwas gesagt wird, das nicht der Offenbarung Christi sprich der "Heiligen Schrift" als auch nicht mit der "Heiligen Überlieferung" übereinstimmt, kann diese eben nicht "himmlischen Ursprungs sein. Aber natürlich hat das letzte Wort immer die Eine, Heilige, Katholische und Apostolische Kirche Gottes unseres Herrn und wenn diese NEIN zu einer "Privatoffenbarung" sagt so hat man diese in Gehorsam anzunehmen, auch wenn man persönlich anderer Meinung ist, aber wenn diese JA sagt, so ist Niemand verpflichtet ebenfalls JA zu dieser zu sagen, siehe obigen Auszug aus dem KKK. Leider stellen aber in der heutigen Zeit viele ihren einen Willen und ihre Wünsche über Gott dem Herrn und der uns allen von Ihm offenbarten "Heiligen Schrift" als auch über die "Heilige Überlieferung" der Einen, Heiligen, Katholischen und Apostolischen Kirche Gottes unseres Herrn.

Gottes und Mariens Segen auf allen Wegen
MilitiaAvantgarde
Frau Küble scheint Privatoffenbarungen per se zu verdammen.
Gott hat bei ihr offenbar nur in der Antike gewirkt
Lutz Matthias likes this.
PaulK
Marienerscheinungen sind der Ausnahmefall, weil nämlich das Übernatürliche gewissermaßen in die Natur eingreift. Das Normale ist der Glaube ohne Wunder und ohne Erscheinungen. Unter den Zwölf gab es nur einen, der eine Erscheinung brauchte, der ungläubige Thomas. Wenn daher nun angeblich permanent Erscheinungen stattfinden, ist das grundsätzlich fragwürdig, weil dadurch der Glaubensakt entwertet …More
Marienerscheinungen sind der Ausnahmefall, weil nämlich das Übernatürliche gewissermaßen in die Natur eingreift. Das Normale ist der Glaube ohne Wunder und ohne Erscheinungen. Unter den Zwölf gab es nur einen, der eine Erscheinung brauchte, der ungläubige Thomas. Wenn daher nun angeblich permanent Erscheinungen stattfinden, ist das grundsätzlich fragwürdig, weil dadurch der Glaubensakt entwertet wird, der jedoch die Normalität im Leben der Gläubigen darstellt.

Wie Frau Küble richtig feststellt, gibt es keinen Grund für eine Marienerscheinung, wenn dort nur Banalitäten verkündet werden, wie z. B. "betet immer". Das gab es bei anerkannten Erscheinungen nie, sondern dort wurde immer etwas Besonderes mitgeteilt oder vorbereitet. In M. ist hingegen nach langen Jahren mit Erscheinungen nichts Besonderes geschehen, insbesondere das Vicka gegenüber angekündigte Zeichen fehlt noch immer.

Um M. beurteilen zu können muss man kein Schriftgelehrter sein, denn es genügt der gesunde Menschenverstand. Leider ist er bei vielen durch Emotionen vernebelt.

(Lesehinweis an @Tina 13 , @Maria lieben , @Simeonundhanna )
VERTRAUEN and 2 more users like this.
VERTRAUEN likes this.
a.t.m likes this.
Tradition und Kontinuität likes this.
a.t.m
Fr. Küble hat Recht und wirkt in ihren Kommentaren kontra Medjugorje, ja auch im Sinne des Vatikans und den Ortsbischöfen die schon vor langen ihr Urteil zu den angeblichen "Himmlischen Erscheinungen und Botschaften" gefällt haben. Aber es scheint den "Privatoffenbarungssüchtigen Medjugorianern" ja regelrecht am Hintern vorbeizugehen was die irdische kirchliche Hierarchie zu diesen Ort sagt. …More
Fr. Küble hat Recht und wirkt in ihren Kommentaren kontra Medjugorje, ja auch im Sinne des Vatikans und den Ortsbischöfen die schon vor langen ihr Urteil zu den angeblichen "Himmlischen Erscheinungen und Botschaften" gefällt haben. Aber es scheint den "Privatoffenbarungssüchtigen Medjugorianern" ja regelrecht am Hintern vorbeizugehen was die irdische kirchliche Hierarchie zu diesen Ort sagt. Daher mein Aufrichtiger Dank an Fr. Küble, denn sei weis das sie dafür von den "Medjusüchtigen Sektierern" zumindest verbal verfolgt und gehasst wird.

Gottes und Mariens Segen auf allen Wegen
cyprian and one more user like this.
cyprian likes this.
PaulK likes this.