Ultraviolet
"Christ the King is the title and the idea they don't understand." Classic V.R.S. nonsense. Schism has nothing to do with Christ the King or "crypto-Jews". One Catholic traditionalist society is even named "Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest". Understanding and agreement are not mutually exclusive. For example a Christian can understand the statement, "there is no god but Allah…More
"Christ the King is the title and the idea they don't understand." Classic V.R.S. nonsense. Schism has nothing to do with Christ the King or "crypto-Jews". One Catholic traditionalist society is even named "Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest". Understanding and agreement are not mutually exclusive. For example a Christian can understand the statement, "there is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his prophet" without agreeing. Go stay in the Polish language section where your stupidity isn't as obvious in your own native language.
V.R.S.
Crypto-Jews don't approve. Christ the King is the title and the idea they don't understand.
123jussi
St Paul DID disobey Peter and confronted him to his face when he was wrong. Fraternal correction is not disobedience but LOVE.
Ultraviolet
" Fraternal correction is not disobedience but LOVE" Then you're contradicting yourself @123jussi. You just said St. Paul disobeyed Peter and then you said correction isn't disobedience. *sigh*

"Currently, we have the Jews telling the pope how to interpret scripture, and our leadership happily acquiesces" @Steve D

No, "we" don't. You don't speak for the Catholic Church or the faithful …More
" Fraternal correction is not disobedience but LOVE" Then you're contradicting yourself @123jussi. You just said St. Paul disobeyed Peter and then you said correction isn't disobedience. *sigh*

"Currently, we have the Jews telling the pope how to interpret scripture, and our leadership happily acquiesces" @Steve D

No, "we" don't. You don't speak for the Catholic Church or the faithful because neither embrace your patological Jew-hating bigotry. This is more of your "Church teaching for centuries, bro." Utterly unsupported, unsupportable, and simply another talking point as empty as you head.
123jussi
I do speak for the Carholic Church and do so every time I repeat the timeless teachings of the faith. If you wish to educate your self instead of just pontificating read Aquinas on obedience. You will see that disobedience can not only be employed but is at times required! Yes disobeying the pope when he orders is disobedience but it is done for the love not only of him but of God.
Ultraviolet
Fair enough, I'll accept your claim. @123jussi You speak for the "Carholic Church". However, you don't speak for The Catholic Church because it hasn't appointed you in any official capacity to do so on its behalf. You're not even clergy, just laity like the rest of us. You speak only for yourself and thank God for that.

"instead of just pontificating" (Followed by vague references to Aquinas, …More
Fair enough, I'll accept your claim. @123jussi You speak for the "Carholic Church". However, you don't speak for The Catholic Church because it hasn't appointed you in any official capacity to do so on its behalf. You're not even clergy, just laity like the rest of us. You speak only for yourself and thank God for that.

"instead of just pontificating" (Followed by vague references to Aquinas, zero quotes, zero cites) --because that isn't pontificating. :P

"Yes disobeying the pope when he orders is disobedience but it is done for the love not only of him but of God."

That argument can be used to justify any heresy, any schism. No, your interpretation of Aquinas fails on its own imprecision. For clergy (since that's what Abp. Lefebvre was) it's also contradicted by Canon Law 273, --"Clerics have a special obligation to show reverence and obedience to the Supreme pontiff and to their own Ordinary"--
Ultraviolet
For me? Thank you @Steve D :) Another display of your stupidity is always welcome! What you claimed: "Currently, we have the Jews telling the pope..." What you linked: Rabbi Rasson Arousi "wrote a letter of complaint to Cardinal Kurt Koch,"

Pope Francis is not Cardinal Koch. "D" is for different, Steve D. Get back to me when you figure that out. :P
Ultraviolet
"He acted according to the wisdom of both Saint Paul and Gamaliel " --Except neither man flat-out disobeyed the ruling Pope of that time. @Ave Crux

"We ought to obey God, rather than men." Maybe schismatics see the Popes as just "men", Catholics do not. Popes are the earthly successors to Christ and the temporal heads of His Church in unbroken succession. When Peter spoke those words, he More
"He acted according to the wisdom of both Saint Paul and Gamaliel " --Except neither man flat-out disobeyed the ruling Pope of that time. @Ave Crux

"We ought to obey God, rather than men." Maybe schismatics see the Popes as just "men", Catholics do not. Popes are the earthly successors to Christ and the temporal heads of His Church in unbroken succession. When Peter spoke those words, he was the Pope and, as such, he had the right to use "we" in a Papal sense.

The history of heresy (not to mention schism) is full of men justifying their errors and hiding behind Scripture. They're always "obeying God". Martin Luther could quote that passage as well and he'd be wrong for the same reason.

Poor God... He constantly gets blamed for stupidities He never demanded, much less even suggested.
Ave Crux
We've dealt with this at length elsewhere. No Pope has the right to suppress the Faith of the Ages, nor forbid the priestly formation and Catechesis according to the Faith as it has been received and practiced for centuries.

And no Pope can command any subject to violate his conscience; and in such cases, no penalties imposed are of effect.

The latter is supported by Canon Law, and such was …More
We've dealt with this at length elsewhere. No Pope has the right to suppress the Faith of the Ages, nor forbid the priestly formation and Catechesis according to the Faith as it has been received and practiced for centuries.

And no Pope can command any subject to violate his conscience; and in such cases, no penalties imposed are of effect.

The latter is supported by Canon Law, and such was the case with Archbishop Lefebvre.

That's all I'm saying -- we've been here before and enough has been said on it.
Ultraviolet
Yes we have. ::) When the Pope forbids an Archbishop to ordain the bishops he wishes to, that is not "supress(ing) the Faith of Ages". Papa Johannnes told Little Marcel, "No." It's a certainty he wasn't the first Pope in Church history to forbid a wilfull, headstrong subordinate from doing whatever he pleases.

The Pope didn't command Abp. Lefebvre to violate his conscience. He forbade him …More
Yes we have. ::) When the Pope forbids an Archbishop to ordain the bishops he wishes to, that is not "supress(ing) the Faith of Ages". Papa Johannnes told Little Marcel, "No." It's a certainty he wasn't the first Pope in Church history to forbid a wilfull, headstrong subordinate from doing whatever he pleases.

The Pope didn't command Abp. Lefebvre to violate his conscience. He forbade him from ordaining more bishops like himself, no doubt men with the same contempt for Church authority, -and thus for good reason.

"and in such cases, no penalties imposed are of effect."

There are penalties for invalid ordinations. That is also supported by Canon law and, as you said, "such was the case with Archbishop Lefebvre." Quite so. ;-)
Ave Crux
Well, it appears that Ultraviolet needs to become more familiar with history. Archbishop Lefebvre was asked by young seminarians and Catholic Faithful throughout the world to found a seminary and chapels because of the outrageous departure from doctrine and discipline taking place in seminaries and churches (to include sacrilege and desecration of Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament) which began …More
Well, it appears that Ultraviolet needs to become more familiar with history. Archbishop Lefebvre was asked by young seminarians and Catholic Faithful throughout the world to found a seminary and chapels because of the outrageous departure from doctrine and discipline taking place in seminaries and churches (to include sacrilege and desecration of Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament) which began immediately following Vatican II, and because of the abandon of sound catechetics in Catholic schools everywhere.

As an Archbishop charged before God with the responsibility FIRST of passing on the Faith whole and entire as he had received it and to ensure its preservation, he was NOT charged with the responsibility to obey unjust, destructive orders that would suppress the Faith and leave the faithful abandoned.

To assure the continuation of the Traditional Rites which had been completely abandoned by the Catholic Church throughout the world, Bishops were needed to ordain his seminarians in the Traditional Faith so they could continue the preservation of Tradition.

When Rome continued to refuse to provide these, and as his death from cancer was approaching, Archbishop Lefebvre did exactly what he absolutely believed was his conscious-bound duty before God, for which no individual can be penalized under Canon Law.

Furthermore, what was also clear is that Archbishop Lefebvre was not an uniformed party to what was happening in Rome.

He knew all about the treachery that had happened during Vatican II and following; he witnessed a Cardinal interrupting his personal conversation with Pope John Paul II at the very moment he was on the verge of granting his wishes and then simply walked away when the Cardinal objected, etc., etc., etc.

It is clear that Archbishop Lefebvre's conscience was clearly informed that it was treachery, not concern for the preservation of the Faith that was behind Rome's refusal to grant a Bishop for the SSPX. And he acted in light of that knowledge, as he believed was his duty before God as his death approached.

A just and upright man about to die and face God to give an account of his deeds does not play lightly with his conscience.
Ultraviolet
"That's all I'm saying -- we've been here before and enough has been said on it." @Ave Crux And now, eight paragraphs later.... :D

"Archbishop Lefebvre was asked by young seminarians and Catholic Faithful throughout the world..." -- I never thought you'd stoop to a "doin' it for the children" defense. :P

"As an Archbishop charged before God with the responsibility FIRST of passing on the …More
"That's all I'm saying -- we've been here before and enough has been said on it." @Ave Crux And now, eight paragraphs later.... :D

"Archbishop Lefebvre was asked by young seminarians and Catholic Faithful throughout the world..." -- I never thought you'd stoop to a "doin' it for the children" defense. :P

"As an Archbishop charged before God with the responsibility FIRST of passing on the Faith whole and entire as he had received it and to ensure its preservation..."

He signed his good name endorsing Vatican Council II's documents and sat happily by for twenty five years afterwards. Fancy that.

"unjust, destructive orders that would suppress the Faith and leave the faithful abandoned."

The Pope forbidding Abp. Lefebvre from ordaining his own bishops did nothing of the sort.

As Catholic clerg , he also had an obligation to obey Church Law, Notably Canon Law 273, --"Clerics have a special obligation to show reverence and obedience to the Supreme pontiff and to their own Ordinary"--

Also Canon Law 1382 --"A bishop who consecrates some one a bishop without a pontifical mandate and the person who receives the consecration from him incur a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See."--

"Bishops were needed to ordain his seminarians in the Traditional Faith so they could continue the preservation of Tradition."

No they weren't. Easy counter example: all the traditionalist priests who've been ordained since Vatican Council II by Catholic bishops who have nothing to do with the SSPX.

"When Rome continued to refuse to provide these,..."

Correction: "When Rome refused to provide the bishops Abp. Lefebvre wanted..." Rome hasn't refused to provide bishops who are sympathetic to traditionalism, witness all the bishops who ordain FSSP priests.

"Archbishop Lefebvre did exactly what he absolutely believed was his conscious-bound duty before God, for which no individual can be penalized under Canon Law."

LOL... using your logic, a person who believes providing abortion is a "conscious-bound duty before God" is exempt? How about murder and other mortal sins? Btw. I believe you meant "conscience-bound" but, hey, one moar error at this point ain't gonna matter none. ;-)

"Furthermore, what was also clear is that Archbishop Lefebvre was not an uniformed party to what was happening in Rome."

It's also clear that he was headstrong, willful, disdainful of Papal authority, and prone to presuming he possessed its equal. (something Pope Paul VI noted)

"He knew all about the treachery that had happened during Vatican II and following;"

He should, since he signed the Vatican Council II documents and abided by them for 25 years afterwards.

Anyone can cite their "conscience" for breaking whatever Church Law or teaching they please, from shop-lifting to murder. Example: the travesty of "LGBTQ-Catholics". They're wrong now for the same reason Abp. Lefebvre was worng.
Ultraviolet
"A just and upright man about to die and face God to give an account of his deeds does not play lightly with his conscience."

Loads O' Bold! I was wondering when the SSPX Propaganda Bot would go online. :D Fact is, blindly self-righteous clergy often confuse their own arrogance with their "conscience". Martin Luther was following his "conscience" too. Does that exonerate his heresy?
Ave Crux
"If my work is of God, He will guard it and use it for the good of the Church." Archbishop Lefebvre

He acted according to the wisdom of both Saint Paul and Gamaliel (Acts 5):

"But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men. 30 The God of our fathers hath raised up Jesus, whom you put to death, hanging him upon a tree. 31 Him hath God exalted with his right …More
"If my work is of God, He will guard it and use it for the good of the Church." Archbishop Lefebvre

He acted according to the wisdom of both Saint Paul and Gamaliel (Acts 5):

"But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men. 30 The God of our fathers hath raised up Jesus, whom you put to death, hanging him upon a tree. 31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand, to be Prince and Saviour, to give repentance to Israel, and remission of sins. 32 And we are witnesses of these things and the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to all that obey him.

Gamaliel's Counsel

33 When they had heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they thought to put them to death. 34 But one in the council rising up, a Pharisee, named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, respected by all the people, commanded the men to be put forth a little while.

35 And he said to them: Ye men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what you intend to do, as touching these men. 36 For before these days rose up Theodas, affirming himself to be somebody, to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all that believed him were scattered, and brought to nothing. 37 After this man, rose up Judas of Galilee, in the days of the enrolling, and drew away the people after him: he also perished; and all, even as many as consented to him, were dispersed. 38 And now, therefore, I say to you, refrain from these men, and let them alone; for if this council or this work be of men, it will come to nought; 39 But if it be of God, you cannot overthrow it, lest perhaps you be found even to fight against God. And they consented to him.
aderito
They want to destroy christianity but we are alive because our leader Christ the King has already won the war
Ultraviolet
"If my work is of God, He will guard it and use it for the good of the Church." Does that mean Mohammed's work "is of God" too? It's been around much longer and makes more converts than The Church. Just because error endures doesn't mean God guards it.
Lisi Sterndorfer
“Even if at the moment he is keeping quiet, one or another of these bishops will receive from the Holy Ghost the courage needed to arise in his turn. If my work is of God, He will guard it and use it for the good of the Church. Our Lord has promised us, the gates of Hell shall not prevail against Her. This is why I persist, and if you wish to know the real reason for my persistence, it is this: …More
“Even if at the moment he is keeping quiet, one or another of these bishops will receive from the Holy Ghost the courage needed to arise in his turn. If my work is of God, He will guard it and use it for the good of the Church. Our Lord has promised us, the gates of Hell shall not prevail against Her. This is why I persist, and if you wish to know the real reason for my persistence, it is this: At the hour of my death, when Our Lord asks me, “What have you done with your episcopate, what have you done with your episcopal and priestly grace?” I do not want to hear from His lips the terrible words, “You have helped to destroy the Church along with the rest of them.”
+Archbishop Lefebvre, “Open Letter to Confused Catholics”, chapter 23