Author: Christ the King
Baptized in 1991. Confirmed Roman Catholic 2015. I am married and the father of two sons. My education includes a B.A. in Geography and Urban planning. My interests are in reading the Bible and good books like Will Durant's, The Story of Civilization.
Lesson of the Keys
Catholic Privilege
POPE U.N.plugged: Return of the Old World Order
False Eccuminism
Who Were the Nicolaitans?
The Nicolaitans are the wolves in sheep’s cloths who have conquered the laity in false obedience to heresy and hypocrisy. Through deception, these false shepherds have fooled most of the faithful into accepting sin by an over emphasis on God’s mercy. While down playing his judgment.
By: Rodney Ford
The Nicolaites were an infamous sect, who disturbed the rising Church by the superstitions and all the impurities of paganism. See St. Augustine, de hæresib. -Thou hast them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaites, which is compared to that of Balaam who taught Balac to cast a scandal before the children of Israel, by which they were seduced by the women of the Moabites, and fell into the sin of fornication and idolatry. (Numbers xxiv. and xxxi. 16.)
By this woman, Jezebel, was meant some heretical sect, or the corrupt synagogue of the Jews; but interpreters commonly understand some powerful woman thereabout among the infamous Nicolaites, who by her authority and artifices, brought many to embrace that sect.[Haydock Catholic Bible Commentary]
St. Jerome’s commentary on the Apocalypse says,
“Nicolaitans: Ancient commentators connected this group with with the proselyte Nicolas, who, according to Acts 6:5, became…
View original post 344 more words
Pope in Name Only(Sedeprivationism)
CASSICIACUM THESIS
Sedeprivationism is an ideological school or party of the traditionalist Roman Catholic movement that holds that Popes since John XXIII have been defective Popes, following the principles of the late French theologian Michel Louis Guérard des Lauriers, O.P., as Lauriers set it out in his thesis published in the Cahiers du Cassiciacum and therefore called the “Cassiciacum thesis”.
According to Laurier’s thesis, Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II and (implicitly) Benedict XVI and Francis were or are defective Popes in that, due to their supposed espousal of the “modernist heresy”, their consent to become Pope was faulty or defective, so that they became potentially Pope, but did not attain to the papacy.
This idea is also described in another manner by saying that they became Pope materially but not formally (the formula, “papa materialiter non formaliter”).
Two consequences flow out of this thesis:
There is no real sede vacante since a man fills the role of potential Pope;
If the current potential Pope recants from Modernism and returns to Catholicism, he will complete the process and attain to the fullness of the papacy.
The terms sedeprivationism and sedeprivationist were coined by the late English Sedevacantist William J. Morgan.
Besides the late bishop Michel Guerard des Lauriers, O.P., those Traditionalists prominent for subscribing to this explanation are: Bishops Robert F. McKenna, O.P. and Donald Sanborn in the U.S.A., and Fr. Francesco Ricossa and his Istituto Mater Bonii Consilii (alternative name Sodalitium Pianum), to which Bishop Geert Jan Stuyver belongs, located in Flanders as well as the cities of Turin and Rome in Italy.
EXTERNAL LINKS
(http://www.sedeprivationism.com)
Donald Sanborn, The material Papacy (www.sodalitiumpianum.com)
Sedeprivationism is Not Sedevacantism
By: Fr. Ronald Ringrose
“The Chair of St. Peter at Rome (January 18) — This feast reinforces the unique role of the pope as vicar of Christ, and that as universal pastor, he cannot err when he teaches on matters of faith and morals. How then, are faithful Catholics to explain the appearance that the pope has erred since Vatican II? Here are some of the attempts that have been made over the years. Some of you old timers will no doubt remember them.
– It is the liberal bishops and not the pope who are responsible.
– The council was ambiguous and the wrong interpretation has been given.
– The real pope is being held captive and a look-alike imposter has taken over.
– The pope didn’t speak ex cathedra.
– The council was only a pastoral council.
– Nowadays it seems that it can sometimes happen that the pope teaches error. When he does, we must continue to recognize his authority, but hold fast and resist whatever erroneous teaching or evil commands he may give.
– The pope and bishops have embraced the apostasy of the new religion and have thereby lost their offices. All the seats are empty, including that of the pope and we are today without any hierarchy whatsoever.
We understand that as glaring as some of these errors may seem today, they were the best answers that were available at the time. Only in time and with further reflection, did the error of these answers become apparent. Let us consider today this last error, which many now call sedevacantism (Latin for “the see being vacant”). The popular name for this error is borrowed from the term that is used between the death of one pope and the election of a new one. Good Catholics, who believed the idea that all the seats are vacant, did so only to be faithful to the promise of Christ that the religion any pope would teach the Universal Church would be guaranteed by His own word and the power of the Holy Ghost. However, while defending this one truth of Christ, they unwittingly fell into an error contrary to another teaching of the Church, that the Hierarchy is perpetual, that it will last to the end of time, and that Peter will have perpetual successors. The pope and the Hierarchy cannot simply be gone! Therefore, this explanation must be rejected by Catholics.
The Chair of St Peter at Rome (continued) – This feast reinforces Catholic teaching that Christ has given to Peter and his successors a unique role in the Church as Universal Pastor. In this role as teacher Our Lord has promised that he who hears Peter hears Him. Recognizing this promise, the Church has infallibly taught that Peter and his successors cannot teach error to the Universal Church any more than Christ can. So Christ guarantees that Peter will never teach error and Peter has the special assistance of the Holy Ghost to carry this out.
We have considered the error of sedevacantism, which holds that there is no pope, and that there is no hierarchy. Today let us consider another error, referred to by some as “Recognize and Resist.” In a nutshell, R&R holds that sometimes the pope teaches error or imposes evil or harmful practices or laws.* When he does, we must recognize his authority but resist his erroneous teachings or evil commands. Good Catholics have mistakenly fallen into this error in their attempt to protect the teaching of the Church that the pope must have perpetual successors and that somehow there must always be a hierarchy. The R&R position cannot be held because it ignores the clear teaching of the Church that the pope cannot teach error or impose evil or harmful practices and laws by virtue of the guarantee of Our Lord and the special assistance of the Holy Ghost. If we recognize the pope’s authority to teach and rule the Church in matters of faith and morals, we have no choice but to assent and obey, for not to do so would be to fail to assent to Christ Himself, by Whose authority and in Whose name the pope speaks. So R&R cannot be the answer, and like sedevacantism, it too must be rejected.
(*Some have said that the pope taught error at the time of St. Athanasius, but a closer examination of the facts shows this not to be true.)
Chair of St. Peter at Rome … conclusion) – We have been considering the past few weeks this feast, which reinforces the teaching of the Church that the office of the Chair of St. Peter (Peter and his successors, the popes) is indefectible, that is it is always free from error and must be perpetual. Its teachings are the standard and rule of Faith, despite the worthiness or unworthiness of the successor. In light of this and what we have said before, what is a faithful Catholic to do? Join or re-join the Novus Ordo? By no means! It is a false religion and to do so would be to abandon the Catholic Faith.
We have considered some answers to the question: How is it that the New Order popes have attempted to impose on the Church erroneous teachings and harmful or evil laws or practices? We gave particular attention to two of the most widely-held erroneous explanations: sedevacantism and recognize and resist (R&R). In light of what has been said, the following become apparent:
– Contrary to the teaching of the Church: The pope can teach error sometimes and impose harmful or evil practices and laws on the Universal Church.
– Contrary to the teaching of the Church: There is no hierarchy whatsoever. (It is de fide that the hierarchy must be perpetual.)
– Contrary to the teaching of the Church: We may resist the authority of the pope.
– That since it is obvious that the Vatican II popes have imposed teachings and practices contrary to Faith and morals, it must be concluded that the infallible and indefectible teaching power promised to Peter’s successors is absent.
– It may be held that since the Vatican II popes possess a legal and valid election, they have a certain legal status as popes.
– It may be held that this legal status is sufficient to maintain the succession to Peter and the perpetuity of the hierarchy.
It would appear, then, that the Chair is not totally vacant, nor is it completely full. The new order popes possess some legal aspect as popes but lack the authority to teach and rule on matters of faith and morals. In the face of this situation, the proper response of all faithful Catholics is to believe what Catholics have always believed and to do what Catholics have always done. We cannot go wrong doing that!” (Fr. Ronald Ringrose, St. Athanasius Church Bulletins of Jan. 14, Jan. 21, Jan. 28, 2018; bold print and italics given.)
We must as Catholics believe these truths revealed by Christ and taught as dogma by the Church:
- We know the things we are to believe from the Catholic Church. It is the pope with the bishops, through whom God speaks to us. (Baltimore Catechism #3 q. 10 also q. 157)
- The Church (pope & bishops) certainly can never teach us falsehood because the Holy Ghost abides with it forever. (BC #3 q. 445)
- Infallibility means that the Church (pope & bishops) cannot err when they teach faith and morals. (BC #3 q. 526)
This is all nicely summarized in a Youtube video entitled, “Archbishop Lefebvre Speaks Frankly About the Pope.”
“It is a recorded conference of the Archbishop in which he clearly states that it is impossible for a pope to impose heresy and evil practices on the Church and that he who would do so certainly cannot be pope. Look up these questions in the Baltimore Catechism for yourself and listen to the Archbishop’s own words.”(Fr. Ronald Ringrose, St. Athanasius Church Bulletin of Apr. 29, 2018; italics given)
The person occupying the Apostolic See is no longer formally the pope: He no longer has any divinely assisted Pontifical authority; he however remains materially a pope insofar as he has not been juridically deposed.
Let us suppose that the New Order popes held only materially the Papal office, while not holding formally the chair of Peter. This is the conclusion of Fr. Bernard Lucien in his “Thesis Cassiciacum.” That the occupant of the chair of Peter is not formally Pope.
The Vatican II document “Dignitatis Humanae Personae” writen on Dec 7, 1965 contradicts Catholic teaching on religious liberty and the infallibility of the ordinary and universal Magisterium. This can be demonstrated if we look at the traditional teaching on religious liberty in the encyclical by St. Pope Pius IX, “Quanta cura.”
“For you well know, venerable brethren, that at this time men are found not a few who, applying to civil society the impious and absurd principle of “naturalism,” as they call it, dare to teach that “the best constitution of public society and (also) civil progress altogether require that human society be conducted and governed without regard being had to religion any more than if it did not exist; or, at least, without any distinction being made between the true religion and false ones.” And, against the doctrine of Scripture, of the Church, and of the Holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert that “that is the best condition of civil society, in which no duty is recognized, as attached to the civil power, of restraining by enacted penalties, offenders against the Catholic religion, except so far as public peace may require.” From which totally false idea of social government they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our Predecessor, Gregory XVI, an “insanity,”2 viz., that “liberty of conscience and worship is each man’s personal right, which ought to be legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society; and that a right resides in the citizens to an absolute liberty, which should be restrained by no authority whether ecclesiastical or civil, whereby they may be able openly and publicly to manifest and declare any of their ideas whatever, either by word of mouth, by the press, or in any other way.” But, while they rashly affirm this, they do not think and consider that they are preaching “liberty of perdition;”3 and that “if human arguments are always allowed free room for discussion, there will never be wanting men who will dare to resist truth, and to trust in the flowing speech of human wisdom; whereas we know, from the very teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ, how carefully Christian faith and wisdom should avoid this most injurious babbling.”….” For they repeat that the “ecclesiastical power is not by divine right distinct from, and independent of, the civil power, and that such distinction and independence cannot be preserved without the civil power’s essential rights being assailed and usurped by the Church.” Nor can we pass over in silence the audacity of those who, not enduring sound doctrine, contend that “without sin and without any sacrifice of the Catholic profession assent and obedience may be refused to those judgments and decrees of the Apostolic See, whose object is declared to concern the Church’s general good and her rights and discipline, so only it does not touch the dogmata of faith and morals.” But no one can be found not clearly and distinctly to see and understand how grievously this is opposed to the Catholic dogma of the full power given from God by Christ our Lord Himself to the Roman Pontiff of feeding, ruling and guiding the Universal Church.”….”And again do not fail to teach “that the royal power was given not only for the governance of the world, but most of all for the protection of the Church;”11 and that there is nothing which can be of greater advantage and glory to Princes and Kings than if, as another most wise and courageous Predecessor of ours, St. Felix, instructed the Emperor Zeno, they “permit the Catholic Church to practise her laws, and allow no one to oppose her liberty. For it is certain that this mode of conduct is beneficial to their interests, viz., that where there is question concerning the causes of God, they study, according to His appointment, to subject the royal will to Christ’s Priests, not to raise it above theirs.”
In dirrect contradiction to this teaching, Vatican II “Dignitatis Humanae Personae” says,
“On his part, man perceives and acknowledges the imperatives of the divine law through the mediation of conscience. In all his activity a man is bound to follow his conscience in order that he may come to God, the end and purpose of life. It follows that he is not to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his conscience. Nor, on the other hand, is he to be restrained from acting in accordance with his conscience, especially in matters religious. The reason is that the exercise of religion, of its very nature, consists before all else in those internal, voluntary and free acts whereby man sets the course of his life directly toward God. No merely human power can either command or prohibit acts of this kind.”
“With regard to lthe contradiction between Vatican II and Quanta cura, one can easily conclude that one or the other teaching must be erronious; and hence that one or the other of these acts promilgated by the Magisterium lacks infallibility.”(Fr. Bernard Lucien, Thesis Cassiciacum)
‘Pope’ Francis and His Spurious Encyclical
“In his inter-action with the 500 faithful attending his third weekly general audience in the San Damaso courtyard following six months of live-streamed weekly catecheses from the papal library of the Apostolic Palace. For just over 20 minutes the Holy Father mingled with the faithful –
Pope Francis began Wednesday’s lesson by saying, “we have seen the vital role played by the many people who generously care for others, especially the sick, elderly and most vulnerable. We have also recognized our responsibility to care for the natural world, whose beauty is all too often ignored and its resources squandered.”we can see the influence of his modernist philosophy by mixing truth with lie. He always speaks with ambiguity and deception.
“Highlighting the importance of contemplation, he noted that, “in order to regain a proper sense of our place within God’s creation, and of our call to respect and care for the earth and one another, we need to learn anew the art of contemplation. For when we enter into silence and contemplate our interconnected world, we come to appreciate the true meaning and value of all creatures, for each in its own way reflects something of God’s infinite wisdom, goodness and beauty.”(1)This kind of language can only be interpreted as pantheism, the worship of the planet and the denial of God as a personal being.
ENCYCLICAL “BROTHERS ALL” TO BE SIGNED BY POPE OCTOBER 3 IN ASSISI, MADE PUBLIC OCTOBER 4
We are all brothers? Only those who follow Christ or “Christians” are my brother, Francis. Shame is brought on the faithful by this man(the Holy Father). He is teaching pantheism, worship of the planet, not Catholicism or the Gospel.
Brother Catholics, Put Christ and his truth before this faithless leader– unite against these false teachings coming from the Vatican. Pantheism, False Eccuminism, modernism! No fellowship with Muslims, heretics, and schismatics. Therefore, we must separate ourselves from these apostates who call themselves Catholic, and are not.
Notes:
Inclusion at All Cost
By: Rodney Ford
Diversity is the politically correct demon of our age. A better word to aspire to would be ‘assimilation’, to a God centered worldview; one that promotes family and Faith. Diversity without unity of thought is anarchy.
Quote Tweet:
“Sad silver lining to 2020: Diversity has been the cause of all our ruin. We no longer need to imagine the consequences of Whites becoming a minority in our historic homelands, we see countless examples in our cities. This makes the educational work of White advocacy much easier.”(Faith Goldy@FaithGoldy)
While Faith Goldy, a political commentator and social media influencer from Canada, is under attack for her conservative[White advocacy] worldview against a Corrupt socialist fascism which threatens to encompass the world, we Americans are suffering and being lead slowly down the same road to tyranny.
Instead of acting as the bastion of freedom and democracy, we are crumbling and caving into the sin of the complacent. After years of media controlled psych-ops being pushed on the populous by the news and entertainment industry, we, as a collective, have been transformed into a docile, non-thinking herd of animals who eat, drink, and do exactly what “big brother” tells us. Even our schools have been infiltrated by the gravest form of evil of which misunderstood people like Joseph McCarthy tried to warn us. But we were too progressive, too civilized to listen to the clarion call of the “watchmen on the wall” that Almighty God sent to awaken us from our sleep.
And how about the Communist infiltration of our, once great, Catholic Church? This fact has been opined and bemoaned by every neo-conservative from here to China. But what’s being accomplished by all that effort? Only a distraction by the evil one from what should be happening. Repentance and suffering for the sins of the world, and the Church, against the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
We, as Catholics, should Know more than anyone else,”For the time has come for judgement to begin at the house of God, and if it begins with us first, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God?”(1Peter 4:17)
Catholics, who have been given the fullness of the Faith, have a greater responsibility. We represent the best of what is good, honest and true of western civilization, and we, for the most part, have abandoned our heritage and tradition for a cheap imitation.
Post-modern thinking, and the humanistic secular worldview has engendered a “me first” self centered generation that makes unto themselves god’s of men. Putting man in the center of your theology, in place of God, is a very dangerous thing. Instead of absolute truth based on the natural law of God, we have a constantly changing morass of relativistic situation ethics.
Diversity of race is fine [and all forms of racism should be condemned], but diversity of a common creed is where the wisdom of this age has erred. In trying to be inclusive, many have had to deny truth. The truth of the gospel has been replaced with a different gospel. A gospel of diversity and inclusion at any cost. We are now being asked to even tolerate sin in the midst of Christ’s body for the sake of inclusion.
Diversity is not the answer when it comes to the war of ideas. Unity of thought is still required for membership of any coherent group which hopes to last the test of time, adversity, and the wiles of chance that crashes against the ship of life on which we all ride. Christ once said,” you are either for me, or against me.” And also,”I came not to bring peace, but a sword.” That kind of singularity of thought is lost on this generation of milk toast snowflakes.
There is, however, a new religion. A religion of convenience. For lack of a better term, a sentimental humanitarianism. This religion is filled with good intentions, sunshine and puppy dogs! But when reality is introduced to this Church of “nice” and wishful thinking, it shows itself to be the shallow, empty, and bankrupt kind of faith that leads, ultimately, to perdition.
Conclusion
All this being said, tolerance can be a good thing when practiced out of love for neighbor, but this tolerance must always be practiced without losing sight of the uncompromising truth of Almighty God. At the same time we must remember all kind of people’s don’t always mix well together; because of socio-economic, religious, cultural, as well as, political reasons. So, we must therefore conclude the sovereign right of nations to uphold and defend their territorial borders is given to us as a divine right directly from God himself.
“But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built. 6And the Lord said, “Indeed the people are one and they all have one language, and this is what they begin to do; now nothing that they propose to do will be withheld from them. 7Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.” 8So the Lord scattered them abroad from there over the face of all the earth, and they ceased building the city. 9Therefore its name is called [c]Babel, because there the Lord confused the language of all the earth; and from there the Lord scattered them abroad over the face of all the earth.”(Genesis 11:5-9)
Christian Universal Truth 