 |
St. Peter's Dome is blown away by Vatican Council II: The Rhine overflows contaminating the Tiber. . . "When therefore you shall see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place". . . "Rome will apostatize and become the seat of the Antichrist. The Church will be in eclipse".
The total of our faith is founded on prophesy.
|
Only the pope could take away the daily sacrifice of the New Testament: the Holy Mass. This prophesy was fulfilled by the "Bugnini Novus Ordo Mass" decreed by Paul VI. No longer was it to be the Sacrifice on the Cross of Calvary, no longer a sacrifice, but a mockery of the Last Supper. This prophecy is fulfilled prophecy for and in our times, as flying armies are as Newtestamentary as the Second World War is modern! It is also in agreement with Mathew 25:32-54, "And before him shall be gathered all nations:
and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. . . Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:. .
The head of the Church Militant, Christ's Army sent to conquer the world in His Name --in Catholic lingo-- is the Pope. Scripture is precision itself!.
DEBATE!
Despite Scripture's clarity, despite La Salette, despite desolation and the whole gamut of abominations having brought havoc upon the Church, debate has been raging on this issue for years: Is it His Holiness, or is it his Damnedest. Something quite unthinkable for any other institution on earth. It's become so tiring, that if it were not for prophesy being fulfilled the madhouse would be indistinguishable from the Church!
Fortunately there's debate! Debate is as necessary as abridgement, as selectivity, as pinpointing essentials and bringing them to the fore; as sifting the grain from the chaff! And fortunately, there's Bishop Williamson and Atila Sinke Guimaraes. Two men of extraordinary competence, deep culture, and thoroughgoing honesty! I'm overwhelmed by my sheer luck of having them at hand through the Internet! They are so outstanding that I've had to think not twice, but thrice, on the issue. I've come to understand their plight by examining their peculiar circumstances. Mr. Guimaraes has been one of my heroes in my incursions into the weighty matters of apostasy and the II Vatican Council. He's taken close to ten years of his life as a journalist and thorough researcher to follow and interview the luminaries of The Council; he's written 11 sizable volumes on his interviews, his readings, his conclusions under the Title "Eli, Ely, Lamma Sabachtani" Christ's words from the Cross "My God, my God, why hast Thou Forsaken Me?" The title of a few of his tomes tell him out: "In the Murky Waters of Vatican II", "Animus Injuriandi", "Animus Delendi", "Fumus Satanae" and after his concluding on the desire to injure, to destroy (delendi), and confirming Paul VI conviction that the smoke of Satan had entered the Church, he still brings out a booklet titled "Resistance Versus Sede-Vacantism"!!! If you feel stumped you're in good company, mine! What comes to mind is an old quote the author of which I don't remember: "The deep sources of atheism are as incomprehensible as the sources of belief". Claiming the pope to be Christ's Vicar after piling mountains of evidence on his being Judas, or an ass, beats all my sources of belief! It certainly is light years away from "The buck stops here," insane Truman's (after Hiroshima and Nagasaki) very sane recognition of unavoidable personal responsibility! But I finally had to admit that his outstanding effort could not accept two words: "Sede Vacante" as being the valid practical substitute of his resounding achievements Mr. Guimaraes is to be found here on the subject:
Bishop Williamson's plight is no less excruciating. As a follower of Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre he studied, was raised, formed and ordained in the blessings of the FSSPX. In everything and in every way the true liturgy of the only Church of Christ. Certainly something to be grateful, and something not to be betrayed. The only problem lies in a suicidal and contradictory sedeoccupantism which I analyzed in my previous article. Both men were undoubtedly convinced Paul VI "Fumus Satanae" was the pope lamenting, when it should have been obvious that he was extolling. As the worldly are for their own generation wiser than the sons of the light (Luke 16:8)
Having thus found sensible excuses for these two holy men, we can concentrate on:
THE ISSUE
Sede-occupantists make, and rely, on a single issue; and that issue refers to a single person: the person of the pope. Their being right, wrong, or at least half right, will depend on a single reference point of theology, and that reference point can be no other than the Gospel itself. And the Gospel is as clear as clarity itself can be, by establishing the limits, not only to papal authority, but as to what is the minimal requirement for a man to be pope. In a world so off track that any of Darwin’s pretended ancestors could be brought down from a tree to occupy the theological chair at the Pontifical Gregoriana di Roma, and this in agreement with modernist common sense, it is necessary to emphasize that theology is the application of human intelligence to the study of Holly Scripture. And the need is felt to underline the word study as opposed to cockeyed invention if you’re to receive the benefit of the merger between Hans Küng and King Kong. To wit: to merge is the opposite of “to discern between”. And the word is the Lord’s: “Scripture cannot fail (be broken – John 10:35)”. Therefore the letter is the master, and human intelligence its servant, with no way to invert this relationship. No monkeying around by “theologians” can break Holy Scripture. And it is in Mathew that Christ, Our Lord, establishes the papacy; its limits, its power, and its privileges.
And what does Scripture say?
Mat 16:18
And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build
my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Mat 16:23
Who turning, said to Peter: Go behind me, Satan, thou art a scandal unto
me: because thou savourest not the things that are of God, but the things that
are of men.
Mat 23:8,10 But be not you called Rabbi. For one is your master: and all you are brethren... Neither be ye called masters: for one is your master, Christ.
It must be noticed that by Mat 23:8,10 the final Magisterium is His alone! The fact that every organization requires a local visible head cannot mean the pope could, in any way, contradict in the least: the King, the Owner, the Master, the Christ. A mere Vicar, the pope is subservient to the Gospel. Thus, all His apostles hold equal ground and dignity (the pope is the bishop of Rome, "primum inter pares" and has the same duty to, and owes equal obedience to the only Truth which is Christ. And Christ taught that only Scripture cannot fail (be broken), and the dogma of papal infallibility is grounded precisely on this fact. Here are the precise words from Pastor aeternus: 5. The Roman pontiffs . . . defined as doctrines to be held those things which, by God's help, they knew to be in keeping with Sacred Scripture and the apostolic traditions. . . 6. For the Holy Spirit was promised to the successors of Peter not so that they might, by his revelation, make known some new doctrine, but that, by his assistance, they might religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles.
THIS IS THE DOGMA OF PAPAL INFALLIBILITY!
THAT, if their teachings are not "in keeping with Sacred Scripture" THEY CANNOT BE POPES! As infallibility was granted to scripture alone. No infallibility, no papacy without Holy Scripture! Also, the Holy Ghost cannot make known some new doctrine (i.e. cult of man, worldliness, ecumenism, judaization), but, to the contrary, they must religiously guard and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of faith transmitted by the apostles.
Therefore, in keeping with the strongest excommunication formula afforded by Holy Scripture "Go behind me, Satan" Mat 16:23, usurpers are irremediably excommunicated by the Lord Himself. Peter repented immediately. but His judgment as to the cause stands firm. Our Lord gives His irrevocable judgment upon the cause of damnation: "because thou savourest not the things that are of God, but the things that are of men". This is a fundamental lesson throughout Scripture, one of the best known quotes of it is from James 4:4 "Adulterers, know you not that the friendship of this world is the enemy of God? Whosoever therefore will be a friend of this world becometh an enemy of God"; by which James echoes Christ's rebuke of Peter anathematizing the apostasy and heresies of the Second Vatican Council's aggiornamento.
 |
Good looking Fellay!
|
Having the full agreement of prophesy and doctrine throughout, how can anyone state that a pope need not be Catholic, that such felon can be credited and retain power in order to impose apostasy upon all?
A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. . . Wherefore by their fruits you shall know them. (Mat 7:18-20)
Nor the apostle?
Be ye not unequally yoked together with
unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and
what communion hath light with darkness?
And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that
believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God
with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will
dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my
people. Wherefore come out from among
them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and
I will receive you, and will be a
Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord
Almighty. (2Co 6:14-18)
Nor the prophets?
Flee ye from the
midst of Babylon, and let every one save his own life: be not silent upon her
iniquity: for it is the time of revenge from the Lord, he will render unto her
what she hath deserved. (Jer 51:6)
AFTER HEARING WHAT MUST BE BELIEVED, LET US LISTEN TO MR. GUIMARAES:
It seems to me that to respond to
the theory that the See of Peter is vacant because of the heresy of
these Popes, one must first distinguish between two basic perspectives
in the Church, what is divine in her and what is human.
I. The Church, a divine society
When we take the first and most noble perspective, we try to analyze, understand and judge the present day situation based on the divine factors: the words of Scripture, infallible papal and conciliar documents of the past, as well as the unanimous teaching of Bishops, Saints and Doctors. I believe that a discussion on these points is necessary, but very frequently treacherous, for since a scholar knows that any heretic, upon falling into heresy, disconnects himself from the Church, he is led to apply this to the conciliar Popes and to draw juridical consequences from this fact: The present day Popes are no longer Popes, they lose their jurisdiction, their sacraments are not valid, the Bishops consecrated by them are not Bishops, the priests are not priests, etc.
I have accompanied these studies from afar, and I also know that a heretic cannot be a member of the Church. When I apply this principle to the conciliar Popes, however, I stop at the affirmation that they are heretics. I do not enter into the juridical consequences of this fact. The imperative reason is simple: Pope Boniface VIII in the Bull Una Sanctam clearly interpreted the words of Scripture, “The spiritual man judges all things and he himself is judged by no man” (1 Cor 2:15), as applicable to Popes. And he concluded saying definitively that no one can “judge” a Pope. “To judge,” for Boniface VIII, was not to make a dogmatic or moral appraisal about the thinking or the conduct of a Pope, but rather to attribute to oneself the power of deposing him. Boniface VIII was indirectly dealing with the case of the King of France, Philip the Fair, who pretended he could depose and make Popes.
Now, when someone affirms today that the conciliar Popes are not Popes, that person implicitly is attributing to himself that power. Even when, to avoid such arrogance, a person says that the Pope automatically ceases to be Pope and therefore the See is vacant, it seems to me that he does not have the right to conclude “therefore the seat is vacant” because here he directly enters the prohibited zone.
I. The Church, a divine society
When we take the first and most noble perspective, we try to analyze, understand and judge the present day situation based on the divine factors: the words of Scripture, infallible papal and conciliar documents of the past, as well as the unanimous teaching of Bishops, Saints and Doctors. I believe that a discussion on these points is necessary, but very frequently treacherous, for since a scholar knows that any heretic, upon falling into heresy, disconnects himself from the Church, he is led to apply this to the conciliar Popes and to draw juridical consequences from this fact: The present day Popes are no longer Popes, they lose their jurisdiction, their sacraments are not valid, the Bishops consecrated by them are not Bishops, the priests are not priests, etc.
I have accompanied these studies from afar, and I also know that a heretic cannot be a member of the Church. When I apply this principle to the conciliar Popes, however, I stop at the affirmation that they are heretics. I do not enter into the juridical consequences of this fact. The imperative reason is simple: Pope Boniface VIII in the Bull Una Sanctam clearly interpreted the words of Scripture, “The spiritual man judges all things and he himself is judged by no man” (1 Cor 2:15), as applicable to Popes. And he concluded saying definitively that no one can “judge” a Pope. “To judge,” for Boniface VIII, was not to make a dogmatic or moral appraisal about the thinking or the conduct of a Pope, but rather to attribute to oneself the power of deposing him. Boniface VIII was indirectly dealing with the case of the King of France, Philip the Fair, who pretended he could depose and make Popes.
Now, when someone affirms today that the conciliar Popes are not Popes, that person implicitly is attributing to himself that power. Even when, to avoid such arrogance, a person says that the Pope automatically ceases to be Pope and therefore the See is vacant, it seems to me that he does not have the right to conclude “therefore the seat is vacant” because here he directly enters the prohibited zone.
On his first proposition: "one must first distinguish between two basic perspectives in the Church, what is divine in her and what is human".
I answer: Scripture is the norm, and on the subject at issue "one must first distiguish" but together with Christ, NOT "What is divine and what is human in her", as Mr. Guimaraes proposes, since it's the pope, not the Church, that is the problem; and Our Lord's judgement refers to "what is divine and what is satanic in the man "pope". In other words to that, that either commands obedience to his Vicar, or, demands his deposition as Satan himself must be deposed in order that damage be controlled. Christ, the Good Sheperd gave His life to save his sheep from the wolves. He was ready to give His life for a single lamb. What can we say Mr. Guimaraes to your opening the door to such carnage as derives from loss of faith and souls, and to temples being deserted to the abomination of desolation?
Christ's Words leave absolutely no doubt in his addressing Peter: Mat 16:23 "Who turning, said to Peter: Go behind me, Satan, thou art a scandal unto me: because thou savourest not the things that are of God, but the things that are of men".
On the clear matters you have done so much to clarify, are we to accept Christ's invitation to discern and to become party to His interests, or are we to dump his words away when they are most needed?
On his second proposition: "I have accompanied these studies from afar, and I also know that a heretic cannot be a member of the Church. When I apply this principle to the conciliar Popes, however, I stop . I do not enter into the juridical consequences of this fact. The imperative reason is simple: Pope Boniface VIII in the Bull Una Sanctam clearly interpreted the words of Scripture, “The spiritual man judges all things and he himself is judged by no man” (1 Cor 2:15), as applicable to Popes. And he concluded saying definitively that no one can “judge” a Pope".
I answer: My dear Mr. Guimaraes, I would never dare judge a pope! But in your own words they are heretics, apostastizers, it's only you who stops at the affirmation that they are heretics because "Pope Boniface VIII in the Bull Una Sanctam clearly interpreted the words of Scripture, “The spiritual man judges all things and he himself is judged by no man” (1 Cor 2:15), as applicable to Popes. And he concluded saying definitively that no one can “judge” a Pope". Are you trying to humor us? If you are seeing a girl being raped, you would not intervene because the fellow may not be a rapist? Or, did angelic Roncalli, crusader Montini and Wojtiwa calling Christ a liar because "nobody goes to Hell" fit your description of The spiritual man? Are you at least aware of the fallacy you incurr "petitio principii" when the problem is to discern their being or not being popes, and you shun the problem because they are popes? Are you about to convince us that Pope Boniface VIII foresaw the plot against the Church and wrote those words on behalf of Vatican II?
Christ's words: "He that is not with me, is against me" Mat 12:30, refer specifically to judgement together with Him or against His words. That is the essential eclesiastical ruling for the salvation of His flock.
On his third proposition: Now, when someone affirms today that the conciliar Popes are not Popes, that person implicitly is attributing to himself that power. Even when, to avoid such arrogance, a person says that the Pope automatically ceases to be Pope and therefore the See is vacant, it seems to me that he does not have the right to conclude “therefore the seat is vacant” because here he directly enters the prohibited zone.
I answer: That is petitio principii all over again! There would be a prohibited zone only if it concerned the pope instead of the antipope. Your unilateral declaration forces the question: prohibited by whom? Pope Boniface VIII in the Bull Una Sanctam clearly refers to popes, not to zonified apostasy! Christ is the God of discernment: For neither does the Father judge any man: but hath given all judgment to the Son (John 5:22). And His invitation to follow Him demands that we judge with Him, not that we flee from Him, His Words or His Judgements to the detriment of His Kingdom.
Your answer is egerly and respectfully awaited.
Your answer is egerly and respectfully awaited.
