Open Letter from Archbishop Capalla The Mindanao Daily Mirror, Saturday, November 12, 2011
by Ednard Kim La Rosa on Saturday, November 12, 2011 at 3:24pm
FR. FRANCOIS LAISNEY
Priests of the Society of Saint Pius X
# 9 Carpio Subdivision
Buhangin Road, Davao
Dear father Laisney:
As the Archbishop of Davao and duly appointed shepherd of the Catholic faith of this local church I would like to remind you again of a basic and fundamental principle from the Code of Canon Law . This principle must regulate and guide our priestly ministry.
I am Writing this reminder as from a friend and gentleman to another. This reminder is also directed to your Society here in Davao City and through you to some of our people who have innocently sought your ministerial services.
This fundamental principle is the authentic right and authority to minister here. If you think are validly ordained priest you have this right undoubtedly. But without genuine authorization or approval from me as Archbishop and Local Ordinary, you cannot, and are not allowed, to exercise that right within my jurisdiction and territory. You do not have the canonical faculty or permit which can only be given in writing by me.
I assume that you know very well that priests not canonically incardinated in our Diocese must have required written faculty to minister here. You also very well know that even transient priests, who are not irregular, need to present a celebret or certification from their own bishop or superior when they come here to preside in liturgical celebration or administer the Sacraments. This you do not Have. And even if you ask I cannot grant it because you do not have canonical status.
The reason for this has already been given and explained by our Holy Father, pope Benedict XVI in his Papal Letter on the Society of Saint pius X dated 12 March 2009. In reference to this point he clearly stated:
“The fact that the Society of Saint Pius X does not possess a canonical status in the Church is not, in the end, based on disciplinary but on doctrinal reasons. As long as the Society does not have a canonical status inside the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministry in the Church.”
It is very clear that you cannot exercise legitimately your priestly right to minister our Church territory or Diocese. And the reason-which you perhaps you failed to explain that there are two types of excommunication: ipso facto or automatic (latae sententiae) and sub judice or under investigation (ferendae sententiae). Of course I can understand why you could not and did not explain that because of automatic excommunication does not need official Church declaration you still remain excommunicated in conscience because of doctrinal error. This is the reason why you and your Society do not have canonical Status.
To push argument further, especially for the benefit of the lay people, this point means that you and your Society are not in the approved list of recognized ministers and society within the Church. No amount of reasoning, like the perceived necessity, the appeal to the people, the “salvation of souls”, the Good Samaritan Metaphor can confer ordinary jurisdiction or grant authorization to you except the local bishop. And you cannot apply one canonical provision and violate another in your argumentation.
Please Pardon me for saying that the logical consequence of the above points I presented is that as illegitimate ministers you are intruding without permission into our communities and misleading our people. As official shepherd of the flock I cannot help saying that you are trespassing our private domain, sneaking into our fold and snatching away like wolves in sheep’s clothing our innocent sheep. (Mt 7:15)
As chief shepherd of the local flock I am aware of my own short comings and limitation and those of my clergy, religious and lay faithful. Yes, there are lapses and questionable practices and behavior in the liturgical, pastoral and moral lives in our communities. We are not ignoring them. They make us humble before God’s mercy and forgiveness, and encourage us to struggle for authenticity and credibility. Our archdiocesan Liturgical Center under Fr. Joel Caasi will in due time prepare our people to celebrate the Missa extraordiaria in Latin with propriety and dignity when needed.
I have to say this as spiritual leader and ultimately responsible to God and the pope for the welfare of the flock entrusted to me. I am sorry I don’t enjoy and relish this public exchange of open letters which you provoked. But I am sure our people- priests, religious, laity especially the Latin Mass Society- will respond to your misleading statements in due time and in the appropriate manner.
With every good wish and prayer, I remain;
Your friend and brother in Christ,
(sgd.) Fernando R. Capalla
Archbishop of Davao
Priests of the Society of Saint Pius X
# 9 Carpio Subdivision
Buhangin Road, Davao
Dear father Laisney:
As the Archbishop of Davao and duly appointed shepherd of the Catholic faith of this local church I would like to remind you again of a basic and fundamental principle from the Code of Canon Law . This principle must regulate and guide our priestly ministry.
I am Writing this reminder as from a friend and gentleman to another. This reminder is also directed to your Society here in Davao City and through you to some of our people who have innocently sought your ministerial services.
This fundamental principle is the authentic right and authority to minister here. If you think are validly ordained priest you have this right undoubtedly. But without genuine authorization or approval from me as Archbishop and Local Ordinary, you cannot, and are not allowed, to exercise that right within my jurisdiction and territory. You do not have the canonical faculty or permit which can only be given in writing by me.
I assume that you know very well that priests not canonically incardinated in our Diocese must have required written faculty to minister here. You also very well know that even transient priests, who are not irregular, need to present a celebret or certification from their own bishop or superior when they come here to preside in liturgical celebration or administer the Sacraments. This you do not Have. And even if you ask I cannot grant it because you do not have canonical status.
The reason for this has already been given and explained by our Holy Father, pope Benedict XVI in his Papal Letter on the Society of Saint pius X dated 12 March 2009. In reference to this point he clearly stated:
“The fact that the Society of Saint Pius X does not possess a canonical status in the Church is not, in the end, based on disciplinary but on doctrinal reasons. As long as the Society does not have a canonical status inside the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministry in the Church.”
It is very clear that you cannot exercise legitimately your priestly right to minister our Church territory or Diocese. And the reason-which you perhaps you failed to explain that there are two types of excommunication: ipso facto or automatic (latae sententiae) and sub judice or under investigation (ferendae sententiae). Of course I can understand why you could not and did not explain that because of automatic excommunication does not need official Church declaration you still remain excommunicated in conscience because of doctrinal error. This is the reason why you and your Society do not have canonical Status.
To push argument further, especially for the benefit of the lay people, this point means that you and your Society are not in the approved list of recognized ministers and society within the Church. No amount of reasoning, like the perceived necessity, the appeal to the people, the “salvation of souls”, the Good Samaritan Metaphor can confer ordinary jurisdiction or grant authorization to you except the local bishop. And you cannot apply one canonical provision and violate another in your argumentation.
Please Pardon me for saying that the logical consequence of the above points I presented is that as illegitimate ministers you are intruding without permission into our communities and misleading our people. As official shepherd of the flock I cannot help saying that you are trespassing our private domain, sneaking into our fold and snatching away like wolves in sheep’s clothing our innocent sheep. (Mt 7:15)
As chief shepherd of the local flock I am aware of my own short comings and limitation and those of my clergy, religious and lay faithful. Yes, there are lapses and questionable practices and behavior in the liturgical, pastoral and moral lives in our communities. We are not ignoring them. They make us humble before God’s mercy and forgiveness, and encourage us to struggle for authenticity and credibility. Our archdiocesan Liturgical Center under Fr. Joel Caasi will in due time prepare our people to celebrate the Missa extraordiaria in Latin with propriety and dignity when needed.
I have to say this as spiritual leader and ultimately responsible to God and the pope for the welfare of the flock entrusted to me. I am sorry I don’t enjoy and relish this public exchange of open letters which you provoked. But I am sure our people- priests, religious, laity especially the Latin Mass Society- will respond to your misleading statements in due time and in the appropriate manner.
With every good wish and prayer, I remain;
Your friend and brother in Christ,
(sgd.) Fernando R. Capalla
Archbishop of Davao
.jpg)
![ST. JEROME EMILIANI [1486-1537]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_6dKQTchkJaA/R0lo013dyBI/AAAAAAAAB_4/XzUAPDESwwQ/s1600/St.+Jerome+in+prayer,+small_1.jpg)
well said Archbishop Capalla. He just did what is good and what is right!
ReplyDeleteTHANKS BE TO GOD FOR GIVING DAVAO SUCH A GOOD SHEPHERD.
ReplyDeleteAre you and your bishop ignorant of the ff.facts:?
ReplyDeleteTwenty years ago in January 1991, a canonical decree of excommunication was issued in Honolulu, Hawaii against six lay persons by the local bishop of that diocese. Their supposed crime was attending the SSPX’s Our Lady of Fatima Chapel in that city and utilizing one of the Society’s bishops for conferring the sacrament of confirmation. Two years later in 1993, this decree was overturned by none other Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, one of the first actions he would take in favor of Tradition.
This landmark canonical case—which earned the moniker of "The Hawaii Six”—was an important and crucial one for Catholic Tradition, as it proved beyond a doubt that the faithful who attend the chapels of the Society of St. Pius X, or receive the sacraments from its clergy (either bishops or priests) are neither schismatic nor excommunicated for doing so—thus proving the claims made by the SSPX for many years.
The "Excommunicated Six" immediately appealed the case to Rome. Finally, in a letter dated June 28, 1993, the USA's Apostolic Pro-Nunico, Archbishop Cacciavillan, declared on Cardinal Ratzinger's behalf:
From the examination of the case, conducted on the basis of the Law of the Church, it did not result that the facts referred to in the above-mentioned decree are formal schismatic acts in the strict sense, as they do not constitute the offense of schism; and therefore the Congregation holds that the Decree of May 1, 1991 lacks foundation and hence validity.
This is a declaration that the automatic (ipso facto) excommunication claimed by Bishop Ferrario for the followers of Archbishop Lefebvre is in fact totally non-existent.
After nine months' insistence by the Hawaii Six, Cardinal Ratzinger's official, hand-signed decree of June 4, 1993 nullifying the excommunications was finally released by Archbishop Cacciavillan to the petitioners under his February 28, 1993 cover letter.
RBP
Are you and your bishop ignorant of the ff.facts:?
ReplyDeleteTwenty years ago in January 1991, a canonical decree of excommunication was issued in Honolulu, Hawaii against six lay persons by the local bishop of that diocese. Their supposed crime was attending the SSPX’s Our Lady of Fatima Chapel in that city and utilizing one of the Society’s bishops for conferring the sacrament of confirmation. Two years later in 1993, this decree was overturned by none other Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, one of the first actions he would take in favor of Tradition.
This landmark canonical case—which earned the moniker of "The Hawaii Six”—was an important and crucial one for Catholic Tradition, as it proved beyond a doubt that the faithful who attend the chapels of the Society of St. Pius X, or receive the sacraments from its clergy (either bishops or priests) are neither schismatic nor excommunicated for doing so—thus proving the claims made by the SSPX for many years.
The "Excommunicated Six" immediately appealed the case to Rome. Finally, in a letter dated June 28, 1993, the USA's Apostolic Pro-Nunico, Archbishop Cacciavillan, declared on Cardinal Ratzinger's behalf:
From the examination of the case, conducted on the basis of the Law of the Church, it did not result that the facts referred to in the above-mentioned decree are formal schismatic acts in the strict sense, as they do not constitute the offense of schism; and therefore the Congregation holds that the Decree of May 1, 1991 lacks foundation and hence validity.
This is a declaration that the automatic (ipso facto) excommunication claimed by Bishop Ferrario for the followers of Archbishop Lefebvre is in fact totally non-existent.
After nine months' insistence by the Hawaii Six, Cardinal Ratzinger's official, hand-signed decree of June 4, 1993 nullifying the excommunications was finally released by Archbishop Cacciavillan to the petitioners under his February 28, 1993 cover letter.
RBP
Its ture that going to the SSPX doesnt make you schismatic and be automatically excommunicated. The excommunication reffer by the archbishop is "not the disciplinary excommunication like what the bishops of the SSPX had incurred and the one issued by the local ordinary of Honolulu. The excommunication to which he refers is a very ancient concept, which is different from what we know today, but is still a valid one. When there is a doctrinal break, there is an excommunication. It is not the same kind as a disciplinary one, as what happened when the Archbishop ordained the four bishops. In this context, the term is employed -excommunicated in conscience-means “out of communion with”. We know that the SSPX is not in full communion with the Holy See. The bishop’s language may be a trifle archaic, but the concept is still in place in the Church. Pope Benedict refers to it himself when he refers to the matter of doctrine. He simply uses more modern language.
What the bishop is contesting now is that society of apostolic life, no association of the faithful, no religious order, no religious congregation, no lay organization using the name Catholic may setup house in a diocese without the permission of the diocesan bishop. This is the kind of letter should a catholic group-even in good standing with the Catholic Church.
Now is the SSPX getting the facts in the Canon Law or are they just playing stupid? They have no right to come in the Diocese without the permission and that the SSPX remains canonically suspended ministers therefore, they have no right to establish a house here nor they are in authority to celebrate mass.
PART I-BISHOP TISSIER DE MALLERAIS ADDRESSES THE PROBLEM
ReplyDeleteI. THE PROBLEM: THE ABSENCE OF JURISDICTION?
A problem is immediately apparent to you, as I am sure you are aware. What authority do these priests, these bishops, these district superiors, this Superior General and these traditional communities have in the Church? You ask this not only because they are, so we are told, excommunicated, but also because they do not receive their authority from the hierarchy of the official Church. Our priests do not receive the power to hear confessions from the diocesan bishops. The Priestly Society of St. Pius X has no longer any "official existence." The bishops of the Society, they say, did not receive their authority from the Holy Father. What right therefore does this traditional clergy have to require of you, the laity, to depend on it in your Catholic action?
It is this objection to which I am going to reply. What is the authority of the traditional Catholic clergy in this crisis situation, and, in particular, what is its authority with respect to traditional Catholic study groups? The thesis is the following (I can review it briefly before explaining it):
Your traditional priests —for they are your priests —your traditional bishops and your traditional parishes, have no ordinary authority, but an extraordinary authority which is a supplied authority.
Then, I will strive to examine the concrete aspects of this supplied authority of the traditional clergy so as to apply them to the case of your "Catholic action."
Supplied Jurisdiction
To explain this, let me use the example of confession in normal times. The traditional clergy has no ordinary authority over the faithful, for it has not received this authority which we call jurisdiction. It has not received it by delegation or by mandate of the Sovereign Pontiff or the diocesan bishops or of regularly appointed parish priests. This is the concrete case, especially for the priests of the Society; for example, for confessions.
You know that for the validity of a confession, the priest must have the power of hearing confessions. He normally receives this power from the bishop, but it is quite obvious that in the present situation this is impossible. Does this mean that our confessions are invalid? No.
We already resolved this question a long time ago, explaining it to the faithful as a case of necessity. Here we fall back on principles which are very elevated in the hierarchy of principles of the Church. This is the case where the Church directly confers jurisdiction on a priest without going through the different degrees of the hierarchy. It is the Mystical Body of Our Lord, Our Lord Himself as Head of His Church, which gives jurisdiction to priests in some particular cases.
Do you know, for example, the case of what is called "common error"? When a priest is in a church and has no jurisdiction, but is in stole and surplice, and one of the faithful asks him to hear his confession, this priest can indeed hear his confession, although he has as such no faculties. The reason is that the person is in error in believing he does and that is what we call "common error." In such a situation the Church makes up for the lack of jurisdiction for the good of the faithful.
Another situation is when a priest is no longer sure whether or not he has jurisdiction. There is a doubt. The Church resolves the doubt in favor of jurisdiction. Likewise in the case of danger of death. If a Catholic overturns his vehicle, and is in an emergency situation any priest has the power of hearing his confession even if he does not necessarily have jurisdiction. In such a case the Church opens wide the doors of her mercy and gives jurisdiction to any priest. It is the Church herself which gives jurisdiction, without involving the hierarchy.
RBP
PART II
ReplyDelete"Ecclesia Supplet" —"The Church Supplies" (For the Spiritual Good of the Faithful)
These three cases are foreseen by Canon Law, and the same principle applies in each of these three cases; namely that for the good of the faithful, that is their spiritual good, the Church assures, as much as possible, that they have the means available necessary for salvation. That includes the Sacrament of Confession. We therefore say "Ecclesia supplet" —"the Church supplies," —when the priest lacks jurisdiction. Another rule of Canon Law applies: "Salus animarum suprema lex" —"The supreme law is the salvation of souls." Consequently the Church supplies for an absence of jurisdiction. It is therefore not the good of the priest which is in question. It is not to reassure the priest that he has jurisdiction to hear confessions. it is the good of the faithful which matters. It is very important to understand this. It is for your own good that your priests receive a supplied jurisdiction, that is to say for the common good of the Church and not for the personal good of the priest.
For the good of the faithful in these three cases, "Ecclesia supplet" —"the Church supplies."
I have spoken to you of the jurisdictional power of the priest, which is the power of governing. Let us say a few more words about it.
Jurisdiction: The Power to Feed a Flock
Does a priest lack something when he is ordained a priest? Would there be something missing from his priestly character which the diocesan bishop has to add by word, "Here, I give you jurisdiction," as by waving a magic wand? Would a word from the bishop give something extra to the priest? No, it is not quite this.
Jurisdiction is the fact that the bishop gives a flock to his priests, or that the Pope designates a flock for a bishop by giving him a diocese. Jurisdiction is the power which a superior has over his flock and which a pastor has over his sheep.
This is what the power of jurisdiction is: the power to feed the sheep.
You certainly know that in the Church we distinguish between the power of Holy Orders and the power of jurisdiction. When Our Lord said, "Go into the whole world and preach the gospel," "docete omnes gentes" — "and teach all nations," —it was the power of jurisdiction which he gave. "Teach," or, "Teach them to observe all that I have commanded you" (Matt. 28:19), that is to teach the —commandments of God. Thus to direct the flock is the power of jurisdiction.
Just beforehand Our Lord had spoken to His apostles of the power of Holy Orders: "Baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" (Matt. 28:19). This is the power of Holy Orders, which is the power of sanctifying, which depends directly upon the priestly character. It is the power to celebrate Holy Mass and to sanctify the faithful by the Sacraments. There must therefore be something besides the priestly character, by which the priest or the bishop receives from his hierarchical superior a part of the flock. It is that which is called the power of jurisdiction.
PART III
ReplyDeleteThe Supplying of Jurisdiction in Times of Crisis
In the present situation of crisis, it is obvious that your priests cannot receive from their superiors in the church, that is to say from the diocesan bishops and from the Pope, a flock, because that flock is refused to them. This authority over a flock must, therefore, be given to them in another manner: that is, by substitute or supplied jurisdiction.
In this case it is the Church herself which gives to priests a power as the power of the pastor over his flock. Normally the power of Holy Orders, brings with it the foundation or basis of a power to organize the Church in a hierarchy. Thus the priest’s or the bishop’s power of Holy Orders normally brings with it the power of jurisdiction. It is normal for a bishop or a priest to have a particular flock over which he exercises his power of Holy Orders. But in the present situation we have to deal with the abnormal situation where the power of Holy Orders is unjustly deprived of the power of jurisdiction. It is in this case that the Church mercifully supplies jurisdiction in favor of you, the faithful, giving the jurisdiction your priests would otherwise not have.
This is therefore an extraordinary power, which is an exceptional case. In exceptional situations there are exceptional powers.
The General Extent of Supplied Jurisdiction
It is not only present for confessions, but also for the entire priestly ministry. There is no reason to limit it to confessions alone.
And, you are indeed aware that jurisdiction is sometimes necessary for a priest to validly administer the Sacraments. This is the case, first of all, for Confession. It is equally the case for a priest assisting at Marriage. If he does not have jurisdiction the marriage is null and void. Although the two spouses are the ministers of the Sacrament, the Church has added a supplementary condition for validity, that is to say that the matrimonial consent be exchanged before the official witness of the Church, which is normally the parish priest. It is quite obvious that our priests do not have this power in an ordinary way. They can only receive it in an extraordinary way by the Church’s supplying of jurisdiction. In fact we here depend on OC Canon 1098 § 1, which dispenses from the necessity of the presence of a priest having jurisdiction for the marriage to be valid when it is foreseen that such a priest cannot be found.
Normally jurisdiction is necessary for licitness, that is to say, in order that the act of the priest be licit, or, permissible. For example, to preach a priest must have a mandate, or, for a bishop to confirm in another diocese than his own, he must have a mandate from the diocesan bishop. In order to ordain priests a bishop must normally have jurisdiction and this is, of course, all the more so for the consecration of other bishops. For an episcopal consecration he must have a Pontifical mandate.
This same principle is supplied throughout. In an exceptional situation the Church supplies for this absence of jurisdiction on the part of the priest or even the bishop.
And the more serious the crisis is, the more necessary it will be to fall back on this supplying of the Church on a higher level. This is what happened on June 30, 1988, when Archbishop Lefebvre consecrated four bishops with Bishop de Castro Mayer as co-consecrator.
PART IV
ReplyDeleteThe Case of Necessity for the Traditional Faithful
The fact that heresy, and even apostasy, is widely spread amongst the clergy, leaves the faithful, and especially those who want to keep the faith and the true religion, as sheep scattered and without a pastor.
You can easily see, my dear friends, that it is the case of necessity amongst the faithful which is responsible for the fact that traditional priests and bishops have a supplied jurisdiction with respect to your needs. This is not only so that they may validly hear confessions and validly assist at marriages, but also for all of the acts of their priestly or episcopal ministry.
For confessions, you certainly remember that Archbishop Lefebvre invoked the principle of the "danger of spiritual death" of the faithful. Just see the unhappy faithful who have no priests of certain doctrine, and who sometimes even doubt the validity of their confessions: "Does this priest really have the necessary intention so as to validly absolve?" They can readily doubt this. "If I can no longer go to confession then I am exposed to fall and perhaps to fall into grave sins. Who knows? My eternal salvation is at risk, I am in danger of spiritual death." The Church supplies, for the Church places ipso facto (by the fact itself) this Catholic under the jurisdiction of a priest. The Church places this Catholic as a sheep of a priest who will be his pastor for a determined case. Thus is established between the faithful Catholic and his priest a relationship as the sheep or the lamb with respect to the shepherd. The only thing is that this relationship of authority does not come from a delegation from the hierarchy of the Church, but by the Church, the Mystical Body of Our Lord, herself supplying.
II. CHARACTERISTICS OF SUPPLIED JURISDICTION
Let us strive to describe the characteristics of this supplied jurisdiction.
1) first of all it is a supplied jurisdiction. This is its definition. It is the supplying for the absence of jurisdiction in a priest or a bishop: "Ecclesia supplet." It is neither the Pope nor the diocesan hierarchy which gives their flock to the traditional clergy, but the Church, and Our Lord Jesus Christ as Head of His Mystical Body. It is they who sanction and declare this case of necessity for the faithful.
"I have mercy on this crowd," Our Lord said, "for they are as sheep without a shepherd." This would indeed be your case if there was no traditional clergy. The Church takes account of this abnormal situation and therefore links you up with traditional priests by that link of authority which makes a pastor and a flock.
This is supplied jurisdiction. The Church supplies for the absence of the ordinary link between you and your priests. It creates a link on account of your spiritual needs.
2) it is a personal and not a territorial jurisdiction. It is very important to understand this. Your priests have jurisdiction over your persons and not over a territory.
Traditional priests have jurisdiction over each one of their faithful who come to their chapel or traditional church or traditional convent or priory, and they do not have jurisdiction over a determined territory as for example the territory of a parish.
So when we say that "our churches are our parishes" it is true, but we must see that it is true without technically being the same thing.
3) finally, the third characteristic of this supplied jurisdiction is that it depends a great deal on the faithful.
Allow me to explain. It is the state of necessity of the faithful which creates between the priest and the faithful the relationship of authority or supplied jurisdiction. Take for example Archbishop Lefebvre, who, when the French episcopacy failed to do so, sent a telegram to the representatives to declare that they would fall under the pain of excommunication if they voted for a law favoring abortion.
PART V
ReplyDeleteBut in order that such a ministry and such admonitions be fruitful it is necessary that the faithful in question accept them willingly. It is inasmuch as you do not refuse to receive from your priests the ministry which they have the right to exercise for your good, that is to say for the good of the Church, that the jurisdiction that you in a certain way give them will be able to be fruitfully exercised.
Normally, a parish priest can take hold of a sheep which is perhaps a little mangy and say to him authoritatively: "Look out, come back to the Church!" But in our case the admonition of this suppletory pastor will only bear fruits if the sheep recognizes first of all that relationship of authority which has been created in his favor by the very case of necessity. This is the limit and the practical fragility of the organization of our traditional parishes.
"Your chapels are your parishes" —It is exactly inasmuch as you accept the principle of supplied authority of the priests and of its exercise over yourselves, that their authority over the flock will be extended, efficacious, genuine, continuous and broad. It is quite obvious that if you do not want to ask anything from your priests, or very little, they will be paralyzed. Archbishop Lefebvre said, and it is perfectly true, "Your chapels are your parishes, consider your priories and your chapels as your parishes, that is where you are. Do not return to your former parishes, which have fallen into the hands of the modernists." Consider your chapels as your parishes! But in saying that, Archbishop Lefebvre had no intention of usurping for his priests an ordinary jurisdiction that they do not have.
He had the intention of making you realize and making you understand, you faithful laymen and laywomen, that it is your duty to ask from your traditional priests and chapels for the entire priestly ministry which is normally exercised in a parish. It is your duty to ask for all of the priestly ministry that they are able to provide for you. It is your duty to entrust yourselves completely to your traditional priests. You have not simply to ask of them a Mass, a Baptism, or a sermon and that is all. If this were the case you would paralyze the priest. He cannot exercise his total ministry in all of its fullness under such circumstances.
III. CONSEQUENCES FOR THE ATTITUDE OF THE FAITHFUL WITH RESPECT TO THE TRADITIONAL CLERGY
What are the consequences of this principle which seems to be very important for the attitude of the faithful?
Formerly, the parish priest had simply to speak and everybody obeyed. It was the word of the gospel and everybody obeyed!
Obviously this is no longer the case. An appropriate state of mind must therefore be established in the faithful with respect to the traditional clergy. There must be on the part of the laity a voluntary submission to the clergy. They ought to feel the need for their souls to be totally dependent on the priestly ministry in all of its amplitude. I think that this is a requirement of the sense of the Church. If you have the sense of the Church, that is to say the sense of the hierarchy of the Church, you will understand this. The "sensus Ecclesiae," the sense of the Church, on the part of the faithful, will make them learn to avoid two snags, that is to say, two dangerous attitudes which, as always, are opposed to one another. Errors, as you know, are always in the direction of too much of something or too little of it. The truth is situated as a summit above the two opposed errors of too much or too little. The truth is not a liberal, compromising middle point between the two.
I say therefore that there are two dangerous attitudes which exist in the present crisis in the Church, and which are opposed to the sense of the Church. Neither of these opinions is in conformity with the divine constitution of the Church: whether it be the error by excess, an error in the direction of too much, or the error by default, in the direction of too little.
PART VI
ReplyDeleteThe Error by Excess: "The Catholic Hierarchy No Longer Exists. Let Us Therefore Create a New One!"
The error in the direction of too much is to say that all bishops, or nearly all, have apostatized from the Catholic Faith, or at least that they no longer preach it and that consequently there is no longer a legitimate hierarchy: that there is no longer a legitimate Pope nor legitimate bishops in the Church. Hence the true Catholic hierarchy, and the only one which exists, consists of traditional priests alone. According to this idea, it is the traditional clergy alone, with their exterior hierarchical organization, which would make up the hierarchy of the Church. Consequently one of the bishops would have to be elected as Pope and this would complete the hierarchical appearance!
Certain sects have not hesitated to do just this: they have fallen into the trap. This is quite obviously false. We refuse this analysis and its consequences. Without a doubt we can indeed question the legitimacy of certain bishops, and one can even have questions concerning that of the Pope himself. But these are but questions. We do not have the authority to decide on these questions. The Church will herself judge. A future council or Pope will decide on the mysterious situation of this Pope John Paul II and his predecessor Pope Paul VI. It is not for us to judge. We do not have the power. Even a single bishop does not have the power to decide on these things. It is the Church who will have to resolve this problem as she will without doubt do. It will without doubt not make a decision saying "This Pope was not Pope. "I do not think so, for this has never happened in the Church, to say that this Pope was not a Pope. But it will be declared: "This was a bad Pope...who professed errors...and even heresies!" Hence we cannot say that the hierarchy of the Church no longer exists. It has in large part defaulted, but we cannot say that it no longer exists. We cannot say this.
Secondly, we cannot say either, that the Society of Saint Pius X, (since it is especially the Society which is concerned, for it has bishops and superiors), is constituted in a hierarchy in the same way as the hierarchy of the Church with a Pope, bishops, parish priests, etc. It is not at all the same thing. It is similar, but it is not the same thing.
PART VII
ReplyDeleteAt Every Degree it is but a Supplied Jurisdiction
The hierarchy of the Society, and the only hierarchy it has, is a substitute hierarchy. Its priests have power directly over the faithful in their priories, in their parishes, and in their traditional chapels. The district superiors have power over their priests. But in principle that is all the power they have. According to the constitution of the Society they have in principle no power over the faithful. But on account of the crisis in the Church they have a supplied power over the faithful.
Here the principle of subsidiaries is to be invoked. This means that that which your simple priests in the priories cannot do, the district superior will make up for, and this for the good order of our priories. The district superiors also have to look after the apostolate of their priests and hence have relations with the faithful. But this is a supplied jurisdiction. Likewise the Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X has in principle no direct power over the faithful, but he will all the same exercise his authority for important questions and difficult matters, which the simple priest or even the district superiors cannot resolve. This is a supplied power in virtue of the principle of subsidiaries.
Hence at all levels of the hierarchy of the Society, and the hierarchy of Tradition (if you wish), there is only a supplied power and not an ordinary power. Consequently, there is no way that it can be said that Archbishop Lefebvre constitutes the Church. There can be no question of the "Church of Lefebvre" as the newspapers report it. There is simply the Catholic Church with its incomprehensible and generalized failings, and in the Catholic Church the clergy which has remained entirely faithful to the Faith, and with, because it was necessary, a certain organization, and bishops with their power over the faithful but which is only a supplied power.
This is the Error by Excess: to say that there is no longer any hierarchy in the Church, and that we must therefore create a jurisdiction and submit ourselves to this jurisdiction. We may as well create a new church! This is an error, for we cannot create a church.
Error by Defect: "Our Priests do not have Jurisdiction. Therefore, we are Free!"
The error in the direction of too little would be to say that the traditional priests in our priories and in the convents have not received jurisdiction from the Pope or the bishop and have therefore no power over us. "What right have they to require something of us? We are indeed free! Let us stay free! We are free to place ourselves under their authority or not."
Such a mentality is also a danger which is opposed to the sense of the Church. This would be to take advantage of the crisis in the Church because of the appearance of freedom which it gives. It is especially dangerous for the lay apostolate where, it is true, there is a large part of freedom. For very often the tasks performed by lay people are not the specific tasks of a priest, such as, for example, to spread the Christian social order in the State. There is, therefore, a certain element of autonomy in the Catholic action of the laity. This is true. But it is not the sense of the Church to dispense oneself entirely from every link with the hierarchy. To say this on account of the crisis in the Church, because "the traditional clergy has no ordinary power over us" would be to really lack a sense of the Church. Let us therefore avoid these two snags of either going too far or not going far enough.
PART VIII
ReplyDeleteThe Paradoxical Situation of Certain Laymen
We are at the present moment in a rather paradoxical situation with respect to Catholic action. I speak of your action as lay Catholic men and women in the Church and in the state. A few decades ago, "La Cité Catholique," and then the Holy Office, had a great deal of difficulty in finding support from the clergy. They looked for bishops and they found none except Archbishop Lefebvre. They looked for chaplains but Archbishop Lefebvre warned them, "Look out! Death trap! Do not look for chaplains in the present clergy, for they are all progressive and they will torpedo you! Therefore develop your organization without priests, since the situation is like this."
So, you see, these founders of "La Cité Catholique," who had a profoundly Catholic spirit, were obliged to found an organization of Catholic action in the strict sense without priestly support, on account of the failure of the priests (or at least without the support of the hierarchy).
Just recently their successors, who follow them in their fight for Tradition, chose a few months ago to deprive themselves of their dependence on the clergy. This is not the same thing, for now there is a good clergy, now there are priests, and good priests I hope, and priests who are well formed. They are not all specialized in all political and social questions, of course, but they know the major principles. And now I say to these laymen and women, now that you have a good clergy how can you deprive yourselves of the priestly influence over your Catholic action? This would be a paradox!
This is always under the pretext that traditional priests do not have jurisdiction! But they do have a supplied jurisdiction. It is you who have to appeal to this supplied jurisdiction. I therefore say that the sense of the Church, the sensus fidei, must persuade faithful laymen and laywomen to willingly submit their apostolic activities to the traditional clergy. This is the proper order. It is the sense of hierarchy to submit your Catholic action to the counsel and higher guidance of the traditional hierarchy, to use the words of St. Pius X. This corresponds to the hierarchical constitution of the Church. It is necessary for the faithful to understand this well, and all the more since the clergy cannot, strictly speaking, require this dependence since it has no ordinary jurisdiction over the faithful.
Requirement for Virtue on the Part of the Laity
You see, then, that I must insist on the moral necessity of an appropriate state of mind in the faithful. There are special moral requirements linked to this time of crisis. This exceptional situation, which gives only a supplied jurisdiction to the priests, requires on the part of the clergy, of course, quite some tact, prudence, and wisdom. For they cannot demand to exercise a strict right (hence the clergy has to understand the principles which are relevant). But this situation requires on the part of the laity virtue, a hierarchical sense, a sense of the need which you all have, namely of having a link by which you depend upon the traditional clergy in all the amplitude of their priestly ministry and in all the amplitude of your apostolic action.
I think that I could summarize these remarks in a brief phrase: your submission and your dependence with respect to the clergy must be as voluntary as the clergy have less right to demand it.
This therefore requires moral virtue on your part. It is for you, faithful Catholics, to seek for this profitable and necessary dependence in your traditional study groups. This does not mean that the priest is going to do everything. The priest will be, as Father Bonneterre remarked, "the counselor, the guide, the doctor" but not necessarily the organizer. He will remain in his spiritual domain, but the laity will retain this indispensable link of dependence.
PART IX
ReplyDeleteIV. SUPPLIED JURISDICTION AND PRESENT LAY APOSTOLATE
Let us very briefly apply these principles to traditional Catholic study groups. This morning I tried to summarize the idea of Pope St. Pius X, who distinguished two sorts of apostolic endeavors for the laity:
1) Direct participation of the laity in the priestly apostolate inasmuch as it is possible. This includes the education of youth, teaching in our schools, and special, more properly apostolic youth movements which have as their purpose the conversion of souls. It is obvious that such a movement has an essential dependence with respect to the clergy. It would be quite erroneous to say that such a movement is a movement of Catholic action in the strict sense of the word, with a relatively loose dependence on the clergy.
From the very fact that it is for the conversion of souls, it follows that there is an intrinsic dependence on the clergy. The same applies to the Catholic Scout movement and the Legion of Mary which had as its purpose, by the intercession of Our Lady, the conversion of souls. This is, if you wish, a participation in the priestly ministry on the part of the laity, and consequently it requires a mandate. The priest gives a mandate to the laity to exercise a part of his priestly apostolate.
2) Quite different is Catholic action understood as a work of the Catholic laity in the temporal order, so as to bring about the reign of Christian social principles in the State. It is this which St. Pius X strove especially to promote, and which can be called Catholic action in the strict sense of the term. We cannot say that such Catholic action, because it is not the ministry of the priest, is independent of the priest. Saint Pius X, as I reminded you this morning, said that "One cannot at all conceive of this Catholic action of the faithful independently from the counsel and higher guidance of ecclesiastical authority."
It is an essential distinction. Pope Pius XII, following Pius XI, blurred somewhat its importance, which is not without consequences [cf. Bishop Tissier de Mallerais’ article, "Catholic Action Defined for a comprehensive explanation of this matter; webmaster’s note]. He simply spoke of a gradation in the dependence of works of Catholic action on the hierarchy. The more a work is properly priestly the more must it have an intimate dependence on the priest, and the more a work properly belongs to the laity the more tenuous the link with respect to the clergy. That which is constant in all of the popes is the teaching that there can be no question of giving total autonomy to the laity in their action. This is impossible. This is repugnant to the Catholic sense. It is repugnant to the sense of hierarchy in the Church.
[PART I-BISHOP TISSIER DE MALLERAIS ADDRESSES THE PROBLEM]
ReplyDeleteTHIS TRAITOR BISHOP OF SSPX DIDN'T ADDRESS THE PROBLEM. HE CREATES MORE PROBLEM AND HE IS PART OF THE PROBLEM.
[I. THE PROBLEM: THE ABSENCE OF JURISDICTION?]
THAT IS RIGHT. FROM APOSTOLIC TIMES THE AUTHORITY OF PRESBYTERS WERE BEING HANDED THROUGH THE APOSTLES AND THEIR SUCCESSORS THE BISHOPS AND THIS AUTHORITY IS SUPREMELY GIVEN TO THE OFFICE OF ST. PETER BEING THE UNIVERSAL PASTOR OF THE CHURCH.
[A problem is immediately apparent to you, as I am sure you are aware.]
IT IS THE SSPX WHO HAVE THE PROBLEM NOT US. DON'T THROW TO US YOUR OWN SELF INFLICTED PROBLEMS.
[What authority do these priests, these bishops, these district superiors, this Superior General and these traditional communities have in the Church?]
WE THE TRUE TRADITIONAL CATHOLIC PRIESTS AND BISHOPS HAVE AUTHORITY IN THE CHURCH THROUGH APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION. THE SSPX DO NOT HAVE THAT AUTHORITY BECAUSE THEY ARE DE JURE ET DE FACTO OUTSIDE THE CHURCH. THEY ARE CANONICALLY OUTSIDE THE CHURCH. SO THEIR AUTHORITY IS ZERO. THEY ARE NOT TRADITIONALS BUT CANONICAL TRAITORS.
[You ask this not only because they are, so we are told, excommunicated, but also because they do not receive their authority from the hierarchy of the official Church.]
THAT'S RIGHT. THE LORD JESUS WILLED THAT THE AUTHORITY IN THE CHURCH SHALL PASS THROUGH APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION.
[Our priests do not receive the power to hear confessions from the diocesan bishops.]
THAT'S IT.
[The Priestly Society of St. Pius X has no longer any "official existence." The bishops of the Society, they say, did not receive their authority from the Holy Father.]
OBVIOUSLY.
[What right therefore does this traditional clergy have to require of you, the laity, to depend on it in your Catholic action?]
NICE QUESTION. ANSWER IT FAIRLY AND SQUARLY.
[It is this objection to which I am going to reply.]
JUST SHOOT YOUR WAY, TRAITOR BISHOP.
[What is the authority of the traditional Catholic clergy in this crisis situation, and, in particular, what is its authority with respect to traditional Catholic study groups?]
SO, WHERE ARE YOUR ANSWERS?
[The thesis is the following (I can review it briefly before explaining it):
Your traditional priests —for they are your priests —your traditional bishops and your traditional parishes, have no ordinary authority, but an extraordinary authority which is a supplied authority.]
YOUR ANIMAL PRIESTS AND BISHOPS HAVE NO EXTRAORDINARY AUTHORITY.
ALL AUTHORITY IN THE CHURCH FLOWS FROM THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS WHETHER THAT AUTHORITY IS ORDINARY OR EXTRAORDINARY.
THIS IS PURE ALIBI. A DEMONIC ALIBI IN ORDER TO JUSTIFY YOUR LACK OF AUTHORITY IN THE CHURCH.
THE POWER TO BIND AND TO LOOSE WERE GIVEN TO ST. PETER [MT 16:18-19] AND TO ALL APOSTLES WHO WERE THE BISHOPS OF THE CHURCH [MT 18:18]. ALL POWERS HAVE BEEN GIVEN BY THE FATHER TO CHRIST AND IN TURN CHRIST HANDED THE AUTHORITY TO THE APOSTLES:
Mat 28:18 And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
Mat 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Mat 28:20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age."
THAT IS THE REASON WHY THE AUTHORITY OF THE POPE IS DIRECTLY FROM CHRIST. HE IS THE VICAR OF CHRIST. NO REASON WHATSOEVER JUSTIFIES ACTUAL REJECTION OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE POPE.
[Then, I will strive to examine the concrete aspects of this supplied authority of the traditional clergy so as to apply them to the case of your "Catholic action."]
FOOL. THE LORD JESUS SUPPLIED THE CHURCH WITH AUTHORITY THROUGH THE OFFICE OF PETER AND APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION. YOUR SUPPLIED AUTHORITY DIDN'T COME FROM THE LORD JESUS BUT FROM SATAN.
[Supplied Jurisdiction]
ReplyDeleteSUPPLIED AUTHORITY OR ORDINARY AUTHORITY AS WELL AS EXTRAORDINARY AUTHORITY IN THE CHURCH HAS BEEN ENTRUSTED BY JESUS TO THE SUCCESSOR OF PETER NOT TO THE SSPX TRAITORS. THIS SUPPLIED AUTHORITY ARGUMENT IS A MERE ALIBI TO JUSTIFY THEIR LUCIFERIAN REBELLION AGAINST THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS.
[To explain this, let me use the example of confession in normal times.]
WHETHER NORMAL OR ABNORMAL TIMES THE AUTHORITY TO CONFESS COMES FROM THE BISHOPS AND THE POPE.
[The traditional clergy has no ordinary authority over the faithful, for it has not received this authority which we call jurisdiction.]
THAT IS WHY YOU ARE IN CANONICAL TROUBLE AND DOCTRINALLY IN ERROR BECAUSE OF THIS FACT.
[It has not received it by delegation or by mandate of the Sovereign Pontiff or the diocesan bishops or of regularly appointed parish priests.]
THEN, YOU JUST ADMITTED THAT YOU ARE OF DEMONIC ORIGIN BECAUSE THE CHURCH FOUNDED BY JESUS IS ESTABLISHED BY GOD'S WILL AND PREDILECTION ON THE ROCK THAT IS PETER AND NOT ON ANY WACKY OLD FOOL CALLED 'LEFEBVRE'.
[This is the concrete case, especially for the priests of the Society; for example, for confessions.]
YOUR ARGUMENT IS STILL INVALID. BECAUSE IN CASE OF EXTREME OR EXTRAORDINARY CRISIS IN THE CHURCH THE FAITHFUL SHALL BE STRENGTHENED BY THE POPE, BY PETER AND NOT BY ANY WACKY OLD FOOL CALLED LEFEBVRE. THIS IS VERY CLEAR IN MT 16:18-19 AND IN
Lk 22:31-32 "Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you, that he might sift you like wheat, but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren."
THAT IS WHY IN EVERY CRISIS IN THE CHURCH IT IS ALWAYS THE POPE THAT SUSTAINS THE FAITHFUL. POPE PAUL VI, OF BLESSED MEMORY, SUSTAINED THE CHURCH AGAINST MODERNISM IN HUMANAE VITAE AND JOHN PAUL THE GREAT SUSTAINED THE CHURCH IN DEFEATING COMMUNISM IN EASTERN EUROPE. THE POPES DID IT NOT THE WACKY OLD FOOL LEFEBVRE AND HIS USELESS FOLLOWERS.
[You know that for the validity of a confession, the priest must have the power of hearing confessions.]
ReplyDeleteYES.
[He normally receives this power from the bishop, but it is quite obvious that in the present situation this is impossible.]
IT IS THE LORD WHO WILLED THAT THE POWER TO FORGIVE SINS FLOWS FROM HIM THROUGH THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS.
WHY IS IT IMPOSSIBLE NOW? IT IS NOT IMPOSSIBLE BECAUSE I RECEIVED IT. I GOT THE AUTHORITY TO HEAR CONFESSIONS AND FORGIVE SINS FROM MY BISHOP. THE SSPX IS IN IMPOSSIBLE SITUATIONS BECAUSE THEY DEMONICALLY PUT THEMSELVES IN THAT IMPOSSIBLE SITUATION. THEY FOLLOWED LEFEBVRE IN HIS LUCIFERIAN REBELLION AGAINS THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS SO THAT THEY ARE NOW BEREFT OF AUTHORITY. THEY ARE NOW ENJOYING THE FRUITS OF THEIR OWN DEFIANCE AND FOOLISHNESS.
[Does this mean that our confessions are invalid? No.]
HA HA HA... THIS WACKY OLD FOOL IS VERY HILARIOUS. HA HA HA... PATHETIC OLD FOOL.
ARE YOU NOT AWARE TISSIER DE MALLERAIS [IN FILIPINIO TARSIER DE MALI-RIA] THAT REGARDLESS OF THE VALIDITY OF THE ORDINATION AND YOUR SACRAMENTS YOUR USE OF THEM AGAINST THE WILL OF THE HOLY FATHER AND THE BISHOPS WILL ONLY PUT YOU INTO SIN OF CONTINUOUS DISOBEDIENCE? THAT IS THE REASON WHY YOUR SOCIETY IS LUCIFERIAN.
SO WHAT IF YOUR CONFESSION IS VALID. HOW ABOUT THE SACRAMENTS OF THE ORTHODOX? IS IT VALID OR NOT? VALID.
HOW ABOUT THE CONFESSIONS GIVEN BY ARIUS? VALID OR NOT? VALID. HE WAS A VALIDLY ORDAINED PRIEST LIKE THE SSPX.
HOW ABOUT THE CONFESSIONS GIVEN BY LUTHER? VALID OR NOT? VALID. HE WAS A VALIDLY ORDAINED PRIEST LIKE THE SSPX.
HOW ABOUT THE CONFESSIONS GIVEN BY NESTORIUS? VALID OR NOT? VALID. HE IS A VALIDLY ORDAINED BISHOP LIKE BISHOP TARSIER. HA HA HA...
WHO CARES IF YOUR CONFESSIONS ARE VALID? YOU CAN GO TO HELL FOR THAT. YOU ARE EXERCISING THE MINISTRY AGAINST THE AUTHORITY OF THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS. THE VALIDITY OF YOUR SACRAMENTS WILL NOT SHIELD YOU INSTEAD IT WILL BE MORE TERRIBLE FOR YOUR SOULS.
[We already resolved this question a long time ago, explaining it to the faithful as a case of necessity.]
ReplyDeleteHA HA HA... YOU DIDN'T RESOLVED IT. YOU ONLY INVENTED AN ALIBI.
MY QUESTION TO YOU IS THAT: WHERE CAN YOU FIND IN SACRED TRADITION OR IN THE SACRED SCRIPTURES THAT IN CASE OF NECESSITY THE OFFICE OF PETER MUST BE REJECTED IN FAVOR OF LEFEBVRE?
THE GATE OF HELL SHALL WIN OVER YOUR SOCIETY AND INDEED IT HAS OVERPOWERED IT BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT IN UNION WITH THE VICAR OF CHRIST. SATAN SHALL CRUSH YOU LIKE WHEAT BECAUSE THERE IS NO PETER TO STRENGTHEN YOUR SOCIETY. SORRY FOR YOU BISHOP TARSIER.
[Here we fall back on principles which are very elevated in the hierarchy of principles of the Church. This is the case where the Church directly confers jurisdiction on a priest without going through the different degrees of the hierarchy.]
HA HA HA... THIS BISHOP TARSIER IS A FOOL. HE IS CITING THE AUTHORITY OF PRIEST IN CASE OF NECESSITY TO CONFESS IN DANGER OF DEATH. IN THIS CASE ALL PRIESTS WHETHER WITH CANONICAL AUTHORITY OR NOT AS LONG AS THEY ARE VALIDLY ORDAINED CAN BESTOW THE SACRAMENT. UNFORTUNATELY FOR BISHOP TARSIER THIS AUTHORITY IS NOT OUTSIDE THE AUTHORITY OF THE POPE AND THE BISHOP. IN FACT, IT IS ACTUALLY COMING FROM THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS. IT IS WRITTEN IN CANON LAW LEGISLATED, PROMULGATED, CODIFIED AND IMPLEMENTED BY PAPAL AUTHORITY. HA HA HA...
TO USE THAT ARGUMENT FOR SSPX IS AN ACT OF DESPERATION AND FOOLISHNESS. THEIR CANON LAWYERS ARE GOING TO THE DOGS. THEY CANNOT JUSTIFY THE UNJUSTIFIABLE.
[It is the Mystical Body of Our Lord, Our Lord Himself as Head of His Church, which gives jurisdiction to priests in some particular cases.]
ReplyDeleteHA HA HA... IDIOT. IN CALL CASES WHETHER ORDINARY OR EXTRAORDINARY ALL AUTHORITIES COMES FROM THE LORD JESUS, THROUGH HIS MYSTICAL BODY THE CHURCH. AND IN ALL CASES ALSO THAT AUTHORITY IS HANDED TO THE POPE AS THE VICAR OF CHRIST WHETHER ORDINARY OR EXTRAORDINARY CASES IT IS STILL THE POPE WHO WILL GRANT AUTHORIZATION. IT IS THE POPE WHO WILL DETERMINE WITH FINALITY WHAT THE LORD WANTS HIS CHURCH TO DO IN ANY ACTUAL SITUATION. THAT IS WHY THE COMMAND TO "FEED" AND TO "TEND" THE FLOCK WAS GIVEN TO PETER AND NOT TO LEFEBVRE. THAT POWER IS IN THE HANDS OF BENEDICT XVI AND NOT OF FELLAY OR TISSIER. THE SSPX IS PILAY AND TARSIER [SMALL MONKEYS].
[Do you know, for example, the case of what is called "common error"? When a priest is in a church and has no jurisdiction, but is in stole and surplice, and one of the faithful asks him to hear his confession, this priest can indeed hear his confession, although he has as such no faculties.]
EXCUSE ME. IF THE PRIEST HAS NO FACULTY THEN HE SHOULD TELL THE ONE ASKING FOR CONFESSION THAT HE HAS NO FACULTY FROM HIS BISHOP AND THEREFORE HE CANNOT HEAR HIS CONFESSION UNLESS HE OR SHE IS DYING.
[The reason is that the person is in error in believing he does and that is what we call "common error." In such a situation the Church makes up for the lack of jurisdiction for the good of the faithful.]
HA HA HA... THE FAITHFUL ASKING FOR CONFESSION IS IGNORANT OF THE FACT THAT THE PRIEST HAS NO FACULTY. BUT THE PRIEST IS NOT IGNORANT OF THE FACT THAT HE HAS NO FACULTY. IF HE WILL CONFESS HIM THEN THAT PRIEST DECEIVED THE SINNER AND DISOBEYED HIS BISHOP WHO DIDN'T GIVE HIM YET THE FACULTY.
IN THAT CASE TEHRE IS NO PROBLEM FOR THE SINNER WHO CONFESSED BUT THE PRIEST WHO DECEIVED OR WITHELD VALUABLE INFORMATION TO THAT SINNER SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE TO GOD AND THE CHURCH. AND SO THE SSPX WHO ARE DECEIVING THE PEOPLE.
[Another situation is when a priest is no longer sure whether or not he has jurisdiction. There is a doubt.]
HA HA HA... IN CASE OF DOUBT THEN HE SHOULD ASK HIS BISHOP WHERE HE STAYS AND THE BISHOP WHO ORDAINED HIM OR HIS SUCCESSOR. HE HE HE... IN CASE OF DOUBT HE MUST TO THE BISHOP AND THE POPE. HE MUST NOT PRETEND THAT HE HAS IT IF HE IS IN DOUBT. HE HE HE...
[The Church resolves the doubt in favor of jurisdiction.]
BECAUSE IN CASE OF DOUBT PRESUMPTION IS ON THE SIDE OF THE SUPERIOR... IN THAT CASE OF JURISDICTION. YOU DO NOT LOOSE YOUR JURISDICTION UNLESS IT IS OFFICIALLY REMOVED. UNLESS THE POWER THAT BINDS REMOVED IT THEN IT IS THERE. BUT THAT AUTHORITY IS STILL RESIDING WITH THE POPE AND THE BISHOP. AS YOU'VE SAID THE CHURCH RULED IN FAVOR OF JURISDICTION. WHO IS THAT CHURCH WHO RULED? THE POPE AND THE BISHOP. IT WAS THE HOLY SEE WHO RESOLVES SUCH CASES. SO THIS IS STILL AGAINST THE SSPX JUSTIFICATION OF DISOBEYING THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS.
[Likewise in the case of danger of death. If a Catholic overturns his vehicle, and is in an emergency situation any priest has the power of hearing his confession even if he does not necessarily have jurisdiction.]
THE AUTHORIZATION TO DO SO COMES FROM THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS. IT IS EXPLICITLY GIVEN IN CANON LAW PROMULGATED BY THE POPE. SO IT DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE SSPX's DEFIANCE AGAINST THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS.
[In such a case the Church opens wide the doors of her mercy and gives jurisdiction to any priest. It is the Church herself which gives jurisdiction, without involving the hierarchy.]
IDIOT. IT IS THE CHURCH THAT OPENS THE DOOR OF MERCY BUT IT IS DONE THROUGH THE VICAR OF CHRIST THE ONE WHO HAS THE POWER TO OPEN AND TO CLOSE. WHEN HE OPENS NO ONE CAN SHUT AND WHEN HE SHUT NO ONE CAN OPEN. EVEN THE SSPX CAN OPEN OR CLOSE CONTRARY TO THE POWER OF PETER. THAT IS WHY YOUR ARGUMENT IS DEMONIC AND DIRECTLY VIOLATIVE OF THE WILL OF THE DIVINE MASTER.
PART II
ReplyDelete["Ecclesia Supplet" —"The Church Supplies" (For the Spiritual Good of the Faithful)]
WHAT THE SSPX IS DOING IS NOT FOR THE GOOD OF THE CHURCH BUT FOR EVIL. BECAUSE IT TRIES TO SEPARATE THE FLOCK FROM THE AUTHORITY OF THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS. THAT IS DEMONIC. THE LORD JESUS WILLED THAT THE CHURCH BE GOVERNED BY THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS AND THE SSPX NEGATE THIS WILL OF THE LORD.
[These three cases are foreseen by Canon Law, and the same principle applies in each of these three cases; namely that for the good of the faithful, that is their spiritual good, the Church assures, as much as possible, that they have the means available necessary for salvation. That includes the Sacrament of Confession. We therefore say "Ecclesia supplet" —"the Church supplies," —when the priest lacks jurisdiction. Another rule of Canon Law applies: "Salus animarum suprema lex" —"The supreme law is the salvation of souls."]
HA HA HA... WHAT A VERY CHEAP SHOT. HA HA HA...
ECCLESIA SUPPLET IS NOT EQUAL WITH SSPX SUPPLET. THAT PRINCIPLE IS ESTABLISHED IN CANON LAW AS YOU HAVE STATED AND THEREFORE IT IS SUBJECT TO THE AUTHORITY OF THE POPE. TO USE IT AGAINST THE POPE WHO PROMULGATED THE CANON LAW AND THE ONE WHO IS THE DEFINITIVE INTERPRETER OF THE CANON LAW IS AN ACT OF ARROGANCE, DISOBEDIENCE AND PRETENSION. DREAM ON TARSIER. HA HA HA...
ECCLESIA SUPPLET DOES NOT CONTAIN PROVISIONS THAT THE POPE CAN BE DISOBEYED AT WILL BY THE SSPX.
[Consequently the Church supplies for an absence of jurisdiction. It is therefore not the good of the priest which is in question. It is not to reassure the priest that he has jurisdiction to hear confessions. it is the good of the faithful which matters. It is very important to understand this. It is for your own good that your priests receive a supplied jurisdiction, that is to say for the common good of the Church and not for the personal good of the priest.]
HA HA HA... ECCLESIA SUPPLET. THAT IS NOT APPLICABLE WITH SSPX BECAUSE THE SSPX ARE CANONICALLY OUTSIDE THE CHURCH. THEY ARE DE JURE ET DE FACTO OUTSIDE THE CHURCH. ECCLESIA SUPPLET... THAT CHURCH REFERS TO IS LED BY THE POPE AND NOT WITHOUT THE POPE. THE SSPX IS THE SOCIETY OF THE POPELESS. I THINK THE CHURCH BEING REFERRED TO BY TARSIER IS THE LUTHERAN CHURCH OR THE NESTORIAN CHURCH BUT NOT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.
[For the good of the faithful in these three cases, "Ecclesia supplet" —"the Church supplies."]
ReplyDeleteHA HA HA... THE CHURCH LED BY THE POPE SUPPLIES AND NOT THE SSPX. ECCLESIA SUPPLET IS NOT SSPX SUPPLET.
[I have spoken to you of the jurisdictional power of the priest, which is the power of governing. Let us say a few more words about it.]
THE JURISDICTIONAL POWER OF THE PRIEST MUST ALWAYS BE IN COMMUNION WITH HIS BISHOP AND HIS POPE. EVEN A MISSIONARY WORKING ALONE IN AFRICA OR SAHARA DESERT MUST BE IN UNION WITH HIS POPE AND HIS BISHOP. THE SSPX INTERPRETATION DESTROYS THE VERY NATURE OF JURISDICITON, OF HIERARCHY AND APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION.
[Jurisdiction: The Power to Feed a Flock]
THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY OF FEEDING AND TENDING THE FLOCK WAS ENTRUSTED TO ST. PETER AND NOT TO LEFEBVRE THE WACKY OLD FOOL.
[Does a priest lack something when he is ordained a priest? Would there be something missing from his priestly character which the diocesan bishop has to add by word, "Here, I give you jurisdiction," as by waving a magic wand? Would a word from the bishop give something extra to the priest? No, it is not quite this.]
HA HA HA... I AM AMAZED BY THE STUPIDITY OF THIS BISHOP TARSIER. HA HA HA... AN ORDAINED PRIEST IS LACKING OF NOTHING AS REGARDS HIS PRIESTHOOD. AND PART OF THAT PERFECTION IS HIS COMMUNION WITH THE POPE AND THE BISHOP. HE TOOK AN OATH TO BE FAITHFUL TO HIS POPE AND HIS BISHOP BEFORE ORDINATION AND DURING HIS ORDINATION.
IF AN ORDAINED PRIEST WILL DISOBEY HIS BISHOP AND HIS POPE THEN THERE IS INDEED LACKING IN HIM. HE WILL LACK JURISDICTION AND FACULTY. AND HE WILL NO LONGER BE IN GOOD STANDING IN THE CHURCH.
THE ARGUMENT OF TARSIER IS VERY PROTESTANT IN NATURE. I AM AMAZED BY HIS SOPHISTIC MANNER OF REASONING IN ORDER TO EVADE PAPAL AUTHORITY.
[Jurisdiction is the fact that the bishop gives a flock to his priests, or that the Pope designates a flock for a bishop by giving him a diocese. Jurisdiction is the power which a superior has over his flock and which a pastor has over his sheep.]
ReplyDeleteTHE PRIEST WHO IS NOT IN UNION WITH HIS BISHOP HAS NO BUSINESS DEALING WITH THE FLOCK BECAUSE THE REAL SHEPHERD OF THE FLOCK OVER ALL THE SHEEP WHICH INCLUDE THE PRIESTS IS THE BISHOP. IF THE PRIEST WILL DISOBEY HIS BISHOP AND TRY TO STEAL THE SHEEP FROM HIS HAND THEN HE IS NO LONGER A SHEPHERD BUT A WOLF. THAT IS WHY THE PEOPLE OF DAVAO LIKEN THE SSPX PRIESTS TO THE WOLVES.
[This is what the power of jurisdiction is: the power to feed the sheep.]
THE POWER TO FEED THE FLOCK IS UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF PETER. THE PRIEST HAS NO AUTHORITY TO FEED THE FLOCK WITHOUT PETER BECAUSE HE MIGHT ONLY FEED THEM WITH POISON.
[You certainly know that in the Church we distinguish between the power of Holy Orders and the power of jurisdiction. When Our Lord said, "Go into the whole world and preach the gospel," "docete omnes gentes" — "and teach all nations," —it was the power of jurisdiction which he gave. "Teach," or, "Teach them to observe all that I have commanded you" (Matt. 28:19), that is to teach the —commandments of God. Thus to direct the flock is the power of jurisdiction.]
THE POWER OF JURISDICTION IS ENTRUSTED TO ST. PETER AND NOT WITHOUT PETER. SO THE SSPX HAS NO JURISDICTION.
[Just beforehand Our Lord had spoken to His apostles of the power of Holy Orders: "Baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" (Matt. 28:19). This is the power of Holy Orders, which is the power of sanctifying, which depends directly upon the priestly character.]
THE POWER OF SANCTIFYING WAS GIVEN TO BE EXERCIZED WITHIN THE POWER OF JURISDICTION. THAT IS THE REASON WHY THE POWER OF THE HOLY ORDERS ARE CONFERRED THROUGH THE HANDS OF THE BISHOPS IN COMMUNION WITH THE POPE. THE PRIESTLY CHARACTER CONFERRED IS NOT AN EXCUSE TO DISOBEY THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS AND MUST NOT BE USED AS SUCH. INSTEAD, IT IS EXPECTED OF PRIESTS TO BE MORE EAGER TO BE IN UNION WITH HIS POPE AND BISHOPS THAT IS WHY THE OPERATING MINDSET OF THE SSPX IS VERY VERY PROTESTANT AND MODERNIST.
[ It is the power to celebrate Holy Mass and to sanctify the faithful by the Sacraments.]
THE FACT THAT THE BISHOP ORDAINS THE PRIEST SHOWS THAT IT IS CLEAR FOR THAT PRIEST AND FOR THE FAITHFUL THAT IT IS IMPERATIVE FOR PRIESTS TO BE IN UNION WITH THE CHURCH AND HIS POPE. THE POWER TO SANCTIFY GIVEN BY GOD TO THE PRIEST CAN BE REGULATED AND CAN EVEN BE SHUT BY THE POWER OF THE KEY OF PETER. THERE IS NOTHING IN THE FORMULA OF ORDINATION WHICH STATES THAT: 'WHEN CRISIS COMES IT IS OK FOR YOU TO DISOBEY THE POPE AND THE BISHOP.' EXCUSE ME THAT KIND OF MENTALITY IS SO FOREIGN TO TNE PRIESTLY CHARACTER THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED. THAT IS WHY CARDINAL OTTAVIANI WAS NOT FOOLISH TO JOIN THE LUCIFERIAN REBELLION OF LEFEBVRE.
[There must therefore be something besides the priestly character, by which the priest or the bishop receives from his hierarchical superior a part of the flock. It is that which is called the power of jurisdiction.]
BLAH BLAH BLAH... NO MATTER WHAT THERE IS NOTHING THERE THAT JUSTIFIES THE SSPX DISOBEDIENCE AGAINST THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS. NADA... IN RUSSIAN: NYET NYET. GO TO HELL WITH LEFEBVRE AND WE WILL BE WITH BLESSED JOHN XXIII AND BLESSED JOHN PAUL THE GREAT.
[PART III
ReplyDeleteThe Supplying of Jurisdiction in Times of Crisis]
WHERE IS IT DECLARED IN THE SACRED TRADITION OR THE HOLY BIBLE THAT IN TIME OF CRISES THE AUTHORITY OF THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS CAN BE BYPASSED?
[In the present situation of crisis, it is obvious that your priests cannot receive from their superiors in the church, that is to say from the diocesan bishops and from the Pope, a flock, because that flock is refused to them.]
THE POPE AND THE DIOCESAN BISHOP DID NOT REFUSE TO THE SSPX THE FLOCK. THEY SIMPLY PROTECTED THE FLOCK FROM THE EVIL OF SSPX. BESIDES THOSE FLOCK ARE ENTRUSTED BY THE LORD TO ST. PETER AND TO HIS SUCCESSORS AND NOT TO LEFEBVRE YOUR WACKY OLD FOOL. THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS ARE THE TRUE SHEPHERDS OF THE FLOCK AND THE SSPX ARE WOLVES TRYING TO LURE THEM INTO THEIR REBELLION.
[This authority over a flock must, therefore, be given to them in another manner: that is, by substitute or supplied jurisdiction.]
HA HA HA... STUPID. THE POPE IS THE ONE WHO HAS AUTHORITY OVER THAT FLOCK. YOU DONT HAVE THE RIGHT OF JURISDICTION BECAUSE YOU ARE REJECTING THE AUTHORITY OF THE UNIVERSAL SHEPHERD.
BY REJECTING THE AUTHORITY OF THE POPE THE SSPX LOST ANY RIGHT OF JURISDICTION WHETHER SUPPLIED JURISDICTION OR DELUSIONAL JURISDICTION. HE HE HE...
[In this case it is the Church herself which gives to priests a power as the power of the pastor over his flock.]
THIS IS DEMONIC. THE ONE THAT ACTS AND DECIDES FOR THE CHURCH IS THE POPE. SO, WHAT CHURCH ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? TARSIER MUST BE REFERRING TO THE LUTHERAN CHURCH. HA HA HA...
[Normally the power of Holy Orders, brings with it the foundation or basis of a power to organize the Church in a hierarchy.]
THE ONE WHO ESTABLISHED THE HIERARCHY IS JESUS AND HE PUT PETER ON THE TOP NOT LEFEBVRE. SORRY FOR YOU. AND VATICAN I STATES THAT THE CHURCH MUST BE GOVERNED BY THE POPE AS WILLED BY THE LORD JESUS. SO SORRY FOR YOU. HE HE HE...
[Thus the priest’s or the bishop’s power of Holy Orders normally brings with it the power of jurisdiction. It is normal for a bishop or a priest to have a particular flock over which he exercises his power of Holy Orders. But in the present situation we have to deal with the abnormal situation where the power of Holy Orders is unjustly deprived of the power of jurisdiction.]
THE SSPX CREATED ITS OWN ABNORMAL SITUATION. IT IS FROM THE VERY BEGINNING AN ABNORMAL SOCIETY FOUNDED BY A WACKY OLD FOOL, A SENILE ARCHBISHOP WHO WAS COWARDLY SILENT DURING VATICAN II AND SIGNED THE DOCUMENTS YET TURNED TRAITOR LATER.
THE SSPX IS NOT DEPRIVED OF JURISDICTION. THEY HAVE NO RIGHT FOR SUCH JURISDICTION BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT IN COMMUNION WITH THE UNIVERSAL SHEPHERD THE POPE.
[It is in this case that the Church mercifully supplies jurisdiction in favor of you, the faithful, giving the jurisdiction your priests would otherwise not have.]
IT IS SATAN THAT SUPPLIES YOU WITH FAKE JURISDICTION BECAUSE ALL JURISDICTION OF THE CHURCH IS GOVERNED BY THE SUCCESSOR OF PETER. THE CHURCH IS FOUNDED ON PETER AND SO YOUR POPELESS SOCIETY IS DEMONIC IN ORIGIN.
[This is therefore an extraordinary power, which is an exceptional case. In exceptional situations there are exceptional powers.]
ALL AUTHORITY IN THE CHURCH HAS BEEN ENTRUSTED TO ST. PETER. WHETHER IT IS EXCEPTIONAL OR ORDINARY POWER IT MUST BE GIVEN BY THE POPE. THE EXCEPTIONAL POWER OF THE SSPX IS NOT FROM POPE AND THEREFORE NOT FROM CHRIST. WHERE DID IT COME FROM THEN? FROM LUCIFER - THE CHIEF REBEL IDOLIZED BY LEFEBVRE.
[The General Extent of Supplied Jurisdiction]
ReplyDeleteALL JURISDICTION IN THE CHURCH MUST BE UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE POPE WHOSE POWER IS SUPREME AND ABSOLUTE AS THE VICAR OF CHRIST. WE DO NOT RECOGNIZE THE AUTHORITY OF YOUR TREACHEROUS BISHOPS FROM LEFEBVRE TO FELLAY.
[It is not only present for confessions, but also for the entire priestly ministry. There is no reason to limit it to confessions alone.]
YOU ARE FREE TO HALLUCINATE AND IMPOSE YOUR DELUSIONS ON YOUR POPELESS SOCIETY.
[And, you are indeed aware that jurisdiction is sometimes necessary for a priest to validly administer the Sacraments. This is the case, first of all, for Confession. It is equally the case for a priest assisting at Marriage.]
AUTHORIZATION FROM THE BISHOP AND COMMUNION WITH THE POPE IS NECESSARY.
[If he does not have jurisdiction the marriage is null and void. Although the two spouses are the ministers of the Sacrament, the Church has added a supplementary condition for validity, that is to say that the matrimonial consent be exchanged before the official witness of the Church, which is normally the parish priest.]
YEAH... THAT IS THE REASON WHY YOUR EFFORT TO OFFER AN ALIBI TO CIRCUMNAVIGATE THE BISHOP AND THE POPE IS FOOLISH AND VERY DANGEROUS IN THE SPIRITUAL LIFE OF THE CHURCH.
[It is quite obvious that our priests do not have this power in an ordinary way. They can only receive it in an extraordinary way by the Church’s supplying of jurisdiction.]
IDIOT. WHETHER IN ORDINARY OR EXTRAORDINARY WAY IT IS STILL THE POPE AND THE BISHOP WHO WILL GIVE THOSE POWER. WITHOUT THE POPE AND THE BISHOP THERE IS NO POWER THAT YOU CAN EXERCISE IN THE CHURCH.
[In fact we here depend on OC Canon 1098 § 1, which dispenses from the necessity of the presence of a priest having jurisdiction for the marriage to be valid when it is foreseen that such a priest cannot be found.]
HA HA HA... ANOTHER IDIOTIC REASONING BECAUSE THE ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIESTS OF COURSE CAN BE FOUND NOW A DAYS. SECOND, CANON 1098 DOES NOT SAY THAT THE SSPX CAN RECEIVE JURISDICTION IN AN EXTRAORDINARY MANNER APART FROM THE BISHOP AND THE POPE. THIS TARSIER IS A LIAR AND DECEIVER.
[Normally jurisdiction is necessary for licitness, that is to say, in order that the act of the priest be licit, or, permissible.]
NORMALLY YES. UNFORTUNATELY THE SSPX IS ABNORMAL. THE ABNORMALITY IS NOT IN THE CHURCH BUT IN THE SSPX.
[For example, to preach a priest must have a mandate, or, for a bishop to confirm in another diocese than his own, he must have a mandate from the diocesan bishop. In order to ordain priests a bishop must normally have jurisdiction and this is, of course, all the more so for the consecration of other bishops. For an episcopal consecration he must have a Pontifical mandate.]
OF COURSE. WITHOUT A MANDATE THE ONE WHO WILL CONSECRATE BISHOP SHALL INCUR EXCOMMUNICATION AUTOMATICALLLY LIKE YOUR WACKY OLD FOOL LEFEBVRE WHO DIED OUTSIDE THE CHURCH WHERE THERE IS NO SALVATION.
[This same principle is supplied throughout. In an exceptional situation the Church supplies for this absence of jurisdiction on the part of the priest or even the bishop.]
THE ONE WHO WILL SUPPLY DURING EXCEPTIONAL SITUATION IS STILL THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS. YOU CAN ONLY ESCAPE THE POPE AND THE BISHOP IF YOU WILL GO TO THE PROTESTANT CHURCH.
[And the more serious the crisis is, the more necessary it will be to fall back on this supplying of the Church on a higher level.]
THIS IS DEMONIC. THE MORE SERIOUS THE CRISIS IS THE MORE THE FAITHFUL MUST CLING TO THE VICAR OD CHRIST ON WHOSE OFFICE THE PROMISE THAT THE GATE OF HELL SHALL NOT PERISH.
[This is what happened on June 30, 1988, when Archbishop Lefebvre consecrated four bishops with Bishop de Castro Mayer as co-consecrator.]
WHAT HAPPENED ON JUNE 3O, 1988 IS AN ABOMINABLE ACT OF DISOBEDIENCE TO THE HOLY FATHER, BLESSED POPE JOHN PAUL THE GREAT. WHAT LEFEBVRE DID IS PROTESTAND AND LUCIFERIAN.
[PART IV
ReplyDeleteThe Case of Necessity for the Traditional Faithful]
THE TRADITIONAL FAITHFUL ARE FAITHFUL TO THE POPE. THE ENEMIES OF THE CHURCH ARE TRAITORS TO THE POPE AND SUCH ARE THE SSPX. TRAITORS.
[The fact that heresy, and even apostasy, is widely spread amongst the clergy, leaves the faithful, and especially those who want to keep the faith and the true religion, as sheep scattered and without a pastor.]
HERESY AND APOSTASY WAS MORE PREVALENT DURING THE TIME OF THE FATHERS WHEN ARIUS, NESTORIUS, EUTYCHES AND THEIR FELLOW HERESIARCHS WERE GIVING TROUBLES TO THE CHURCH. IF TARSIER IS NOT AWARE THEY EXISTED PRIOR TO VATICAN II.
MAY I ALSO REMIND TARSIER THAT THE HERESIES OF LUTHER AND CALVIN THAT SO HURT THE CHURCH HAPPENED BEFORE VATICAN II. THEY PROTESTED BECAUSE OF THE SCANDALS AND ABUSES AND INFIDELITIES IN THE CHURCH BEFORE VATICAN II.
BUT IN EACH CASE THE BEST WAY TO COMBAT AND DEFEAT THE HERESIES AND THE HERESIARCHS IS TO BE FAITHFUL TO THE VICAR OF CHRIST. UNION WITH THE SUCCESSOR OF PETER IS THE BEST PROTECTION FORM HERESIES AND APOSTASY PERSONALLY GIVEN BY THE LORD JESUS. ONLY FOOLS WILL TEACH THAT OUR FINAL DEFENSE AGAINST HERESIES IS THE SSPX. EXCUSE ME. WE ARE NOT FOOLS LIKE YOU. WE STILL HAVE OUR SANITY.
VIVA EL PAPA!
[You can easily see, my dear friends, that it is the case of necessity amongst the faithful which is responsible for the fact that traditional priests and bishops have a supplied jurisdiction with respect to your needs.]
WE DO SEE YOUR DELUSIONS AND YOUR PARANOIA AND WE DO NOT SEE YOUR SUPPLIED JURISDICTION BECAUSE THE VICAR OF CHRIST DIDN'T SUPPLY YOU WITH JURISDICTION WHETHER ORDINARY OR EXTRAORDINARY. DREAM ON TARSIER.
[This is not only so that they may validly hear confessions and validly assist at marriages, but also for all of the acts of their priestly or episcopal ministry.]
DEMONIC STATEMENT. A CHURCH WITHOUT PETER IS NOT THE TRUE CHURCH, NOT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. WITHOUT THE UNIVERSAL SHEPHERD THERE IS NO SUPPLIED JURISDICTION. IN CASE OF NECESSITY THE FAITHFUL ARE NECESSITATED TO BE FAITHFUL TO THE POPE AND NOT TO ANY SOCIETY FOUNDED BY A WACKY OLD FOOL.
[For confessions, you certainly remember that Archbishop Lefebvre invoked the principle of the "danger of spiritual death" of the faithful.]
ReplyDeleteMARCEL LEFEBVRE BY DOING A LUCIFERIAN REBELLION AGAINS THE POPE AND THE ECUMENICAL COUNCIL IMPOSED UPON HIMSELF THAT 'SPIRITUAL DEATH', i.e., EXPULSION FROM THE CHURCH OUTSIDE OF WHICH THERE IS NO SALVATION.
[Just see the unhappy faithful who have no priests of certain doctrine, and who sometimes even doubt the validity of their confessions: "Does this priest really have the necessary intention so as to validly absolve?" They can readily doubt this.]
IF THE PRIEST HAVE A DOUBT ON THE VALIDITY OF THEIR CONFESSION THEN THE ONE WHO WILL SETTLE THE DOUBT IS THE BISHOP AND DEFINITELY THE POPE. IT IS NOT THE SSPX WHO CAN REMOVE DOUBTS CONCERNING THE SACRAMENTS.
["If I can no longer go to confession then I am exposed to fall and perhaps to fall into grave sins. Who knows? My eternal salvation is at risk, I am in danger of spiritual death."]
LEFEBVRE AND TISSIER PUT THEMSELVES INTENTIONALLY INTO SPIRITUAL DEATH BY DEFYING THE SEE OF PETER: "THE GATE OF DEATH... OF HADES... OF HELL PREVAILED OVER THEM" BECAUSE THEY REJECTED THE VICAR OF CHRIST.
[The Church supplies, for the Church places ipso facto (by the fact itself) this Catholic under the jurisdiction of a priest. The Church places this Catholic as a sheep of a priest who will be his pastor for a determined case.]
THE CHURCH SUPPLIES THE PRIEST THROUGH THE POPE AND THE BISHOP. THE CHURCH SUPPLIES US WITH DOGMATIC PRONOUNCEMENTS THROUGH THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS. THE CHURCH CALLS FOR COUNCILS AND SYNODS THROUGH THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS.
[Thus is established between the faithful Catholic and his priest a relationship as the sheep or the lamb with respect to the shepherd.]
HA HA HA... THIS IS STUPID. HOW CAN YOU CLAIM THAT THERE IS A TRUE BOND OF RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PRIEST AND THE SHEEP WHEN IN FACT THE TRUE SHEPHERD OF THE FLOCK IS JESUS AND THE VICAR OF JESUS IS THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS. EVEN IF THE SHEEP IS IN UNION WITH THE PRIEST THEY ARE STILL BOTH IN DANGER OF SPIRITUAL DEATH BECAUSE THEY ARE SEPARATED FROM CHRIST THROUGH HIS VICAR.
[The only thing is that this relationship of authority does not come from a delegation from the hierarchy of the Church, but by the Church, the Mystical Body of Our Lord, herself supplying.]
THIS IS SATANIC. THE CHURCH IS NOT AN ABSTRACT SOCIETY. WHEN WE SPEAK OF THE CHURCH IT IS REPRESENTED BY THE POPE AND BISHOPS WHO ACTS AND DECIDES FOR IT, LEGALLY, SPIRITUALLY AND MORALLY. THAT IS WHY THE AUTHORITY OF THE BISHOP IS ABSOLUTE IN HIS DIOCESE AND THE AUTHORITY OF THE POPE IS ABSOLUTE IN THE UNIVERSAL CHURCH.
THE SSPX IS WILLING TO SELL THEIR SOULS TO THE DEVILS IN ORDER TO JUSTIFY THEIR REBELLIONS AND TREACHERY AGAINST THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS.
[II. CHARACTERISTICS OF SUPPLIED JURISDICTION]
ReplyDeleteTHE FIRST CHARACTERISTIC OF SUPPLIED JURISDICTION IS THAT IT MUST BE SUPPLIED BY LEGITIMATE AUTHORITY AND THAT LEGITIMATE AUTHORITY IS THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS AND NOT THE SSPX. THAT IS WHY THE SSPX IS ILLIGIMATE. THE SSPX IS A CANONICAL BASTARD.
[Let us strive to describe the characteristics of this supplied jurisdiction.]
SHOOT YOUR WAY.
[1) first of all it is a supplied jurisdiction. This is its definition. It is the supplying for the absence of jurisdiction in a priest or a bishop: "Ecclesia supplet."]
HA HA HA... VERY PATHETIC. IF THE JURISDICTION IS ABSENT IT IS BECAUSE IT WAS NOT GIVEN SUCH. WHY? BECAUSE THAT PRIEST OR BISHOP IS DISOBEDIENT TO THE VICAR OF CHRIST. THE LORD GOD WILL NOT GIVE JURISDICTION FOR DISOBDIENCE OTHERWISE SATAN AND THE DEMONS AS WELL AS THE HERETICS, SCHISMATICS AND APOSTATES CAN ARGUE FOR SUPPLIED JURISDICTION.
[It is neither the Pope nor the diocesan hierarchy which gives their flock to the traditional clergy, but the Church, and Our Lord Jesus Christ as Head of His Mystical Body.]
HA HA HA... VERY IDIOTIC. THE WILL OF THE LORD HAS BEEN CLEAR AND CATOGORICALLY STATED IN THE SACRED SCRIPTURES AND IN THE DOGMATIC PRONOUNCEMENTS OF VATICAN I [VATICAN ONE NOT VATICAN II HE HE HE]. THE LORD JESUS WILLED THAT HIS CHURCH BE FOUNDED ON PETER AND HIS OFFICE. NO AMOUT OF ALIBI FROM AN SSPX FOOL LIKE THIS TARSIER CAN REMOVE THE ROLE OF THE OFFICE OF PETER IN THE HANDING ON OF JURISDICTION UNLESS THE SAME AUTHORITY PROVIDES SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR THAT AS IN THE CASE OF THE EASTERN CATHOLIC CHURCHES. NO, NO, NO... SORRY FOR YOU TARSIER. YOUR ARGUMENT DOES NOT HOLD WATER.
[It is they who sanction and declare this case of necessity for the faithful.]
WHO ARE THESE 'THEY'? THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS. NOT THE DISOBEDIENT LOT LIKE YOU AND NOT THE EXCOMMUNICATED LIKE YOUR WACKY OLD FOOL, LEFEBVRE.
["I have mercy on this crowd," Our Lord said, "for they are as sheep without a shepherd." This would indeed be your case if there was no traditional clergy.]
IDIOT. JESUS HAD MERCY ON THE CROWD AND THEREFORE HE GAVE THEM ST. PETER AND THE APOSTLES. JESUS DIDN'T KICK ST. PETER OUT BECAUSE HE FELT MERY TO THE PEOPLE WHO WERE LIKE SHEEP WITHOUT A SHEPHERD. AFTER GIVING THEM THE APOSTLES THEN THEY GOT SHEPHERDS.
THE CASE OF SSPX IS THE CONTRARY, THEY HAVE NO SHEPHERD BECAUSE THEY REJECTED WHAT THE LORD HAD GIVEN. THAT IS WHY IT IS SATANIC. TARSIER, YOU ARE VIOLATING THE WILL OF THE LORD TO SUIT YOUR REBELLIOUS HEART. WE WILL NOT JOIN THE LIKE OF YOU.
[The Church takes account of this abnormal situation and therefore links you up with traditional priests by that link of authority which makes a pastor and a flock.]
THAT IS YOUR LINK TO SATAN. SINCE YOU HAVE REJECTED THE AUTHORITY OF THE VICAR OF CHRIST THE GATE OF DEATH HAS CONQUERED YOU.
[This is supplied jurisdiction. The Church supplies for the absence of the ordinary link between you and your priests. It creates a link on account of your spiritual needs.]
THE ONE WHO SUPPLIES IN THE NAME OF THE CHURCH IS THE POPE AND THE BISHOP NOT THE SSPX ANIMALS. WE DO NOT RECOGNIZE YOU AND YOUR COHORTS AS OUR SHEPHERDS. YOU ARE CANONICALLY IMPOTENT AND BASTARD.
[2) it is a personal and not a territorial jurisdiction.]
ReplyDeleteJURISDICTION IS NEVER PERSONAL ALONE. IT MUST BE PERSONAL AND TERRITORIAL AT THE SAME TIME. THE PRIEST IS NOT ALONE; HE BELONGS TO THE CHURCH AND THEREFORE HIS MINISTRY MUST BE IN COMMUNION WITH GOD, THE POPE AND THE BISHOP. A PERSONAL JURISDICTION THAT IS NOT TERRITORIAL AND NOT IN COMMUNION WITH THE POPE AND BISHOP IS PROTESTANT IN NATURE, NOT CATHOLIC. IT IS SIMILAR TO THE BORN AGAIN PASTORS WHO ARE INDEPENDENT BY THEMSELVES. THEY RELY ONLY ON SOLO CHRISTO ET SOLA GRATIA.
THE THEOLOGY OF THIS TARSIER DE MALALA IS VERY PROTESTANT-LIKE.
[It is very important to understand this. Your priests have jurisdiction over your persons and not over a territory.]
THE PRIEST IS THE PASTOR OF SOULS AND THE PASTOR OF THE TERRITORY WHEREIN HE IS SENT FOR. THE PRIEST'S PASTORAL AUTHORITY AS SHEPHERD OF SOULS IS SUBJECT TO THE AUTHORITY OF THE HIGHER SHEPHERDS: THE POPE AND THE BISHOP.
[Traditional priests have jurisdiction over each one of their faithful who come to their chapel or traditional church or traditional convent or priory, and they do not have jurisdiction over a determined territory as for example the territory of a parish.]
THE TRADITIONAL PRIESTS ARE FAITHFUL TO THE POPE AND THE BISHOP. IF THEY ARE UNFAITHFUL THEN THEY ARE NOT TRADITIONAL AT ALL BUT TRAITORS AND SUCH ARE THE SSPX PRIESTS - TRAITORS TO THE POPE AND TO THE CHURCH.
[So when we say that "our churches are our parishes" it is true, but we must see that it is true without technically being the same thing.]
WHAT A THEOLOGICAL AND CANONICAL GOBBLEDYGOOK. I AM SUPRISED BY TARSIER DE MALALA'S CAPACITY TO LIE AND TO DECEIVE PEOPLE. IT IS REALLY TRUE THAT EVEN THE DEVIL CAN TWIST THE SACRED SCRIPTURE TO SUIT HIS REBELLIOUS SPIRIT.
[3) finally, the third characteristic of this supplied jurisdiction is that it depends a great deal on the faithful.]
THE FAITHFUL ARE FAITHFUL TO THE POPE. THE SO-CALLED SUPPLIED JURISDICTION OF SSPX DOESN'T DEPEND ON THE FAITHFUL BUT ON THE TRAITORS. THAT IS WHY IT IS LUCIFERIAN... DEMONIC-LIKE.
[Allow me to explain. It is the state of necessity of the faithful which creates between the priest and the faithful the relationship of authority or supplied jurisdiction.]
VERY PROTESTANT. THE PASTOR AND THE FLOCK ALONE. ME AND MY FOLLOWERS ALONE. THIS IS BORN-AGAIN THEOLOGY AND PASTORAL STYLE. IT IS DEMONIC. MARTIN LUTHER USED ALMOST THE SAME ARGUMENT IN REJECTING THE AUTHORITY OF THE POPE. HE HE HE...
[Take for example Archbishop Lefebvre, who, when the French episcopacy failed to do so, sent a telegram to the representatives to declare that they would fall under the pain of excommunication if they voted for a law favoring abortion.]
WE DON'T NEED THAT ANIMAL, YOUR WACKY OLD FOOL LEFEBVRE TO TEACH US TO FIGHT AGAINST ABORTION. OUR POPES ARE OUR CHAMPIONS AGAINST ABORTION. THE SERVANT OF GOD POPE PAUL VI OF BLESSED MEMORY IS THE CHAMPION OF HUMANAE VITAE NOT THAT ANIMAL LEFEBVRE. HE IS A TRAITOR TO THE CHURCH. BOTH THE PRO-ABORTIONS AND THE SSPX ARE AGAINST POPE PAUL VI. THEY ARE POSSESSED BY THE SAME DEMON OF REBELLION AGAINST THE SEE OF PETER.
[PART V
ReplyDeleteBut in order that such a ministry and such admonitions be fruitful it is necessary that the faithful in question accept them willingly.]
GOSPEL TEACHES US THAT IN ORDER TO BE FRUITFUL THE FAITHFUL MUST BE IN COMMUNION WITH CHRIST LIKE THE BRANCH ATTACHED TO THE VINE. SO THE FAITHFUL MUST BE FAITHFUL TO JESUS AND JESUS GAVE US THE SEE OF PETER NOT THE SEE OF LEFEBVRE. SO TO BE FRUITFUL WE MUST BE UNITED WITH THE POPE AND NOT WITH ANY WACKY OLD FOOL LIKE LEFEBVRE.
THE CHURCH IS THE BODY OF CHRIST. IF WE WANT TO BE FRUITFUL WE MUST BE IN UNION WITH HIS BODY. THE SSPX IS OUT OF COMMUNION WITH THE BODY OF CHRIST. IT IS CANONICALLY FORNICATING WITH ECONE RATHER THAN BEING MARRIED WITH THE CHURCH IN ROME.
[It is inasmuch as you do not refuse to receive from your priests the ministry which they have the right to exercise for your good, that is to say for the good of the Church, that the jurisdiction that you in a certain way give them will be able to be fruitfully exercised.]
YOU DO NOT HAVE ANY JURISDICTION AND CHRIST DIDN'T SUPPLY YOU WITH JURISDICTION BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT IN COMMUNION WITH THE BODY OF CHRIST LED BY HIS CHOSEN VICAR. THUS, THE SSPX IS LITURGICALLY AND CANONICALLY AND SACRAMENTALLY IMPOTENT AND FRUITLESS.
[Normally, a parish priest can take hold of a sheep which is perhaps a little mangy and say to him authoritatively: "Look out, come back to the Church!" But in our case the admonition of this suppletory pastor will only bear fruits if the sheep recognizes first of all that relationship of authority which has been created in his favor by the very case of necessity. This is the limit and the practical fragility of the organization of our traditional parishes.]
THE LIMIT AND FRIGILITY OF YOUR LUCIFERIAN PARISHES IS ON THE FACT THAT YOU ARE NOT ESTABLISHED ON A SOLID ROCK GIVEN BY THE LORD JESUS. THAT IS WHY THE GATE OF HELL HAS OVERTAKEN THE SSPX STARTING FROM ITS SENILE FOUNDER WHO DIED OUTSIDE THE CHURCH WHERE THERE IS NO SALVATION.
["Your chapels are your parishes" —It is exactly inasmuch as you accept the principle of supplied authority of the priests and of its exercise over yourselves, that their authority over the flock will be extended, efficacious, genuine, continuous and broad.]
ReplyDeleteTHIS IS SATANIC. ALL CATHOLIC CHAPELS MUST BE IN COMMUNION WITH THE POPE IN ORDER TO BE GENUINE AND EFFICACIOUS. THE PRIESTS SERVING IN CHAPELS WHO ARE DEFYING THE POPE IS NOT EFFICACIOUS BUT DANGEROUS. SUCH ARE THE SSPX PRIESTS. THAT IS WHY TARSIER DE MALALA IS TWISTING THE CHURCH TEACHINGS TO SUIT THEIR LUCIFERIAN REBELLION.
[It is quite obvious that if you do not want to ask anything from your priests, or very little, they will be paralyzed.]
THE PRIEST IS ALSO PARALYZED IF HE IS NOT IN COMMUNION WITH HIS BISHOP AND POPE.
[Archbishop Lefebvre said, and it is perfectly true, "Your chapels are your parishes, consider your priories and your chapels as your parishes, that is where you are. Do not return to your former parishes, which have fallen into the hands of the modernists."]
THIS WACKY OLD FOOL HAVE FORGOTTEN THE FACT OUT OF HIS SENILITY THAT MODERNISM IS BASICALLY THE REJECTION OF THE AUTHORITY OF THE CHURCH, PARTICULARLY THAT OF THE POPE. HE HAS BECOME THE EXACT DEMON THAT HE PROMISED TO HATE.
[Consider your chapels as your parishes! But in saying that, Archbishop Lefebvre had no intention of usurping for his priests an ordinary jurisdiction that they do not have.]
HYPOCRITE. BY DEFYING THE POPE USING THE PRINCIPLE OF NECESSITY, SUPPLIED JURISDICTION AND ECCLESIA SUPPLET YOU HAVE DEVICED A CLEVER MANNER OF REFUSING THE AUTHORITY OF THE VICAR OF CHRIST THROUGH THEOLOGICAL AND CANONICAL SOPHISTRY.
IT IS CLEAR THAT YOUR GOAL IS TO REJECT THE ORDINARY JURISDICTION AND IN ORDER TO JUSTIFY IT YOU TWISTED SOME CATHOLIC PRINCIPLES THE WAY SATAN TWISTED THE SACRED SCRIPTURES TO REFUTE THE LORD JESUS.
HERE, LEFEBVRE AND TARSIER DE MALALA ARE EMPLOYING THE SAME TECHNIQUE OF THE MODERNISTS IN ARGUING FOR ABORTION, CONTRACEPTION, DIVORCE AND SAME SEX MARRIAGE. THEY TWISTS THE BIBLE AND THE TRADITION TO SUIT THEIR REBELLION. THAT IS WHY THE SSPX ARE HYPOCRITICAL MODERNISTS.
[He had the intention of making you realize and making you understand, you faithful laymen and laywomen, that it is your duty to ask from your traditional priests and chapels for the entire priestly ministry which is normally exercised in a parish.]
THEY ARE NOT FAITHFUL LAY. THE SSPX SUPPORTERS ARE TRAITOR LAYMEN AND LAYWOMEN.
[It is your duty to ask for all of the priestly ministry that they are able to provide for you. It is your duty to entrust yourselves completely to your traditional priests.]
YOU HAVE THE DUTY TO ASK BUT YOU ALSO HAVE THE DUTY TO ASK THEM FROM THE POPE AND NOT FROM THE SSPX TRAITORS. THE FAITHFUL FLOCK MUST KNOW THE REAL SHEPHERDS AND DISCARD THOSE WHO ARE FAKE.
[You have not simply to ask of them a Mass, a Baptism, or a sermon and that is all. If this were the case you would paralyze the priest. He cannot exercise his total ministry in all of its fullness under such circumstances.]
THE ONE WHO WILL PROVIDE THE MASS AND THE SERMON IS THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS. BECAUSE THE COMMAND TO FEED AND TEND THE FLOCK WAS ULTIMATELY GIVEN TO THE SEE OF PETER AND NOT TO THE SEE OF LEFEBVRE.
[III. CONSEQUENCES FOR THE ATTITUDE OF THE FAITHFUL WITH RESPECT TO THE TRADITIONAL CLERGY]
ReplyDeleteTHE FIRST CONSEQUENCE IS THAT THE SSPX IS A BRANCH WHICH BECAME SEPARATED FROM THE BODY OF CHRIST. THUS, IT IS FRUITLESS AND GOOD FOR THE FIRE.
THE SECOND CONSEQUENCE, BY REJECTING THE AUTHORITY OF THE POPE THE SSPX ENDANGERED THEIR SOULS BY MAKING THEM VULNERABLE TO THE GATES OF HELL.
[What are the consequences of this principle which seems to be very important for the attitude of the faithful?]
THE SSPX HAVE BECOME FOLLOWERS OF REBELLION THE WAY ARIUS, NESTORIUS, LUTHER AND LEFEBVRE DID.
[Formerly, the parish priest had simply to speak and everybody obeyed. It was the word of the gospel and everybody obeyed! Obviously this is no longer the case.]
SEE, YOU HAVE ADMITTED THAT YOU ARE NOW DEPARTING FROM THE TRADITION OF THE CHURCH TO DO THINGS IN A NEW MANNER. MUCH WORSE, YOU ARE IMPLYING THAT SINCE THE FAITHFUL OBEYED PREVIOUSLY NOWADAYS IT IS OK TO DISOBEY. VERY CLEVER.
[An appropriate state of mind must therefore be established in the faithful with respect to the traditional clergy.]
THE FAITHFUL ARE FAITHFUL TO THE POPE AND NOT TO THE SSPX TRAITORS. THE SSPX TRAITORS ARE NEVER TRADITIONAL CLERGY BUT REBELLIOUS CLERGY.
[There must be on the part of the laity a voluntary submission to the clergy.]
ReplyDeleteHYPOCRITE AND TREACHEROUS. IMAGINE, HE IS GIVING REASONS ON HOW TO DEFY THE POPE AND YET THIS ANIMAL DEMANDS VOLUNTARY SUBMISSION TO THEIR TRAITOR CLERGY. EXCUSE ME. IF YOU DEFY OUR POPE THEN WE SHALL DEFY YOU AS WELL. WE ARE NOT BOUND TO SUBMIT TO YOUR HYPOCRISY AND DECEITS AND REBELLIONS. WE KNOW OUR TRUE SHEPHERDS AND WE RECOGNIZE THEIR VOICE. OUR LOYALTY IS PLEDGED TO THE VICAR OF CHRIST AND NOT YOUR SSPX ANIMALS.
[They ought to feel the need for their souls to be totally dependent on the priestly ministry in all of its amplitude.]
DEMONIC. HE IS NOW USING THE PRIESTLY MINISTRY AS A WEAPON TO OPPOSE THE VICAR OF CHRIST. HE IS THROWING TO THE DOGS THE SACRED MINISTRY OF THE PRIESTS BY PITTING IT AGAINST THE OFFICE OF PETER AND THE BISHOP.
[I think that this is a requirement of the sense of the Church.]
THAT IS THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE DESTRUCTION OF THE CHURCH, THAT IS, SEPARATION AND REJECTION OF THE ROCK THAT IS PETER. YOUR PROPOSAL IS DEMONIC.
[If you have the sense of the Church, that is to say the sense of the hierarchy of the Church, you will understand this.]
IDIOT. THE CHURCH IS ALWAYS WITH PETER AND NOT WITHOUT PETER. THEN THE HIERARCHY STARTS WITH THE POPE AND WITHOUT THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS THERE IS NO HIERARCHY TO TALK ABOUT. NICE TRY FOR DECEPTION TARSIER DE MALALA.
[The "sensus Ecclesiae," the sense of the Church, on the part of the faithful, will make them learn to avoid two snags, that is to say, two dangerous attitudes which, as always, are opposed to one another.]
THE SENSE OF THE CHURCH IS THAT BY BEING FAITHFUL TO THE POPE THEN ERRORS AND EVIL SHALL BE OVERCAME.
[Errors, as you know, are always in the direction of too much of something or too little of it.]
ERRORS ARE ENTERING WHEN THE FAITHFUL ABANDON THE SEE OF PETER. THE LORD JESUS PERSONALLY CHOSE TO BUILD THE CHURCH ON PETER THE ROCK IN ORDER TO PROTECT THE FAITHFUL FROM ERRORS. INSTEAD, LEFEBVRE CHOSE TO BE ON LEAGUE WITH THE GATE OF HELL RATHER THAN WITH THE ROCK OF PETER.
[The truth is situated as a summit above the two opposed errors of too much or too little. The truth is not a liberal, compromising middle point between the two.]
THE SSPX ABANDONED THE DEFINITIVE PROTECTION AGAINST ERROR WHICH IS THE SEE OF PETER. THAT IS WHY IT SUCCUMBED TO ERRORS. IT BECAME A MODERNIST IN THE GUISE OF TRADITION WHICH IS MORE DANGEROUS THAN THE OPEN MODERNISM.
[I say therefore that there are two dangerous attitudes which exist in the present crisis in the Church, and which are opposed to the sense of the Church.]
THAT IS THE REASON WHY THE SSPX IS OUT OF SENSE WITH THE CHURCH. A SOCIETY THAT IS POPELESS IS ALSO SENSELESS.
[Neither of these opinions is in conformity with the divine constitution of the Church: whether it be the error by excess, an error in the direction of too much, or the error by default, in the direction of too little.]
THE SSPX IS THE PERFECT EXAMPLE OF THAT ERROR WHICH IS EXCESSIVE. IMAGINE, IT DISTORTS THE CANON LAW AND EVEN THE TRADITION JUST TO JUSTIFY THEIR SINFUL DISOBEDIENCE BUT NO AMOUNT OF CANONICAL DEODORANT CAN CHANGE THE FACT THAT BY BEING POPELESS THE SSPS IS ROTTEN TO THE CORE.
PART VI
ReplyDelete[The Error by Excess: "The Catholic Hierarchy No Longer Exists. Let Us Therefore Create a New One!"]
LOOK HOW HYPOCRITE THESE SSPX ARE. THEY ADMIT THAT THIS LINE OF THINKING IS ERRONEOUS YET IN PRINCIPLE AND PRACTICALLY THIS IS ONE THEY ARE DOING. IN FACT, IT IS NOT THE POPE OR SOMEONE APPOINTED BY THE POPE GOVERNING THEM BUT LEFEBVRE AND HIS SUCCESSORS. FELLAY IS NOT UNDER THE POPE CANONICALLY AND THEREFORE THEY HAVE EMBRACED THIS VERY ERROR.
[The error in the direction of too much is to say that all bishops, or nearly all, have apostatized from the Catholic Faith, or at least that they no longer preach it and that consequently there is no longer a legitimate hierarchy: that there is no longer a legitimate Pope nor legitimate bishops in the Church.]
THIS TEACHING HAS BEEN REACHED BY SOME PEOPLE BECAUSE YOU STARTED ATTACKING THE POPE AND CALLING HIM MODERNIST, LIBERAL AND EVEN HERETICAL. THIS ERROR IS THE FRUIT OF YOUR REBELLION. THIS IS ONE OF THE EVILS THAT YOU HAVE BROUGHT FORTH INTO THE FAITHFUL WHOM YOU BROUGHT STRAY FROM THE ROCK OF PETER.
[Hence the true Catholic hierarchy, and the only one which exists, consists of traditional priests alone. According to this idea, it is the traditional clergy alone, with their exterior hierarchical organization, which would make up the hierarchy of the Church.]
BY PRINCIPLE YOUR FOLLOWERS ARE ALREADY UPHOLDING THIS ERROR. THE FACT THAT YOU ARE NOT IN COMMUNION WITH THE POPE AND THE LOCAL BISHOPS IS A PROOF OF THAT.
[Consequently one of the bishops would have to be elected as Pope and this would complete the hierarchical appearance!]
SO FAR SOME GROUPS HAVE DONE THAT AND SOME TRIED TO DISCREDIT THE ELECTIONS OF THE RECENT POPE AND INVENTED A SO-CALLED SECRET ELECTION OF CARDINAL SIRI. HE HE HE...
[Certain sects have not hesitated to do just this: they have fallen into the trap.]
IT IS THE SSPX WHICH PUT THAT TRAP. SO STOP YOUR HYPOCRISY OF PRETENDING AS IF YOU ARE NOT GUILTY OF SUCH AN ERROR. YOU ARE WATCHING A SERPENT THAT YOU HATCHED OUT OF YOUR OWN WOMB.
[This is quite obviously false. We refuse this analysis and its consequences.]
HYPOCRITE. YOU ARE LIKE A DOG HATING ITS OWN VOMIT.
[Without a doubt we can indeed question the legitimacy of certain bishops, and one can even have questions concerning that of the Pope himself.]
THE POPE IS ABOVE ANY POWER IN THIS WORLD EXCEPT THAT OF THE LORD JESUS. THE POPE IS NOT SUBJECT TO THE JUDGMENT OF TRAITORS AND SERPENTS AND HYPOCRITES LIKE YOU SSPX. INSTEAD, IT IS THE POPE WHO HAS POWER OVER YOU. HE IS THE VICAR OF CHRIST AND NO ONE CAN OPEN WHAT HE SHUT AND NO ONE CAN SHUT WHAT HE OPENED.
[But these are but questions. We do not have the authority to decide on these questions. The Church will herself judge.]
ReplyDeleteTHE CHURCH WILL DECIDE THROUGH THE POPE.
[A future council or Pope will decide on the mysterious situation of this Pope John Paul II and his predecessor Pope Paul VI.]
ALL COUNCILS ARE SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE POPE.
CONCERNING POPE JOHN PAUL THE GREAT, THE VERDICT IS OVER. HE IS NOW BEATIFIED AND SOON TO BE CANONIZED. THE SENSUS FIDELIUM IS OVERWHELMINGLY CLAMORING FOR HIS EVENTUAL CANONIZATION. HIS TOMB IS NOW A GREAT PILGRIMAGE SITE IN ROME WHILE THE TOMB OF YOUR WACKY OLD FOOL LEFEBVRE IS ROTTING LIKE HELL. SO MANY SCHOOLS AND EDIFICES HAVE BEEN NAMED AFTER HIM AND HIS SACRED IMAGES ARE VENERATED ALREADY IN MANY PLACES IN THE WORLD. SOON HE WILL BE NAMED DOCTOR OF THE CHURCH. THE VERDICT IS THAT JOHN PAUL II IS 'GREAT' LIKE LEO AND GREGORY. EAT YOUR HEART OUT SSPX. HA HA HA... SORRY FOR YOU.
AND POPE PAUL VI IS ALSO ON HIS WAY TO BEATIFICATION. NOW, THE VERDICT OF HISTORY IS ALSO SURE ABOUT HIM. POPE PAUL VI, OF BLESSED MEMORY, IS THE PROPHET OF LIFE. DEFENDER OF THE UNBORN, THE TERROR OF CONTRACEPTION... HE IS THE CHURCH RALLYING POINT IN DEFENDING THE CULTURE OF LIFE NOT YOUR WACKY OLD FOOL LEFEBVRE. SORRY FOR YOU. HE HE HE...
[It is not for us to judge.]
BECAUSE YOU ARE BEREFT OF AUTHORITY AND BESIDES YOU ARE OUTSIDE THE CHURCH OFFICIALLY.
[We do not have the power.]
OF COURSE. YOU ARE IMPOTENT CANONICALLY BECAUSE OF YOUR SEPARATION FROM THE OFFICE OF ST. PETER.
[Even a single bishop does not have the power to decide on these things. It is the Church who will have to resolve this problem as she will without doubt do.]
HA HA HA... THE CHURCH WILL DECIDE THROUGH THE POPE. NO POPE NO CHURCH DECISION UNLESS YOU ARE TALKING OF THE CONCLAVE. HA HA HA... BUT EVEN THAT IT IS THE ELECTED WHO DECIDES IF HE ACCEPTS THE ELECTION OR NOT. SO IT IS STILL THE POPE. HA HA HA...
[It will without doubt not make a decision saying "This Pope was not Pope. "I do not think so, for this has never happened in the Church, to say that this Pope was not a Pope.]
HA HA HA... EVEN DEMONS HAVE CLEAR GRASP OF TRUTH SOMETIMES.
[But it will be declared: "This was a bad Pope...who professed errors...and even heresies!"]
ReplyDeleteHA HA HA... AND WHAT ARE THE VERDICT ON THESE POPES?
JOHN XXIII = THE GOOD POPE JOHN. BLESSED POPE. VERY HOLY POPE. UNIVERSALLY LOVED. HE HE HE...
PAUL VI = PROPHETIC POPE. THE CHAMPION OF CATHOLIC MORALITY AND DEFENDER OF LIFE. NOW A CANDIDATE FOR SAINTHOOD HE HE HE...
JOHN PAUL I = VERY HOLY POPE. NOW A CANDIDATE FOR SAINTHOOD.
JOHN PAUL II = NOW CALLED JOHN PAUL THE GREAT. BLESSED POPE. VERY HOLY POPE. THE APOSTLE OF THE YOUTH, THE GREATEST MISSIONARY POPE IN HISTORY, THE POPE OF VERITATIS SPLENDOR AND EVANGELIUM VITAE, THE MARIAN POPE... THE POPE OF FATIMA 3RD SECRET. HE HE HE...
[Hence we cannot say that the hierarchy of the Church no longer exists. It has in large part defaulted, but we cannot say that it no longer exists. We cannot say this.]
HA HA HA... THE POPES HAVE DONE WELL AND WE WERE GIFTED WITH VERY HOLY POPES... VERY GOOD ONES. IT IS THE SSPX WHO ARE THE TRAITORS AGAINST THE CHURCH AND THE POPE. THE DISOBEDIENCE OF SSPX IS LUCIFERIAN, AN ECHO OF THE REBELLION OF LUTHER AND JUDAS ISCARIOT.
[Secondly, we cannot say either, that the Society of Saint Pius X, (since it is especially the Society which is concerned, for it has bishops and superiors), is constituted in a hierarchy in the same way as the hierarchy of the Church with a Pope, bishops, parish priests, etc. It is not at all the same thing. It is similar, but it is not the same thing.]
IT IS NOT THE SAME THING AND IT WILL NEVER BE. THE SSPX IS A PIECE OF SHIT IN COMPARISON WITH THE HIERARCHY OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH LED BY OUR BELOVED POPE. WE BELONG TO THE SEE OF PETER. WE BELONG TO THE ETERNAL CITY, THE NEW JERUSALEM, THE CHURCH OF THE NEW COVENANT, THE MYSTICAL BODY OF CHRIST - THE CHURCH OF ROME - THE CHURCH ESTABLSIHED BY THE LORD ON ST. PETER AND NOURISHED BY THE BLOOD OF ST. PAUL AND THE COUNTLESS MARTYRS.
IF NECESSARY WE WILL SHED OUR BLOOD FOR THE ROMAN CHURCH AND FOR THE POPE BUT NOT FOR THE DOGS OUTSIDE LIKE THE SSPX. YOU HAVE FORNICATED WITH THE ENEMIES OF THE FAITH BY BECOMING ONE WITH THEM. THE SSPX IS A BASTARD SOCIETY. IT IS BASTARD CANONICALLY AND THEOLOGICALLY AND SACRAMENTALLY.
[PART VII
ReplyDeleteAt Every Degree it is but a Supplied Jurisdiction]
YOU DON'T HAVE SUPPLIED JURISDICTION BECAUSE THE SUPPLIED JURISDICTION IS SUPPLIED BY THE POPE AND THE BISHOP. YOURS IS PROTESTANT JURISDICTION WHICH IS POPELESS AND BISHOPLESS.
[The hierarchy of the Society, and the only hierarchy it has, is a substitute hierarchy.]
THAT IS DEMONIC. IMAGINE YOU HAVE A HIERARCHY TO SUBSTITUTE FOR THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS. YOU BELONG TO THE DEVIL. ONLY SATAN TRIES TO REPLACE THE HIERARCHY OF THE CHURCH BY A SUBSTITUTE.
[Its priests have power directly over the faithful in their priories, in their parishes, and in their traditional chapels.]
THAT IS ANTI-TRADITION. THE REAL TRADITIONAL PRIESTS ARE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE BISHOP AND THE POPE AND THEY ARE IN COMMUNION WITH THEM. YOURS IS A DEMONIC HIERARCHY SUPPLIED BY SATAN AND NOT BY CHRIST BECAUSE THE HIERARCHY ESTABLISHED BY CHRIST IS LED BY THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS. YOURS IS VERY PROTESTANT IN ESSENCE.
[The district superiors have power over their priests. But in principle that is all the power they have.]
THESE SSPX SUPERIORS ARE CANONICAL WOLVES. THEY ARE NO GENUINE SHEPHERDS OF THE FLOCK BECAUSE THEY ENTER THE SHEEPFOLD NOT THROUGH THE PROPER DOOR BUT BY ILLICIT MEANS. THAT IS WHY YOUR SACRAMENTS ARE ILLICIT. THE TRUE SHEPHERDS ENTER THROUGH THE PROPER DOOR OPENED BY THE KEYS OF PETER.
[According to the constitution of the Society they have in principle no power over the faithful. But on account of the crisis in the Church they have a supplied power over the faithful.]
THIS IS DEMONIC REASONING. IMAGINE, THEY ADMIT THAT THEY HAVE NO POWER OVER THE FAITHFUL. SO THEY ARE NO GENUINE SHEPHERDS OF THE CHURCH. THEY ARE FAKE AND UNAUTHORIZED. YET DESPITE THE LACK OF AUTHORITY THEY INVENT AN ALIBI TO JUSTIFY IT. ONLY FOOLS WILL BUY THIS REASONING AND WE DO NOT BUY IT.
IN CASE OF NECESSITY THE SACRED TRADITION AND THE SACRED SCRIPTURES DEMANDS THAT WE SHOULD ALL THE MORE CLING TO THE POPE. THE MORE WE MUST UNITE OURSELVES WITH THE SEE OF PETER IN TIMES OF CRISES AND NECESSITIES.
[Here the principle of subsidiaries is to be invoked. This means that that which your simple priests in the priories cannot do, the district superior will make up for, and this for the good order of our priories. The district superiors also have to look after the apostolate of their priests and hence have relations with the faithful. But this is a supplied jurisdiction.]
THIS IS DEMONIC ONCE AGAIN. THIS IS SIMILAR TO THE GOVERNMENT OF THE ARIAN IGLESIA NI CRISTO WHO SUBDIVIDED THEIR MEMBERS IN THE DISTRICT UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF SUPERIOR MINISTERS. SINCE THE SSPX REJECTED THE HIERARCHY LED BY THE POPE THEN THEY ARE BEING FORCED TO ADOPT THE PROTESTANT MODEL OF GOVERNMENT.
[Likewise the Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X has in principle no direct power over the faithful, but he will all the same exercise his authority for important questions and difficult matters, which the simple priest or even the district superiors cannot resolve.]
ReplyDeleteDEMONIC HEAD OF THE SOCIETY. HE IS NOT AUTHORIZED TO ACT AS HEAD OF THE FAITHFUL AND HAS NO POWER TO EXERCIZE AUTHORITY OVER THEM YET HE IS ACTING AS SUCH. WHAT IS THIS? THIS IS PRACTICAL DELUSIONS. THE SSPX ARE FOOLS. THEY SO DECEIVED THEMSELVES THAT THEY HAVE AUTHORITY AND JURISDICTION YET THEY ADMIT THAT THEY DON'T HAVE. PATHETIC FOOLS.
[This is a supplied power in virtue of the principle of subsidiaries.]
THAT IS PRINCIPLE OF PROTESTANT GOVERNANCE. HA HA HA... YOU HAVE BECOME THE EXACT DEMON THAT YOU HAVE SWORN TO HATE.
[Hence at all levels of the hierarchy of the Society, and the hierarchy of Tradition (if you wish), there is only a supplied power and not an ordinary power.]
IF YOU DON'T HAVE ORDINARY POWER THEN YOU ALSO DONT HAVE SUPPLIED JURISDICTION. IF YOU HAVE ORDINARY POWER THEN YOU HAVE EXTRAORDINARY POWER OR SUPPLIED POWER. THE ORDINARY AND THE SUPPLIED POWER COME FROM THE SAME SOURCE - THE HIERARCHY ESTABLISHED BY JESUS LED BY THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS. NO MORE NO LESS. HE HE HE...
[Consequently, there is no way that it can be said that Archbishop Lefebvre constitutes the Church.]
HA HA HA... LIAR, LIAR, LIAR. AFTER ADMITTING THAT YOU HAVE A SUBSTITUTE HIERARCHY AND THAT YOU EXERCIZE AUTHORITY EVEN IF YOU DON'T HAVE. HA HA HA... TELL THAT TO THE MARINES, TARSIER DE MALALA. HA HA HA...
[There can be no question of the "Church of Lefebvre" as the newspapers report it. There is simply the Catholic Church with its incomprehensible and generalized failings, and in the Catholic Church the clergy which has remained entirely faithful to the Faith, and with, because it was necessary, a certain organization, and bishops with their power over the faithful but which is only a supplied power.]
THAT IS NOT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. THAT IS THE CHURCH OF SATAN. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS BUILT ON PETER AND NEVER WITHOUT PETER. A POPELESS CHURCH IS NEVER CATHOLIC BUT PROTESTANT. GO TO HELL TARSIER. RETURN TO HELL WHERE YOU CAME FROM AND WHERE YOU BELONG.
[This is the Error by Excess: to say that there is no longer any hierarchy in the Church, and that we must therefore create a jurisdiction and submit ourselves to this jurisdiction. We may as well create a new church! This is an error, for we cannot create a church.]
NO MATTER HOW YOU EMPLOY VERBAL GYMNASTICS YOUR POSITION IS ERRONEOUS AND ANTI-CATHOLIC. IT IS NOT SUPPORTED BY TRADITION BUT PROTESTANT IN NATURE AND IN MODE. YOU HAVE BEEN POSSESSED BY THE SAME DEMON THAT POSSESSED LUTHER AND LEFEBVRE.
[Error by Defect: "Our Priests do not have Jurisdiction. Therefore, we are Free!"]
ReplyDeleteHA HA HA... WHAT A PATHETIC FOOL. YOUR SSPX PRIESTS DO NOT HAVE JURISDICTION. THEREFORE YOU ARE PROTESTANT IN NATURE.
[The error in the direction of too little would be to say that the traditional priests in our priories and in the convents have not received jurisdiction from the Pope or the bishop and have therefore no power over us.]
HA HA HA... THE POPE HAS POWER OVER YOU BUT YOU ARE REFUSING IT JUST LIKE ARIUS, NESTORIUS, LUTHER AND THE HERESIARCHS DID.
["What right have they to require something of us? We are indeed free! Let us stay free! We are free to place ourselves under their authority or not."]
VERY NICE DRAMATIZATION. DO YOU WANT ME TO GIVE YOU AN OVATION FOR SUCH A HALLUCINATORY MONOLOGUE? HA HA HA...
[Such a mentality is also a danger which is opposed to the sense of the Church.]
INDEED, BUT YOUR ALTERNATIVE AND WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING AND WHAT YOU HAVE CHOSEN TO IMPLEMENT IS AS EQUALLY EVIL AND UNACCEPTABLE.
[This would be to take advantage of the crisis in the Church because of the appearance of freedom which it gives. It is especially dangerous for the lay apostolate where, it is true, there is a large part of freedom. For very often the tasks performed by lay people are not the specific tasks of a priest, such as, for example, to spread the Christian social order in the State. There is, therefore, a certain element of autonomy in the Catholic action of the laity. This is true. But it is not the sense of the Church to dispense oneself entirely from every link with the hierarchy. To say this on account of the crisis in the Church, because "the traditional clergy has no ordinary power over us" would be to really lack a sense of the Church. Let us therefore avoid these two snags of either going too far or not going far enough.]
YOU DIDN'T AVOID IT. YOU ARE HEADED TOWARD IT. YOU PRETEND TO BE AVOIDING IT BUT DE JURE ET DE FACTO YOU ARE INDENPENDENT AND FREE FROM THE AUTHORITY OF THE POPE. YOU HAVE BECOME THE EVIL THAT YOU ARE TRYING TO AVOID. YOU'VE BEEN BITTEN BY THE SERPENT THAT YOU KEPT CONTROLLED INSIDE YOUR CAGE NOT NOWING THAT IT HAS OVERTAKEN THE BARRIER.
[PART VIII
ReplyDeleteThe Paradoxical Situation of Certain Laymen]
HA HA HA... YOU ARE USING THE TERM PARADOX IN ORDER TO DESCRIBE YOUR CONFUSION AND PARANOIA.
[We are at the present moment in a rather paradoxical situation with respect to Catholic action. I speak of your action as lay Catholic men and women in the Church and in the state.]
SO WHAT? BEING IN PARADOXICAL SITUATION OR NOT IT IS STILL NOT A VALID REASON TO DISOBEY THE HOLY FATHER AND THE BISHOPS. THE ONE WHO WILL SERVE AS OUR COMPASS TO THE RIGHT PATH IS THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS.
[A few decades ago, "La Cité Catholique," and then the Holy Office, had a great deal of difficulty in finding support from the clergy.]
THIS IS JUST A BLABBING GOSSIP WITH NO FOUNDATION IN REALITY. THIS IS MORE APPROPRIATE ON THE GOSSIP-FILLED SERMONS OF FELLAY THAN IN THE WEB.
[They looked for bishops and they found none except Archbishop Lefebvre.]
THEY WERE LOOKING FOR BISHOPS WHO WOULD LEAD THEM IN REBELLION AGAINST THE POPE BUT THEY FOUND NONE BECAUSE CARDINAL OTTAVIANI AND THE TRUE TRADITIONAL BISHOPS WHO DEBATED IN VATICAN II REMAINED LOYAL TO THE POPE. ONLY LEFEBVRE DECIDED TO CROSS THE BRIDGE OF TIBER TO LEAD HIS LUCIFERIAN REBELLION. THEY LOOKED LIKE FOOLS BECAUSE NOT EVEN 1% OF THE CLERGY AND THE FAITHFUL FOLLOWED THEM. THEY ARE LIKE MAD DOGS BARKING IN THE AUTUMN OF THEIR LIFE LED BY A SENILE BISHOP GONE AWRY.
[They looked for chaplains but Archbishop Lefebvre warned them, "Look out! Death trap! Do not look for chaplains in the present clergy, for they are all progressive and they will torpedo you! Therefore develop your organization without priests, since the situation is like this."]
THIS IS A SOLID PROOF THAT LEFEBVRE IS REALLY OUT OF HIS MIND AND POSSESSED BY A DEMON OF REBELLION. IMAGINE, HE ASKED THE PEOPLE TO DISREGARD THE CLERGY. THAT IS A VERY PROTESTANT ACT.
[So, you see, these founders of "La Cité Catholique," who had a profoundly Catholic spirit, were obliged to found an organization of Catholic action in the strict sense without priestly support, on account of the failure of the priests (or at least without the support of the hierarchy).]
OH YOU HYPOCRITE. THE WACKY OLD FOOL LEFEBVRE HIMSELF DESUADED THEM TO REJECT THE CLERGY AND THEY LISTENED TO HIS POISONING THEN YOU ARE PUTTING THE BLAME ON THE CLERGY AND THE HIERARCHY. THIS IS LIKE SATAN COMPLAINING THAT IT IS THE FAULT OF GOD THAT HE IS IN HELL.
[Just recently their successors, who follow them in their fight for Tradition, chose a few months ago to deprive themselves of their dependence on the clergy.]
ReplyDeleteTHEY DIDN'T FIGHT FOR TRADITION BUT THEY TRAMPLED UPON TRADITION. AND IT IS THEIR FAULT WHY THEY WERE NOT SUPPORTED BY THE CLERGY IT IS BECAUSE THEY LISTENED TO THE VOICE OF THE MAD DOG LEFEBVRE RATHER THAN TO THE VOICE OF THE VICAR OF CHRIST.
[This is not the same thing, for now there is a good clergy, now there are priests, and good priests I hope, and priests who are well formed.]
THE SSPX PRIESTS ARE FORMED BY LEFEBVRE TO DISOBEY THE POPE AND THE BISHOP USING YOUR CANONICAL GOBBLEDYGOOK THE WAY THE HEAD WOLF HAD TRAINED THE PACK. YOUR SSPX PRIESTS ARE TRAINED TO DISREGARD THE ROCK ON WHICH THE SACRED DEPOSIT OF THE FAITH IS KEPT. BY DOING SO YOU HAVE SQUANDERED THE SACRED TRADITION. YOUR ACTION IS NOT APOSTOLIC WHICH IS WITH PETER AND NEVER WITHOUT PETER BUT LUCIFERIAN AND LUTHERAN.
[They are not all specialized in all political and social questions, of course, but they know the major principles.]
THE SSPX PRIESTS ARE SPECIALIZED IN ATTACKING THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS AND TWISTING CATHOLIC PRINCIPLES TO JUSTIFY YOUR UNJUSTIFIABLE REBELLIION WHICH REMINDS US OF THE ARROGANCE OF MARTIN LUTHER, THE HYPOCRISY OF JUDAS ISCARIOT AND THE CUNNING OF THE ANCIENT SERPENT.
[And now I say to these laymen and women, now that you have a good clergy how can you deprive yourselves of the priestly influence over your Catholic action? This would be a paradox!]
HA HA HA... THAT IS REALLY SATANIC. THAT IS NOT A PARADOX BUT A MERE PARAPHRASING OF: "NOW COME TO ME MEN AND WOMEN LAY CATHOLIC. I HAVE FORMED A PARALLEL CHURCH. GET AWAY FROM THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS BUT INSTEAD TRANSFER TO THE SOCIETY THAT I BUILT MYSELF." THIS IS SATANIC. SATANIC. GET AWAY FROM ME YOU SATAN. RETURN TO HELL WHERE YOU CAME FROM.
[This is always under the pretext that traditional priests do not have jurisdiction!]
OF COURSE YOU DON'T HAVE JURISDICTION. YOU ARE NOT IN COMMUNION WITH THE SEE OF PETER AND THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS FOUNDED ON THAT SEE OF PETER. SO GET YOUR JURISDICTION FROM THE GATES OF HELL WHICH IS THE ALTERNATIVE TO THE SEE OF PETER.
[But they do have a supplied jurisdiction. It is you who have to appeal to this supplied jurisdiction.]
FOOL. IF YOU DON'T HAVE JURISDICTION THEN YOU CANNOT HAVE ANY OTHER KIND OF JURISDICTION. THE SUPPLIED JURISDICTION CAN ONLY SUPPLIED BY THOSE WHO HAVE JURISDICTION NAMELY THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS. IF YOU DON'T HAVE ORDINARY AUTHORITY HOW MUCH MORE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR YOU TO POSSESS EXTRAORDINARY AUTHORITY.
WILL YOU STOP MAKING STUPID OUT OF YOURSELF AND OF THE FAITHFUL. WE ARE NOT DECEIVED BY YOUR CANONICAL AND THEOLOGICAL HOCUS-POCUS. NO, NO, NO...
[I therefore say that the sense of the Church, the sensus fidei, must persuade faithful laymen and laywomen to willingly submit their apostolic activities to the traditional clergy.]
ReplyDeleteTHIS IS SATANIC. THE SENSUS FIDEI IS A SPECIAL GIFT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT TO THE FAITHFUL TO DISCERN THE TRUTH OF THE FAITH FROM THE ERRORS OF HERESIES. ONE OF THE HERESIES CONDEMNED BY THE CHURCH IS THE REJECTION OF THE AUTHORITY AND OFFICE OF THE VICAR OF CHRIST AND OF THE BISHOPS. THEN, IT IS ANTI-TRADITION, IT IS DEMONIC AND VERY PROTESTANT TO INVOKE SENSUS FIDELIUM IN ORDER TO DISOBEY THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS. THAT IS ILLOGICAL AND FOOLISH. IT IS LIKE INVOKING THE HUMANAE VITAE IN FAVOR OF ABORTION. NO, NO, NO...
[This is the proper order.]
HA HA HA... IDIOT. THE PROPER ORDER IN THE CHURCH IS THAT THE FLOCK IS LED BY THE POPE AS THE UNIVERSAL SHEPHERD AND THE BISHOPS AS THE SHEPHERDS OF THE LOCAL CHURCH. THE PROPER ORDER BELONGS TO US. YOURS IS A DISORDER AND ANTI-ORDER. YOURS IS CANONICAL CHAOS BORNE OUT OF DISOBEDIENCE.
[It is the sense of hierarchy to submit your Catholic action to the counsel and higher guidance of the traditional hierarchy, to use the words of St. Pius X.]
YOU ARE SACRILEGING THE NAME AND PERSON OF ST. PIUS X WHO NEVER ENCOURAGE DISOBEDIENCE TO THE OFFICE OF ST. PETER. HOW DARE YOU INVOKE HIS NAME TO SUPPORT YOUR PROTESTANT ACTIONS.
[This corresponds to the hierarchical constitution of the Church.]
THAT DOESN'T CORRESPOND TO THE HIERARCHICAL CONSTITUTION OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. THAT CORRESPONDS TO THE DISORDERED NATURE OF THE PROTESTANT SECTS. YOU ARE NOT A CHURCH BUT A SOCIETY. YOU ARE A MERE SECT. A MERE FELLOWSHIP OF FOOLS WHO REJECTED THE VICAR OF CHRIST.
[It is necessary for the faithful to understand this well, and all the more since the clergy cannot, strictly speaking, require this dependence since it has no ordinary jurisdiction over the faithful.]
HA HA HA... HOW DEMONIC YOUR WORDS ARE. YOU ADMIT THAT YOU ARE OUT OF ORDER AND THEN YOU CLAIM TO BE IN PROPER ORDER. YOU REJECTED THE HIERARCHY THEN YOU CLAIM TO BE SUPPORTED BY THE CONSTITUTION OF THE CHURCH. THAT IS STUPID, THE CHURCH IS CONSTITUTION BY THE FAITHFUL LED BY THE HIERARCHY FROM THE POPE TO THE DEACONS.
YOU ARE OUT OF JURISDICTION, OUT OF COMMUNION WITH THE POPE AND THE ENTIRE HIERARCHY. THEN YOU ARE OUTSIDE THE CHURCH WHERE THERE IS NO SALVATION.
[Requirement for Virtue on the Part of the Laity]
ReplyDeleteTHE FIRST VIRGUE THAT THEY MUST PRACTICE IS HUMILITY AND THEN OBEDIENCE. BECAUS CHRIST HUMBLED HIMSELF AND HE OBEYED THE FATHER. IT IS THE SAME FOR THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY. BEAR IN MIND THAT THE SIN OF SATAN IS PRIDE AND DISOBEDIENCE WHICH ARE THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF HUMILITY AND OBEDIENCE. SUCH IS THE SIN OF LUTHER AND OF LEFEBVRE.
[You see, then, that I must insist on the moral necessity of an appropriate state of mind in the faithful. There are special moral requirements linked to this time of crisis.]
IN TIMES OF CRISIS THE BEST WEAPON AGAINST SATAN IS HUMILITY AND OBEDIENCE. THUS, A TRADITIONAL CATHOLIC MUST ALL THE MORE CLING WITH THE VICAR OF CHRIST. INSTEAD, LEFEBVRE CHOSE THE EVIL PATH OF DEFYING THE POPE.
[This exceptional situation, which gives only a supplied jurisdiction to the priests, requires on the part of the clergy, of course, quite some tact, prudence, and wisdom.]
THERE IS NO SUPPLIED JURISDICTION TO THOSE WHO CANNOT HAVE ORDINARY JURISDICTION. ALL JURISDICITON IN THE CHURCH ARE SUBJECT TO THE AUTHORITY OF THE POPE AND THE BISHOP WHO WILL DECIDE WHO IS WORTHY OF SUPPLIED JURISDICTION OR NOT.
WHAT THE SSPX ARE DOING ARE QUITE OPPOSITE THE VIRTUE OF WISDOM AND PRUDENCE. THE SSPX LIKE YOU ARE CUNNING WHICH REMIND US OF THE ARROGANCE OF LUTHER, THE HYPOCRISY OF JUDAS AND THE CUNNING REBELLION OF LUCIFER.
[For they cannot demand to exercise a strict right (hence the clergy has to understand the principles which are relevant).]
GOOD THAT YOU ADMIT VERBATIM THAT YOUR PRIESTS DO NOT HAVE RIGHT. THEN, YOU HAVE NO RIGHT OF JURISDICTION EITHER ORDINARY AND MUCH MORE SUPPLIED JURISDICTION. YOU ARE LIKE STRANGER PRETENDING TO BE A PARENT OF THE BABIES. IN BIBLICAL TERMS YOU ARE FALSE SHEPHERDS.
[But this situation requires on the part of the laity virtue, a hierarchical sense, a sense of the need which you all have, namely of having a link by which you depend upon the traditional clergy in all the amplitude of their priestly ministry and in all the amplitude of your apostolic action.]
ReplyDeleteYOU SEE HOW FOOLISH YOU ARE. YOU REJECTED FULL SUBMISSION FROM THE HIERARCHY AND THEN YOU ARE SAYING THAT THE HIERARCHY IS NEEDED. THEN YOU REJECT THE HIERARCHY LED BY THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS BUT YOU ARE PROPOSING YOUR OWN CLERGY. THAT IS ANOTHER WAY OF SAYING THAT YOU HAVE FORMED A PARALLEL CHURCH WITH A COUNTERPART HIERARCHY. BY PRINCIPLE YOU ARE SCHISMATIC. YOU DO NOT ACCEPT THAT IT IS BUT IN PRACTICE AND IN PRINCIPLE YOU ARE SCHISMATICS.
DON'T EVER DARE TO CALL YOURSELVES APOSTOLIC. YOU ARE NOT. THE APOSTOLIC CHURCH IS BUILT ON PETER AND WAS LED BY HIM AND HIS SUCCESSORS.
[I think that I could summarize these remarks in a brief phrase: your submission and your dependence with respect to the clergy must be as voluntary as the clergy have less right to demand it.]
IT IS LIKE THE DEMON ASKING HIS HAPLESS VICTIM TO SUBMIT TO HIS INFLUENCE VOLUNTARILY BECAUSE UNLESS THE VICTIM COOPERATES HE CANNOT CONTROL. THE SSPX IS REALLY POISONOUS AND CUNNING.
GET AWAY FROM THESE SSPX ANIMALS, MY BRETHREN. AS CATHOLICS WE ARE CALLED TO LOVE AND SUPPORT AND PRAY FOR OUR POPE - THE VICAR OF CHRIST AND THE SUCCESSOR OF THE APOSTLES.
[This therefore requires moral virtue on your part.]
THE SSPX ARE BEREFT OF THESE VIRTUES BECAUSE THEY ARE DISOBEDIENT LOT AND REBELLIOUS SPIRITS AGAINST THE POPE. THEY BELONG TO THE GATES OF HELL TRYING TO DESTROY THE SEE OF PETER. HOW CAN TARSIER DE MALALA REQUIRE MORAL INTEGRITY FROM OTHERS WHEN HE HIMSELF IS DISOBEDIENT.
[It is for you, faithful Catholics, to seek for this profitable and necessary dependence in your traditional study groups.]
THE SSPX IS NOT A TRADITIONAL STUDY GROUP BUT A SOCIETY OF TRAITORS AND THE POPELESS. A TRUE TRADITIONAL CATHOLIC IS FAITHFUL TO THE POPE.
[This does not mean that the priest is going to do everything. The priest will be, as Father Bonneterre remarked, "the counselor, the guide, the doctor" but not necessarily the organizer.]
THE COUNSELLORS AND THE DOCTORS OF THE CHURCH ARE FAITHFUL TO THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS. THOSE WHO ARE NOT FAITHFUL HAVE NO RIGHT AND NO BUSINESS TO COUNSEL AND TO HEAL BECAUSE THEY ARE ONLY DECEIVERS AND DESTROYERS. THE FAITHFUL MUST BE VERY WEARY OF THE SSPX TRAITORS WHO ARE WOLVES IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING.
[He will remain in his spiritual domain, but the laity will retain this indispensable link of dependence.]
AMAZING. THIS ANIMAL PROVIDES REASON FOR THEIR CLERGY AND THEIR FOLLOWERS TO DEFY THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS BY CLEVER TWISTING OF THE TERM SUPPLIED JURISDICTION AND ECCLESIA SUPPLET AND SENSUS FIDELIUM. BUT AS HE WANTS THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS TO BE DISOBEYED HE WISHES FULL AND VOLUNTARY DEPENDENCE OF THE LAITY TO THEIR OWN SELF-INVENTED COUNTER HIERARCHY. HIS WORDS REVEAL THE EVIL IN HIS INTENTIONS AND THE LUCIFERIAN NATURE OF THEIR PLAN AGAINST THE POPE.
[PART IX
ReplyDeleteIV. SUPPLIED JURISDICTION AND PRESENT LAY APOSTOLATE
Let us very briefly apply these principles to traditional Catholic study groups.]
YOU MEAN TRAITORS TO TRADITION STUDY GROUPS.
[This morning I tried to summarize the idea of Pope St. Pius X, who distinguished two sorts of apostolic endeavors for the laity:]
POPE ST. PIUS X NEVER TAUGHT THE LAITY TO SEPARATE AND DISOBEY THE POPE.
POPE ST. PIUS X NEVER TAUGHT THAT ECCLESIA SUPPLET, SENSUS FIDELIUM AND SUPPLIED JURISDICTION MEANS SOME CAN ESTABLISHED A SOCIETY THAT IS NOT UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS. WHERE DID HE TEACH THAT? NADA, NUNCA... IN RUSSIAN: NYET, NYET. HA HA HA...
[1) Direct participation of the laity in the priestly apostolate inasmuch as it is possible.]
THAT IS WHY YOUR LAY MEMBERS ARE TERRIBLY ANTI-POPE. THEY ARE SO WELL-VERSED IN YOUR LIES AND DECEPTIONS. THEY ARE SO WELL-TRAINED IN SPITTING THE VENOMS AGAINST THE RECENT POPES, THE VATICAN II, THE PAULINE MASS AND OUR BISHOPS.
[This includes the education of youth, teaching in our schools, and special, more properly apostolic youth movements which have as their purpose the conversion of souls.]
YOUR GOAL IS TO CONVERT THE SOUL TO SATAN INDIRECTLY BY TRAINING THEM TO DISOBEY THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS. YOU HAVE TRAINED THEM TO BE CANONICALLY SEPARATED FROM THE CHURCH - THE HOUSEHOLD OF GOD AND THE BODY OF CHRIST. INSTEAD OF BRINING THEM IN YOU ARE BRINGING THEM OUTSIDE THE CHURCH WHERE THERE IS NO SALVATION.
YOUR GOAL AND YOUR ACTIONS DO NOT BRING PEOPLE TO SALVATION YOU ARE TURNING THEM INTO SUBTLE PROTESTANTS WHILE DECEIVING THEM THAT THEY ARE TRADITIONAL CATHOLICS.
[ It is obvious that such a movement has an essential dependence with respect to the clergy.]
THEY ARE NOT RESPECTING THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS AND THE CLERGY UNITED WITH THEM BY YOUR OWN EXAMPLES AND PEDAGOGY YET YOU WANT TO BE OBEYED BY THEM. HOW NICE OF YOU. INDEED, YOUR LUCIFERIAN STRATEGY IS VERY VERY EVIDENT.
[It would be quite erroneous to say that such a movement is a movement of Catholic action in the strict sense of the word, with a relatively loose dependence on the clergy.]
ReplyDeleteIT IS MUCH MORE ERRONEOUS TO SAY AND TO TEACH THAT YOUR SOCIETY IS A CATHOLIC SOCIETY WHEN IN FACT IT IS DEFIANT, DISOBEDIENT AND CANONICALLY SEPARATED FROM THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS. ARE YOU NOT TEACHING THAT FACT TO YOUR FOLLOWERS?
[From the very fact that it is for the conversion of souls, it follows that there is an intrinsic dependence on the clergy.]
HYPOCRITICAL STATEMENT. IF YOU ARE REALLY WORKING FOR THE SALVATION OF SOUL YOU WILL UNITE THE FAITHFUL TO THE HOLY FATHER AND THE SEE OF PETER. BRINGING THEM AWAY FROM THE SEE OF PETER IS TO MAKE THE FAITHFUL VULNERABLE TO THE POWERS OF AND INFLUENCE OF SATAN.
IT IS ILLOGICAL FOR YOU TO DEMAND THAT THE LAITY BE FAITHFUL AND BE CLOSER TO THE CLERGY WHEN YOU ARE NOT FAITHFUL AND CLOSER TO THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS. TARSIER, YOU ARE CLIMBING BRANCHES... I SUGGEST THAT YOU WALK THE TALK.
[The same applies to the Catholic Scout movement and the Legion of Mary which had as its purpose, by the intercession of Our Lady, the conversion of souls.]
THE CATHOLIC SCOUT AND THE LEGION OF MARY CONSIDER THE POPE AS THEIR SUPREME COMMANDER HERE ON EARTH AND INSTEAD OF ATTACKING THE POPE THEY PRAY FOR HIM AS AN EXPRESSION OF LOVE WHILE YOU SSPX ARE MOUTHING VENOMS AGAINST THE POPE CALLING HIM MODERNIST, LIBERALIST, ETC. YOU ARE TRAINED AND FORMED TO DISOBEY WHILE THE LEGION OF MARY AND THE CATHOLIC SCOUTS ARE TRAINED AND FORMED TO BE SOLIDIERS OF CHRIST AND OF MARY UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF THE POPE AND NOT OF YOUR WACKY OLD FOOL, LEFEBVRE.
[This is, if you wish, a participation in the priestly ministry on the part of the laity, and consequently it requires a mandate. The priest gives a mandate to the laity to exercise a part of his priestly apostolate.]
ReplyDeleteHA HA HA... THE MANDATE OF THE PRIEST COMES FROM GOD THROUGH THE BISHOP AND ULTIMATELY THE POPE. HOW DARE YOU TALK ABOUT "MANDATE" WHEN YOUR ANIMAL LEFEBVRE ORDAINED BISHOPS WITHOUT MANDATE AND NOW YOU DARE TO DEMAND MANDATE FROM THE PRIEST TO THE LAITY. HA HA HA... FOOL... HYPOCRITE... DECEIVER. OLD AND ANCIENT DECEIVER.
[2) Quite different is Catholic action understood as a work of the Catholic laity in the temporal order, so as to bring about the reign of Christian social principles in the State. It is this which St. Pius X strove especially to promote, and which can be called Catholic action in the strict sense of the term. We cannot say that such Catholic action, because it is not the ministry of the priest, is independent of the priest. Saint Pius X, as I reminded you this morning, said that "One cannot at all conceive of this Catholic action of the faithful independently from the counsel and higher guidance of ecclesiastical authority."]
HYPOCRISY AGAIN. READ CLOSELY: "One cannot at all conceive of this Catholic action of the faithful independently from the counsel and higher guidance of ecclesiastical authority." HOW CAN YOU SAY SUCH A THING WITH CLEAR CONSCIENCE WHEN IN FACT YOU ARE DISOBEDIENT TO THE HIGHEST ECCLESIASTICAL AUTHORITY ON EARTH - THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS? HAVE PITY ON YOUR SOUL TISSIER DE MALLERAIS.
IF YOU ARE REALLY HONEST THAT THE LAITY MUST NOT BE INDEPENDENT FROM THE ECCLESIASTICAL AUTHORITY HOW COME YOU HAVE DEFIED THE HIGHEST ECCLESIASTICAL AUTHORITY IN THE CHURC?
YOUR STATEMENT AND YOUR ACTIONS DO NOT JIBE. THEY DO NOT CONFORM TO EACH OTHER. THAT IS WHY YOU ARE BEING DELUSIONAL. EITHER YOU ARE SENILE OR INTENTIONALLY LYING.
[It is an essential distinction.]
UNITY AND DEPENDENCE OF THE FAITHFUL TO THE ECCLESIASTICAL AUTHORITY IS INDEED ESSENTIAL. AND FOR THAT THE SSPX IS WRONG AND IN THE EVIL PATH BECAUSE IT CHOSE TO DISOBEY SYSTEMACIALLY WITH THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS AND THEY REFUSE CANONICAL UNION WITH HIM.
[Pope Pius XII, following Pius XI, blurred somewhat its importance, which is not without consequences [cf. Bishop Tissier de Mallerais’ article, "Catholic Action Defined for a comprehensive explanation of this matter; webmaster’s note]. He simply spoke of a gradation in the dependence of works of Catholic action on the hierarchy.]
ReplyDeleteTHERE IS GRADE OF DEPENDENCE ON THE HIERARCHY. YES. AND HE HIGHEST AND MOST IMPORTANT GRADE OF DEPENDENCE MUST BE GIVEN OR MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE HOLY FATHER, THE POPE FOLLOWED BY THE BISHOP. THAT IS WHY THE SSPX IS IN GRAVE ERROR BECAUSE IT DEFIES THE HIGHEST AUTHORITY IN THE HIERARCHY.
IT IS SO PATHETIC FOR TARSIER DE MALALA TO DEMAND DEPENDENCE ON THE HIERARCHY WHEN IN FACT HE UNDERMINED SUCH DEPENDENCE ON THE HIGHEST LEVEL.
[The more a work is properly priestly the more must it have an intimate dependence on the priest, and the more a work properly belongs to the laity the more tenuous the link with respect to the clergy.]
YOU DEMONICALLY LIMIT IT BETWEEN THE FAITHFUL AND THE PRIEST ONLY. NO, NO, NO... THE POPES SPEAKS OF THE HIERARCHY WHICH INCLUDES THE POPE AND NEVER WITHOUT THE POPE. THE HIERARCHY WITHOUT THE POPE AND THE BISHOP IS NOT CATHOLIC HIERARCHY BUT PROTESTANT. AND SO THE SSPX IS VERY VERY PROTESTAN-LIKE.
[That which is constant in all of the popes is the teaching that there can be no question of giving total autonomy to the laity in their action. This is impossible. This is repugnant to the Catholic sense. It is repugnant to the sense of hierarchy in the Church.]
AND IT IS ALSO CONSTANT IN THE TEACHING OF THE POPES THAT THE POPE MUST ALWAYS BE OBEYED IN THE CHURCH AND THAT THE FAITHFUL MUST BE UNITED TO THE POPE. THE PRINCIPLES QUOTED FORM THE POPE DOES NOT SPEAK OF A POPELESS HIERARCHY BUT A HIERARCHY WITH THE POPE ON THE TOP.
THE USE OF TARSIER OF THESE MATERIALS FROM THE POPES IS DECEIVING AND LUCIFERIAN.
[PART X
ReplyDeleteThe Sacramental Basis of the Hierarchical Spirit in the Church]
YOU HAVE THE GALL AND THE SHAMELESSNESS TO SPEAK ABOUT THE SACRAMENTAL BASIS OF THE HIERARCHICAL SPIRIT IN THE CHURCH YET YOU ARE USING THE LITURGY TO UNDERMINE THE AUTHORITY OF THE HIERARCHY IN THE CHURCH FROM POPE AND THE BISHOPS. HOW DARE YOU.
YOU DON'T HAVE A HIERARCHICAL SPIRIT IN THE CHURCH BECAUSE YOU ARE OUTSIDE THE CHURCH AND OUTSIDE OF THE WINGS OF THE HIERARCHY OF THE CHURCH. YOUR SPIRIT IS NOT THE SPIRIT OF CHRIST WHO FILLED THE APOSTLES LED BY ST. PETER WITH GRACE THAT PENTECOST SUNDAY. IF YOU HAVE THAT SPIRIT OF THE HIERARCHY THEN YOU SHOULD BE SO EAGER TO BE UNITED WITH PETER. INSTEAD, YOU CHOSE THE PATH OF THE SPIRIT OF THE ANTI-CHRIST WHO IS ANTI-POPE AND ANTI-HIERARCHY.
REGARLESS OF YOUR CANONICAL AND THEOLOGICAL GOBBLEDYGOOK WE ARE NOT DECEIVED. YOU HAVE NO HIERARCHY, NO SUPPLIED JURISDICTION AND YOUR SACRAMENTS ARE ILLEGAL AND THEREFORE WILL ONLY ADD TO THE SINFULNESS OF YOUR ACTIONS... LUCIFERIAN-PROTESTANT ACTS OF DEFIANCE AGAINST THE SEE OF PETER ESTABLISHED BY THE LORD JESUS.
[As I said to you this morning, everything is founded on the characters given by the Sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation and Holy Orders.]
YOU HAVE PROSTITUTED THESE SACRAMENTS BY YOUR ILLICIT AND PROTESTANT ACTS WHICH ARE ANTI-TRADITION.
[Baptism and Confirmation make us sons of the Church, brothers in Jesus Christ and soldiers of Christ, witnesses of Jesus Christ.]
IF YOU ARE TRULY WITNESSES OF CHRIST YOU WILL BE IN UNION WITH THE SEE OF PETER ESTABLISHED BY JESUS. INSTEAD, YOU PREFER TO BE OUTSIDE THAT SEE AND THEREFORE YOU BELONG TO ITS ANTAGONIST - THE GATES OF HELL.
TARSIER, YOU AND YOUR COHORTS ARE WITNESSES OF THE DEVIL AND NOT OF CHRIST.
[Hence the necessity of spreading the Gospel.]
THE GOSPELS ARE CLEAR ABOUT THE PRIMACY OF PETER AS WILLED BY JESUS. WHAT YOU ARE PREACHING IS NOT THE GOSPEL BUT YOUR PROTEST AGAINST THE SEE OF PETER. YOU ARE DESTROYING THE GOSPEL AND NOT PROCLAIMING IT.
[But they do not make you members of the hierarchy. It is alone the character of the Sacrament of Holy Orders which constitutes the hierarchy, and is therefore responsible for organization in the Church.]
ReplyDeleteTHIS IS A PARTIAL TRUTH. IT IS TRUE THAT AN ORDAINED MINISTER BECOMES A MEMBER OF THE HIERARCHY HOWEVER IF THAT ORDAINED MINISTER IS NOT IN FULL COMMUNION WITH THE CHURCH AND THE POPE THEN THAT PERSON HAS NO BUSINESS IN THE HIERARCHY EVEN THOUGH HE IS ORDAINED. THIS IS THE CASE OF LUTEHR, OF AGLIPAY, OF NESTORIUS OR ARIUS WHO WERE ORDAINED MINISTERS BUT TURNED TRAITORS.
AN ORDAINED MINISTERS WHO ARE NOT IN COMMUNION WITH THE POPE IS NOT A PART OF THE HIERARCHY BUT OUTSIDE OF IT. THEY DO NOT HAVE JURISDICTION WHETHER ORDINARY OR EXTRAORDINARY.
[The two characters of the Sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation are dependent upon the character of the Sacrament of Holy Orders.]
RECEPTION OF THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM, CONFIRMATION AND EVEN OF THE HOLY ORDERS ARE NOT ENOUGH TO BE A TRUE MEMBER OF THE HIERARCHY. IT ALSO NEEDED THAT THE ORDAINED MINISTER IS FAITHFUL TO HIS BAPTISMAL PROMISES AND HIS ORDINATION OATH TO PRESERVE THE FAITH AND TO BE FAITHFUL TO THE BISHOP. THE SSXP ARE TRAITORS TO THESE OATH.
[If you have understood this well you have but to apply these principles to our traditional Catholic study groups.]
OBVIOUSLY, YOU YOURSELF FAILED TO UNDERSTAND IT PROPERLY OR YOU ARE SIMPLY AND INTENTIONALLY DECEIVING YOUR FOLLOWERS. THE TRUE TRADITIONAL CATHOLICS ARE FAITHFUL TO THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS THOSE WHO ARE NOT ARE PROTESTANTS.
[ The priest does not do everything but he is the inspirer, the guide, the counselor, and the doctor who brings back to mind the major principles, who maintains the correct doctrinal position, and who avoids deviations.]
THE SSPX PRIEST DO NOT INSPIRE THEY VIOLATE THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH, THEY DO NOT GUIDE BECAUSE THEY SEND AWAY THE FLOCK FROM THE SEE OF PETER, THEY DO NOT COUNSEL WELL BECAUSE THEY DISRESPECT THE CANONICAL RULES AND THE OFFICE OF ST. PETER AND THE BISHOPS, THEY DO NOT CORRECT BUT THEY DEVIATE FROM DOCTRINES AND THEY DO NOT AVOID DEVIATIONS BECAUSE THEY THEMSELVES HAVE DEVIATED.
[We are for hierarchies, because we are Catholic we are for hierarchies. We wish to respect the hierarchies which are divinely instituted, whether they be supernatural or natural.]
HYPOCRITICAL AND PURE LIES. IF YOU ARE NOT OBEYING THE POPE AND THE BISHOPS AND REFUSES FULL SUBMISSION TO THEM THEN YOU DO NOT HAVE RESPECT OF HIERARCHY IN THE CHURCH. NO MORE NO LESS.
[HOPE YOU CAN ANSWER THESE CLEAR EXPLANATION FROM OUR BISHOP ABOUT THE SSPX JURISDICTION.]
I AM VERY HAPPY TO OBLIGE. AND IF YOU THINK THAT THE ARGUMENTS OF YOUR BISHOP TARSIER DE MALALA IS SOLID SORRY FOR YOU. I FIND IT SHALLOW AND STUPID, ILLOGICAL AND DECEPTIVE. ESSENTIALLY DEFECTIVE AND ANTI-TRADITION.
[ARCHBISHOP CAPALLA CERTAINLY HAS NO IDEA WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT.]
ARCH. CAPALLA KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT. OUR ARCHBISHOP HAS JURISDICTION BOTH ORDINARY AND SUPPLIED. YOUR BISHOP TISSIER DE MALLERAIS HAS NO JURISDICTION BOTH ORDINARY AND SUPPLIED. THE CHURCH SUPPLIES JURISDICTION THROUGH THE POPE AND NOT THROUGH ANY DELUSIONAL CLAIMS OF A POPELESS SOCIETY LIKE YOURS. YOUR SSPX BISHOP IS A MAD DOG INCOMPARISON WITH OUR ARCHBISHOP.
[HE IS JUST A PROOF OF ANOTHER LIBERAL BISHOP.]
LIBERALISM IS EXPRESSED IN REJECTION OF THE PAPACY AND THE HIERARCHY OF THE CHURCH. THE SSPX IS A VERY LIBERAL SOCIETY. IT'S SO CALLED TRADITIONALISM IS A MERE CHARADE.
YOURS IS NOT ONLY LIBERALISM AND MODERNISM BUT ALSO PROTESTANTISM AND LUCIFERIANISM.
OUR LORD ARCHBISHOP FERNANDO CAPALLA IS A TRUE AND FAITHFUL BISHOP OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. A GENUINE SHEPHERD OF THE FAITHFUL OF DAVAO WITH ORDINARY AND SUPPLIED JURISDICTION FROM GOD THROUGH THE POPE. THE SSPX GOT THEIR IMAGINARY JURISDICITON FROM SATAN THAT IS WHY IT IS MERE ILLUSION, LIKE SATAN PRETENDING TO BE AN ANGEL OF LIGHT.