Sunday, August 9, 2015

Church_Militant_Moderator Hatred For The SSPX #1

I dreamed of this one here as Lord and huntsman,
pursing the wolf and the cubs up the mountain
(which blocks the sight of Lucca from the Pisans).

with skinny bitches, well trained and obedient;
he had out in front as leaders of the pack
Gualandi with Sismondi and Lanfranchi.

A short run, and the father with his sons
seemed to grow tired, and then I thought I saw
long fangs sunk deep into their sides, ripped open.
Inferno xxxiii

"A forerunner of the Antichrist, with his troops drawn from many nations, will wage war against the true Christ, sole Savior of the world; he will shed much blood and will seek to annihilate the cult of God so as to be regarded as a god." Our Lady of La Salette 19 Sept. 1846 (Published by Mélanie 1879)
The third part of the secret revealed at the Cova da Iria-Fatima, on 13 July 1917. 
I write in obedience to you, my God, who command me to do so through his Excellency the Bishop of Leiria and through your Most Holy Mother and mine. 
After the two parts which I have already explained, at the left of Our Lady and a little above, we saw an Angel with a flaming sword in his left hand; flashing, it gave out flames that looked as though they would set the world on fire; but they died out in contact with the splendour that Our Lady radiated towards him from her right hand: pointing to the earth with his right hand, the Angel cried out in a loud voice: ‘Penance, Penance, Penance!'. And we saw in an immense light that is God: ‘something similar to how people appear in a mirror when they pass in front of it' a Bishop dressed in White ‘we had the impression that it was the Holy Father'. Other Bishops, Priests, men and women Religious going up a steep mountain, at the top of which there was a big Cross of rough-hewn trunks as of a cork-tree with the bark; before reaching there the Holy Father passed through a big city half in ruins and half trembling with halting step, afflicted with pain and sorrow, he prayed for the souls of the corpses he met on his way; having reached the top of the mountain, on his knees at the foot of the big Cross he was killed by a group of soldiers who fired bullets and arrows at him, and in the same way there died one after another the other Bishops, Priests, men and women Religious, and various lay people of different ranks and positions. Beneath the two arms of the Cross there were two Angels each with a crystal aspersorium in his hand, in which they gathered up the blood of the Martyrs and with it sprinkled the souls that were making their way to God.

There will be a forerunner to the Antichrist.

Who is he?
Why does he war against the Church?
How will he earn his title?


The forerunner to the Antichrist is Gary Michael Voris or better known as Gary.

Yes, the forerunner to the Antichrist is named Gary. That name in it self is a cosmic joke.

Gary wars against the Church because of his pride.

Gary will earn his title of forerunner to the Antichrist because he will kill the Fatima Pope and the faithful.

Who is the Fatima Pope? Probably a Priest from the SSPX.

This is the reason Gary will kill the Fatima Pope out of his hatred for the SSPX.

Here is documentation (for future generations) of the hatred for the SSPX by Gary and crew:

‘Have Nothing to Do With Them,’ Says Bishop About SSPX  Bishop Morlino has issued a warning about the SSPX

The status of SSPX will be argued for a long time to come. While those who have accepted the Novus Ordo and Vatican II are quite clear on the issue, the matter is not as simple as "blind obedience to the papacy" (popalatry)....or even the opinion of one truly good bishop.

I am not a Canon lawyer; I have read scholarly opinions on both sides of the question. It is not as simple as CM would have us believe. I suspect that CM has embraced Vatican II, while SSPX has not. Resistance to the errors introduced by the spirit of Vatican II was the reason that SSPX came into existence. SSPX has not accepted the errors of Vatican II and therefore will be at odds with those who have.

It is a convoluted question that many would like to simplify by simply saying, "SSPX is in schism".

However, as a layman, I can certainly abide by the simple rule that Jesus gave us for judging such matters: "By their fruits you shall know them".

Only time will tell, but so far, the fruits of Vatican II have all been rotten, while SSPX has born many good fruits. Let us continue to evaluate the fruits and allow the Holy Ghost to guide the Church. All errors contain within themselves the seed of their destruction. Certainly the Novus Ordo church is self-destructing.

As has been pointed out by many in these discussions, even the pope was wrong in the saga of the Arian heresy.

And just in case you are wondering, I do not attend Mass at a SSPX parish, nor to I support it in any fashion. Unlike CM, I see the SSPX as a "corrective force" in the struggle against modernism.


Church_Militant_Moderator Mod  
"It is a convoluted question that many would like to simplify by simply saying, "SSPX is in schism"."
Because they are!

Canon 751 says that "refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or the communion of the members of the Church subject to him" constitutes schism. Even without a formal declaration of schism, the sin (or state) of schism can be demonstrated for the Society quite easily.

"Refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff" by the Society can be seen in their refusal to reconcile and place themselves under the authority of the Vicar of Christ, rejecting his dogmatically defined “full power of shepherding, ruling and governing the universal Church,” a power "ordinary and immediate over all the churches and over each and every member of the faithful" (cited and referenced in our FAQ on the Society at )

"Refusal of ... communion of the members of the Church subject to" the Roman Pontiff can be seen in the frequently quoted statement by Bishop Fellay (and others) that "The New Mass is bad, it is evil" ( https://www.catholicculture.or... and, in pastoral practice, supporters of the Society are instructed never to participate in a Novus Ordo Mass because it is "absolutely offensive to God" ( ). Supporters of the Society are also discouraged from participating even in FSSP settings because the FSSP "accepts Vatican II." (See for abundant evidence of this attitude towards the FSSP)

So the Society fulfills both parts of the canonical definition of schism, although one need only violate one or the other to be judged schismatic. The Society still, today, has "no canonical status" and does not "legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church." ( and ). All Society priests, including their bishops, remain suspended a divinis and, therefore, all exercise of their priestly ministry is a grave offense against God.

St. John Paul II declared the Society to be schismatic in Ecclesia Dei Adflicta in 1988 ( ), the Pontifical Council on the the Interpretation of Legislative Texts confirmed this judgment in 1996 ( ) and, much more recently, the current head of the CDF (and President of the Ecclesia Dei Commission) referred to the Society as being in schism ( http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.c... ), the recent head of the Apostolic Signatura has said that the Society is in schism, and the current Secretary of the PCED spoke of Pope Francis hoping that the Society would "enter the Church" ( )

We summarize this rather appalling collection of facts in our FAQ on the SSPX:

"The SSPX, for all their many good qualities, are not faithful Roman Catholics because communion with the Chair of Peter is a constitutive part of Roman Catholicism, something the SSPX accepts in principle but rejects in practice. They have "no canonical status," "no legitimate ministry," are "invited to rediscover the path to full communion," have no faculties from any bishop, are not part of the divinely ordained hierarchical structure of the Church, and all their priests are suspended a divinis. No individual or group can seriously claim to be Catholic and have all this true of themselves."

Indeed. How CAN one "seriously claim to be Catholic and have all this true of themselves"?

No comments:

Post a Comment