Search This Blog

Friday, September 30, 2022

Two Popes Who Saw the Problem: One in the Past, One in the Present

Pope Adrian VI, 1522-23
Anyone with eyes to see knows that the Catholic Church is in crisis. It's an unholy mess and, with the latest
Synod on Synodality, things are likely to get much worse. Just as the Vatican used previous synods and surveys to undermine the faith and attack Dogma and Sacred Tradition, the latest synod "listening sessions" will likely be used to further advance dissent and heresy. Already there are rumors about legitimizing contraception and further advancing homosexuality and even abortion. Check out the wolves among the synod "experts" who will be preparing the document for the next step in the synod process. 

No matter how this goes, don't lose heart, friends. God uses what Satan means for evil to bring about good, and what is happening is nothing new in the Church. 

Let's recall for a minute a 16th century pope who served only twenty months, Pope Adrian VI (January 9, 1522 - September 14, 1523). He was a reformer who eliminated many of the excesses of the corrupt Vatican which contributed to the Protestant revolt. He eliminated the balls and fetes, the plays and pomps and parties and all the luxuries infecting the Vatican court. He ate and dressed simply. His two objectives were to reform the curia and to fight the invasion of the Turks. He denounced clerical corruption through his legate at the Diet of Nuremberg in 1523 instructing him with these words:

“You are also to say that we frankly acknowledge that God permits this persecution of His Church on account of the sins of men, and especially of prelates and clergy.... Holy Scripture declares aloud that the sins of the people are the outcome of the sins of the priesthood; therefore, as Chrysostom declares, when our Saviour wished to cleanse the city of Jerusalem of its sickness, He went first to the Temple to punish the sins of the priests before those of others, like a good physician who heals a disease at its roots. We know well that for many years things deserving of abhorrence have gathered round the Holy See; sacred things have been misused, ordinances transgressed, so that in everything there has been a change for the worse. Thus it is not surprising that the malady has crept down from the head to the members, from the Popes to the hierarchy. 
“We all, prelates and clergy, have gone astray from the right way, and for long there is none that has done good; no, not one. To God, therefore, we must give all the glory and humble ourselves before Him; each one of us must consider how he has fallen and be more ready to judge himself than to be judged by God in the day of His wrath. Therefore, in our name give promises that we shall use all diligence to reform before all things the Roman Curia, whence, perhaps, all these evils have had their origin ; thus healing will begin at the source of sickness. We deem this to be all the more our duty, as the whole world is longing for such reform. The Papal dignity was not the object of our ambition, and we would rather have closed our days in the solitude of private life; willingly would we have put aside the tiara; the fear of God alone, the validity of our election, and the dread of schism, decided us to assume the position of Chief Shepherd. We desire to wield our power not as seeking dominion or means for enriching our kindred, but in order to restore to Christ’s bride, the Church, her former beauty, to give help to the oppressed, to uplift men of virtue and learning, above all, to do all that beseems a good shepherd and a successor of the blessed Peter.

Now that's a clear-sighted pontiff who cared about the flock. Would that we had one today. 

And now we move to a modern pope. In 2005, one month before his election to the chair of Peter, as Pope John Paul II lay dying, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger said this during Stations of the Cross:

Should we not also think of how much Christ suffers in His own Church? How often is the holy sacrament of His Presence abused, how often must He enter empty and evil hearts....What little faith is present behind so many theories, so many empty words! How much filth there is in the Church, and even among those who, in the priesthood, ought to belong entirely to Him.... What little respect we pay to the Sacrament of Reconciliation, where He waits for us, ready to raise us up whenever we fall.... Lord, your Church often seems like a boat 

about to sink, a boat taking in water on every side. In your field we see more weeds than wheat. The soiled garments and face of your Church throw us into confusion.

Yet it is we ourselves who have soiled them! It is we who betray you time and time again, after all our lofty words and grand gestures. Have mercy on your Church; within her too, Adam continues to fall. When we fall, we drag you down to earth, and Satan laughs, for he hopes that you will not be able to rise from that fall; he hopes that being dragged down in the fall of your Church, you will remain prostrate and overpowered. But you will rise again. You stood up, you arose and you can also raise us up. Save and sanctify your Church. Save and sanctify us all.

The crisis in the Church is real and serious. To fight it we need to know the faith beginning with the first questions in the Baltimore Catechism. Who made you? God made me. Why did God make you? To know, love, and serve Him in this world and be happy with Him in the next. 

We know God through scripture, prayer, and the sacraments. We love God by worshiping Him and serving our neighbor. And we serve Him by defending the faith and practicing the corporal and spiritual works of mercy. We can do all this through the Holy Spirit whose grace is sufficient for us. May all the angels and saints help us to persevere in every storm and crisis in the Church.


  1. ratzinger denies the 'historicity' of the resurrection.

    ratzinger denies the sacrifice of the cross and the priesthood.

    "The Pope-emeritus writes: “The crucifixion of Jesus is not in itself an act of worship.” The reason he gives is absurd: “The Roman soldiers who executed him are not priests. They carried out an execution; they absolutely did not think they were carrying out an act relating to worship.”

    "This assertion forgets that it is Christ—and He alone—who performs this act of worship: He is both the High Priest of the New Law and the Divine Victim, the only One worthy of being approved by God. Anyway, Benedict XVI’s proposal falls under the condemnation of the Council of Trent: “If anyone says that the sacrifice of the Mass is only one of praise and thanksgiving, or that it is a mere commemoration of the sacrifice consummated on the Cross…: let him be anathema ”(Session XXII, canon 3, September 17, 1562, Denzinger 950). The death of Jesus Christ on the Cross was a true sacrifice. Now, sacrifice is the main act of worship due to God. On the Cross, therefore, there is a true worship, accomplished by Christ alone.

    "Another canon (4) says similarly: “If anyone says that blasphemy is cast upon the most holy sacrifice of Christ consummated on the Cross through the sacrifice of the Mass…: let him be anathema” (Dz. 951). To deny that the Cross is an act of worship is incomprehensible. On the other hand, the modernists claim that the New Testament only ever attributes the priesthood to Christ or to the baptized people, but never to his ministers. In this way, they maintain that this priesthood flows from the Priestly People, that it is a ministry of the People of God.

    "The former pope adheres to this false conception. After describing the worship aspect of the Last Supper and denying that of the Cross, he writes: “In all this, there is never a direct question of the priesthood.” Once again it goes against the holy Council of Trent which affirms (canon 2): “If anyone says that by these words: ‘Do this for a commemoration of me’ (Lk. 22:19; I Cor 11:24), Christ did not make the apostle priests, or did not ordain that they and other priests might offer His own Body and Blood: let him be anathema” (Dz. 949)."

    Yet he prances around in his robes on Good Friday praying to whom to sanctify the church?

  2. Anonymous -- painful but needed comment above. Banner of Truth is not a Catholic group, but they can see the truth while Catholics refuse to look in its direction. Chesterton said that "the only sin is to call green grass grey." But we are very used to doing that lately. I can only hope that Ratzinger has corrected his views in very recent years, and that if he has done so, he lets us know.

  3. FYI, reference "anonymous" guy, above.

    The charge: "Pope Benedict denies the sacrifice of the cross and the priesthood".

    Anonymous is a Calvinist Protestant. The first web site he references is "interdenominational Christian", it's authors' beliefs "are best summed up in the Westminster Confession, which is Presbyterian".

    The second reference he uses is a hit job using a book supposedly co-authored by Pope "Emeritus" Benedict with Cardinal Sarah, but more likely co-authored by a ghost writer using the Pope's name.

    Before the present catastrophe, Pope Benedict XVI was universally recognized as perhaps the greatest theologian Pope the Church has ever known. Now ... everyone is piling on, including the "ecumenist" Protestants evidently, that he is a multi-level heretic (that charge is paricularly ironic here, coming as it is from Calvinists) - since he can't defend himself any more, why not ... if your aim is destroying one who is, perhaps, the last Pope.

    And anonymous' aim is, in fact, destroying the reputation and theological work of our Pope Benedict XVI. He gives the game away with his final sentence describing the Holy Father with venom I've only witnessed in Protestants toward Catholics - "Yet he prances around in his robes on Good Friday praying to whom to sanctify the church"? "Prances". "Robes". Not Catholic language.

    Cardinal Ratzinger was Prefect of the CDF for almost 25 years. He gained a reputation during that time as one of the most orthodox and learned Catholics the Church had seen in the modern (VII) era. I reject the charges above.

  4. Mary Ann, all this information and more is available at Novus Ordo Watch dot org. I was fearful of the sede position, naturally so, but once I actually read their arguments I was a goner.

    Here is a very nice synopsis by a very kind and intelligent man, Mario Derksen who runs NOW.

  5. Novus Ordo Watch, Mario Derksen - of course. Oy Vey!

    1. How's about refuting what NOW/Mario say/write?

      The fruit of VII is more than evident and Fr. Ratzinger is and was a man of the council. The Novus Ordo Church and it's "popes" do not teach Catholicism.

    2. If the NO Church and it's popes were valid, there would be no SSPX. R
      &R is not the Catholic response to a valid pope.

      A “correction” implies two obvious problems: (1) that we cannot trust the teaching of the pope; (2) that we should trust the teaching of the correctors.

      What is the purpose of a pope if he is subject to correction by a self-appointed Board of Correctors? Who assists the Board of Correctors? The Holy Ghost? Where in Sacred Scripture or Tradition is a Board of Correctors mentioned?

    3. For clarity, the above last two paragraphs are quoted from H.E. Bp. Sanborn. For some reason the entire quote did not post affirming it was his writing I was posting.

  6. Jeremias 10:21 “ Because the pastors have done foolishly, and have not sought the Lord: therefore have they not understood, and all their flock is scattered.

  7. The article you wrote above is very good. I read it and found great encouragement in it. God gave us Holy Fathers to see dangers clearly and protect the flock. There are Divine Protections involved. There is historical precedent and continuity for these times of crisis. Interesting piece.

    Then comes the peanut gallery with the anti-church agenda.

    Anyway - the article, the topic … much appreciated.

  8. I posted the first two links. The second is from the SSPX. I also got the information from SSPX that Ratzinger denies the historicity (i.e. fact, reality, Article of Faith) of the resurrection--it is in their Crisis in the Church video series I believe in the episode that deals w/is Benedict still the pope/could that be used to deal w/the issue of Francis. I was just looking for a quick link and this came up very quickly and seemed well researched. I know Tradition in Action also has much information on Ratzinger, especially his outreach to protestants.

    Since commentors here say it is a protestant site, I can only speculate it is because of Ratzinger's outreach to them that they would research to find out exactly what he is about. Something more Catholics should do. To all appearances and from what you see on T.V. or in your diocesan Catholic paper, both John Paul II and Benedict XVI seem very holy and orthodox men. I used to ask people who were more holy/active in the parish what they thought was the issue why everything just seemed to be going bad to worse and they would say oh JP2 is holy but the bishops are bad. It didn't occur to me that JP2 was responsible for appointing the bishops. BXVI was head of the CDF for more than 25 years. He was an expert at VC2--and wore a suit. He excommunicated +Lefebvre (who founded the SSPX) and then turned around 20 years later and un-excommunicated the bishops +L created. But in both instances was he acting to defeat the SSPX view of the Church and God (i.e. trinity)? If he wanted to go back to pre-VC2 beliefs/morals/worship, he could have done that as pope. Praying on Good Friday for GOD to sanctify the Church, while taking no concrete action, is just making a sound byte--probably if you review all the prayers on that Good Friday, there's one sound byte for the liberals, the lgbt crowd, the protestants, the Jews etc. just like one sound byte for the conservatives.

    It was a shock for me to realize that when these popes (JP2 and B16) are saying we worship the same God as the Muslims and Jews, they are denying the Trinity, the divinity of Jesus Christ. And that is there true intent. They deny the fundamental belief of the Catholic (and Protesant) Faith: that Jesus Christ is God who became man. They believe that that is something the apostles made up (along w/the miracles etc.) after Jesus' death (that was just an ordinary crucifixion same as the 2 thieves and there was no resurrection afterward, that was made up too).

    They are not good and holy men: W/out faith you cannot please God. And they do not have it.
    That is what is wrong w/the Catholic Church today. It is run by men who do not believe in it, but are using it's edifice for unknown reasons.

    1. 👆👆👆

      There is more evidence for JPII and BXVI's belief in the council's teaching of religious liberty, false ecumenism and collegiality than you can shake a stick at. Trying to make them Catholic destroys the papacy and Satan is delighted. SVism is the ONLY position which does not contradict, most especially on the traditional teaching of the papacy. It bares repeating....IF the VII Church and it's popes were valid, there would be no SSPX.

  9. The first and oldest Catholic archdiocese in the United States has seen the number of worshippers on its Baltimore rolls sink to about 4,000. Churches built to seat 25,000 people on Sunday hosted about 4,500 per weekend as of 2019. That number has shrunk to 2,000 in the wake of the pandemic.

    What is the "City to come" is it the same as the "city of God"?

    "Mass attendance at all times for all the parishes in the city on a typical weekend is fewer than 2,000...There are MORE churches, many of which are struggling, and PRIESTS in the city THAN the POPULATION CALLS FOR (don't vocations (Calls) come from GOD), the bishop said. “I would rather have fewer, more effective churches (NO Mention of Priests at all) in the city (to come) doing really, really vibrant, strong ministry that meets the needs of the people where we are (what if they are in hell spiritually?) both spiritually and physically.” (do a "priest" word search in this article mentioned once; bishop 20 times)

    "Bishop Lewandowski (overseeing this project) said. For example, he noted that he knows of no parishes fighting for good housing in a city that has 15,000 vacant houses." (is this a work of priests who offer sacrifice for the people to God and sanctify the people by ministering to them the grace of the sacraments in the person of Christ. Is "fighting for good housing" the work of a house of God (church)? Isn't purpose of church to help one fight the world the flesh and the devil to save one's soul?)

    Notice the different headlines-like the soundbytes about ratzinger - what you know and believe about him could depend on what newspaper you read.
    (it's a consolidation)
    (according to the sun, the pews were emptying already)

  10. Anonymous: The Catholic Church is suffering. The Catholic Church still stands. Sins, even great sins, do not cause total collapse. Persevere. God is faithful. Stay within the Faith. Even now, She(the Apostolic RCC) remains the Unspotted Bride of Christ.

  11. Mary Ann K said: "No matter how this goes, don't lose heart, friends. God uses what Satan means for evil to bring about good, and what is happening is nothing new in the Church".

    Debbie said: "If the NO Church and it's popes were valid, there would be no SSPX. R&R is not the Catholic response to a valid pope".

    The first proves that spiritual struggle is normal, not fatal. The second asserts that this spiritual struggle is not normal, because fatal, the devil was successful this time, and we (the RCC) are already dead. I agree with the first assessment, which aligns with faith, history and reason.

    SSPX recognizes and submits to the authority of NO Church and to its Pope in all things lawful. In all things not lawful, SSPX makes known their differences and follows the law (Sacred Tradition and Dogma from which it comes). In other words - R & R, in the modern phrasing.

    What Mary Ann K hi-lights in this article is how there have often been problems and great sin within the Church, usually emanating from the top down, which requires recognition, repentance, penance, cleansing. And she uses two examples (among many other possibilities) to demonstrate recognition and proper response from a Church that is guaranteed to be pure as snow, even while She struggles among its human members against the devil and sin in this world, which includes Pope, Cardinals, Bishops, Priests, Religious, Lay.

    As with the Arian Crisis of the primordial four century Church, almost the entire Church may follow heretical belief and sin ... *while still remaining the Church*. Athanasius remained loyal to the Church and brought repentance and true belief back to the Church. This is also what Arbp LeFebvre did in the modern twentieth century. And as Mary Ann K says above, it is what the Church has always done in response to deviations from the Faith and institutional sin.

    And so - to all those who think the Apostolic Line is ended, valid Popes are no more, the visible Church is now invisible existing only in the lonely isolated homes of individuals with supreme Gnostic enlightenment - the article above, with which I obviously agree, proves that the Apostolic Line still reigns over the RCC and is in need of spiritual cleansing from saints inside willing to work the hard work of revival among the many members. And *THIS* is what SSPX is committed to in its apostolate. They are field medics delivering Sacred Truth to the spiritually starving. And that seems to me the only reasonable path for anyone in these days of trial. Spiritual life is in the Apostolic Line. It is sick, needs attention and treatment, the Body will respond accordingly.

  12. Aqua said, " demonstrate recognition and proper response from a Church that is guaranteed to be pure as snow, even while She struggles among its human members against the devil and sin in this world, which includes Pope, Cardinals, Bishops, Priests, Religious, Lay.'

    Aqua, what does it mean that "the Church is guaranteed to be pure as snow"?

  13. Debbie:

    It does not mean every member is free of sin.

    It does mean the mystical Body of Christ is pure and free of sin.

    One exists in time.

    The other exists outside of time

    One struggles with temptations and sin.

    The other dies not.

    1. Aqua, The Church of Christ in heaven is of course "pure as snow" as no sin can enter there. But the Church of Christ on earth is "pure as snow" in her doctrine, Sacraments, and discipline, or practices approved by the Church. It is the Petrine Promise which guarantees the doctrines, Sacraments, disciplines, and practices are free from error.

      IF, VII and it's popes were valid and safe to follow, there would be no SSPX with their canonically irregular status.

      For 35 years the SSPX, like the sedes, believed the consecration of bishops in the new rite were invalid; they changed their position on that in 2005. Just so happens BXVI was the first "pope" to be consecrated in the new rite. The SSPX also at one time believed priestly ordinations in the new rite were doubtful, they've backed off from that too and now allow priests into the society without conditional re-ordination.

      It also should be noted that there are priests within the society who hold the SVist position, one of which I personally saw his text which stated he recently came to the position, but would remain in the SSPX.

      R&R is not the Catholic response to a valid pope. If one believes Bergoglio (or Benedict) is the valid pope, one must submit to him. To "resist" makes the papacy useless. It is Protestantism. Exactly who decides what doctrines, disciplines, practices to resist? SSPX bishops? SSPX priests? SSPX priests who are not conditionally re-ordained? SSPX lay faithful? The position is untenable.

  14. Debbie, Another way to put it is that we (all Catholics, including all Clergy and Pope) (1) *have been* saved; (2) *are* saved; (3) *will be* saved.

    1: Have been - at baptism
    2: Are - Sanctification (lifetime process of confession, penance, communion, prayer, good works etc).
    3: Will be - In the Eschaton, after all members are raised to the Beatific Vision after Purgation, (if necessary), one Body, one Lord.

    The real battle begins at conversion. And there are no guarantees if final salvation until final Judgement (“will be”). Until then - we live in a spiritual battlefield, and that includes Popes, Cardinals, Bishops, Priests.

    As the above article’s examples clearly show, sin and rebellion have been constant companions of the RCC militant.

    Today’s Feast Day, Our Lady of the Rosary, recalls St Dominic who was favored by a revelation from Our Lady … *in response to the Albigensian heresy* then spreading far and wide in no Europe (RC Daily Missal). Albigensians believed in conflict between good (spirit) and evil (physical matter). This was a heresy, iow it infected the Church “far and wide”. I have a massive book that catalogues the various heresies that have infected the Church through time. No two are identical. Always new ways to fail. Always new ways for saints to rise up and meet the challenge, even when all seems lost.

    Institutional Heresy does not indicate Institutional *failure*. If it did, the Church would have been declared dead 1,500 years ago. It indicates, rather, Institutional (as well as personal) struggle

  15. Debbie,
    We see the same facts. We draw similar conclusions from them in some cases. We draw vastly different conclusions from them in other cases. One thing is for certain, however. We worship Jesus, our Redeemer, through Mary, within the RCC which exists physically now and mystically forever. No current controversy will ever sway me from that quintessential fact. And you if you read the above blog post by Mary Ann K, you will see that her two examples of Papal exhortations, separated by 500 years, and in line with every other Papal exhortation in time I'm quite sure, is oriented purely toward the glory of God Almighty. I wish to live more there, less in the politics. I understand it well enough to see the way forward, and do not wish to spend any more time in it than I (and my family) have to. God bless you!

  16. Aqua, the only reason I hopped on this thread was to agree with anonymous and offer a non-protestant link to the same evidence and more regarding BXVI's well documented heresies. You've refuted nothing of what I or others have posted except with emotionalism and derogatory remarks, "here comes the peanut gallery", and "oy vey" in regards to Mr. Derksen and his work.

    I'm curious if you still hold to the BiP theory, as it is not inline with what the SSPX currently publicly states. Not expecting nor wanting an answer to this, just putting it out there for food for thought.

    For any interested, attached is a 1 hr. 17 min. video refuting the R&R position. It's well worth your time if you find yourself wondering how resisting a valid pope

    May God bless and the Holy Virgin protect us all in these unprecedented and evil times.

  17. Debbie,

    Sanborn states that if such and such is a valid pope, one must submit to him, but is that true? To me, sedes have just added a 2nd layer to the issue. Closest analogy I can come to is if your parents were abusive etc and you had grievance against them, instead of focusing on the specific grievances (as the SSPX do), you suddenly announced (like a teenager): "I am adopted." Now instead of focusing on the grievances, everyone is taking sides and arguing about whether or not you are adopted. There are a number of issues w/sedevacantism that don't make it a realistic solution to the current crisis--namely the succession/church has failed issue (which Christ said could not happen). Sanborn claims to believe that when they recover the faith, they recover their office (so he believes people who he claims to believe aren't popes/bishops and who aren't using true sacraments are continuing the church).

    Also, none of the sedes can be pinned down as to exactly when (date and time) the seat became vacant. So some will say John 23 was not the pope, PVI may have been, but Francis is definitely not (they float new theories for why can't possibly be the pope, but they've been saying no-one is the pope since JP2) and yet they continue watching them (like N.O. WATCH) and preaching against them like the R&R crowd. Why don't the sedes just go their separate way like the protestants (if N.O. is not the church, if consecration of bishops is invalid, then there is no more Catholic Church (except for Sanborn and his fellow thuc bishops (some believe thuc line is not valid since thuc consecrated sodomite and non-catholic to the priesthood plus other simony and lack of witness issues), who never get together or speak to each other) so why pay attention--do they watch the protestant sects? Another mistake I believe the sedes make is to magnify the issues--for instance: "modernism is the synthesis of all heresies."

    +L said I call him the pope because what else am I to call him? He believed the answer to this crisis would come from Rome--the same place the answer has always come in the history of the Catholic Church. The sedes twist around trying to call him pope of the N.O. etc., but they also watch because where else can the answer come from? Until Rome is destroyed as was Jerusalem there is no way to know if this is the great apostasy or if this is just another Arian/Nestorian heresy.

    Jesus said, when the son of man comes, will he find faith on earth? As you can see from Baltimore posts above, the N.O. is selling off the Church (will there be 4 or 2 parishes from 53)? Maryland will vote to enshrine abortion as a 'right' in our constitution, but no mention of that social justice 'issue' from Lori in the decline of his church (nor the approval of gay marriage)). The priest sits on the steps outside like a bum in mismatched clothing. But what are the sedes doing to build up the church: fighting against the SSPX and each other to build up their own protestant fiefdoms (the big 4 of the 9, sanborn, kelly, cekada and dolan, tore the SSPV apart w/their egos, left it, and found their own "congregations" -are they interested in spreading the faith or their own fame)?

    When Nestor preached his heresy, the faithful walked out. To me it is up to the faithful to stop attending sacraments that don't confer grace and are disrespectful to God and to stop listening to sermons/teaching that contradict what the Church has always believed and taught and to support clergy who are faithful. You can (and MUST) do that w/out declaring that Nestor isn't a bishop or so-and-so isn't the pope.

    Notes on Episode #34 includes the transcript

    1. I don't believe any sede would deny there is disunity among the various sede groups. The disunity is "proof" of their current pope to unify under. All other non-sede Catholics have the same problem; no unity and they claim to have a pope.

  18. Debbie, funny that only comment you would make is on the 'disunity' issue. Not sure how disunity proves what you now call a 'thesis' or opinion (vs. a fact/reality) when disunity has always been taken as proof of error in terms of Protestantism. How does Sanborn dogmatize a thesis/opinion? How will he or any of them justify themselves to Jesus Christ Whom they claim to serve and act in the person of when they are fighting and breaking unity with their brethren whom they are commanded to love as Christ loves them over an opinion when practically the whole last sermon of Christ to his apostles was about unity. Also it is impossible to see how they are going to convert their brethren who have fallen into heresy/apostasy by broadcasting this opinion. It may play well to the gallery, but they should be playing for God in Heaven.

    Instead of spreading the thesis/opinion of sedevacantism why don't they focus on spreading the Gospel? There's a Fatima famine all right: a spiritual famine! What are the sedes doing about that? I heard one recently give a whole hour plus talk on the subject and he said the whole entire ramification for some pope who may have held an heretical opinion was that he wasn't declared a saint (all the popes before and after had saint after their name, but he didn't). I was like if that's all that's going to happen to Francis, you might as well give it up and just get down to the business of spreading the Faith which is the great commission to every priest from Jesus Christ (and I'm sure why +L ordained him in the first place). One last thing I would say which is concerning watching. God commanded us to watch, but it was always "Watch and Pray." N.O. Watch seems to have a mocking attitude toward Francis et al which is easy to do, but is not Catholic. One must earnestly love and grieve for these souls and pray w/whole mind, heart, and soul for their conversion.

  19. Vital bit of info on John XXIII, Paul VI, JPII and BXVI.....this short little 36 min video on the Waldorf schools leaves no doubt as to the invalidity of above mentioned "popes". Please consider listening.

  20. Debbie, Why/how is it "vital" to me--I need to save my soul, that's it. How are you helping people to save their souls by trying to persuade them to profess your "opinion/ thesis" which cannot be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt until "THE CATHOLIC CHURCH" rules on the matter? According to the SSPX: no-one except another pope can EVEN ACCUSE another pope of being a heretic.

    As the SSPX points out in their video (episode 34, link below), it is not just the popes that you are declaring "invalid," but also all the bishops (and priests) who profess the same views as the pope. Bellarmaine never considered this (all the bishops losing the faith w/the pope), but pretty much describes what happened during Arian heresy etc. when 90 percent of Church all professed same heresy (same w/protestantism which is why Pius V said any mass in use must be at least 200 years old).

    When did any saint, such as Hilary, Athanasius, etc. during any of these previous crises deviate from discussing the heresy to start discussing whether or not those on the other side held office or were Catholic? How many, if any, who were found to be on the incorrect side were deprived of office after these heresies swept the Church as long as they professed whatever the Church had decided when it did decide?

    Sedevacantism is nothing but a boondoggle. Either you go to the VC2/protestant/orthodox view that the pope is not necessary and the Holy Ghost guides a Church of separate communities who don't even speak to each other (priests/bishops/ministers are self-called) (Lumen Gentium). Or you are left w/Sanborn's "sede prive" thesis/opinion that invalid (whatever that means) popes consecrated w/invalid sacraments are carrying on the apostolic succession and that as soon as one of them "recovers the faith" he recovers a valid papacy.

    In what way is Sanborn's position different from the SSPX stating that heretics can hold office except that instead of arguing w/his peers on the other side of the heresies and trying to persuade them, he runs around making videos and speeches trying to convince those who want to profess the Catholic faith, but who have little/no education in it and are thus prey to whatever charlatan comes along on the internet calling himself a 'traditional' catholic even while he himself professes views that have been condemned by the Catholic Church? The fact of the matter is that, heretics, during the Arian heresy for instance, held office and were not deprived of that office when the Church ruled. Pius V stopped the protestant masses that had been in use for 200 years, but all those who implemented them were not deprived of office/excommunicated ex post facto.

    You address none of the SSPX arguments I raised against your position. The speech I listened to not too long ago was made by a priest who has repeatedly said he wanted to discuss sedevacantism w/the SSPX, but when it came time to discuss any of the concerns raised by the SSPX he brushed them aside w/a hand wave: "of course, there are difficulties." Well, what are these difficulties and what are there ramifications? People listening to him have a right to know that could be vital to saving their soul.

    Episode 34 - transcript see right hand column "resources"

  21. Anonymous:

    Astute observations. As I’ve said, I know someone personally Sede, and I have noticed the feature if their “Catholic faith” is that no Ordinations are valid any more, except a microscopically small number, almost impossible to find, practically speaking. The Church, Her Sacraments, for all intents and purposes, is ended. It is a desperately depressing position in my personal experience. It is a dead end. It does not align with experience, reason, and the clear ongoing promises of Our Lord, Our Lady, and the RCC within Sacred Tradition.

    I have discussed the matter with my SSPX Priest and find their position reasonable, to which I willingly submit in full faith and confidence as being in alignment with Sacred Deposit of Faith.

    The Church is damaged, sick, needs help. It is not dead, nor even hidden. Stay within the Church within the Apostolic Line and her Sacraments to the extent human will, reason and capacity exists. Difficult, not impossible. It is a *trial*, a hard trial, but the battle is ongoing and we must remain faithful as Christ intended. That is my firm belief.