EXCHANGE WITH SSPX FOLLOWER, Part 15

St. Peter, the First Pope and Keeper of the Keys of Heaven

Anonymous said...

Father Abe,

Vatican II did not declare to be a dogmatic council. In matters of Faith and Moral no council can override what have been declared by previous 'DOGMATIC COUNCIL'. You for one should know that.

[quote]
"Yes it is LAWFUL and Official Mass of the Roman Rite Church- not of the ENTIRE CATHOLIC CHURCH- because there are distinct rites and masses from the Roman rite that were retained, and that Includes the Divine Liturgy of the Eastern Catholics."
[/quote]

As said, it has always been the LAWFUL mass and not just selected Church. The Catholic Church as declared by Pope St. Pius V allowed celebration of other norms, if and only if, it has been practiced for more than 200 years. Others are bound to observe the Tridentine Latin Mass and no bishop can stop any priests wanting to celebrate it. There is Wisdom to that, because St. Pope Pius V knew then that there will be people who shall adulterate the mass and distort the Faith of the Church.

If then it is lawful why then you should follow one which was concocted by PROTESTANTS? Light have no part in darkness. And today, a many Catholics no longer know left from right and vice versa.

Then we go to obedience and disobedience. Would st. paul then allow the action of St. peter that is not in line with Church's doctrine? Of course not. St. Paul in Acts corrected St. Peter. Correction does not mean schism. And, in matters of confusion, one can follow what the Church has handed down with Infallible declaration by the Dogmatic Council -- Vatican 1.

This is one thing Catholics need to discern. THE POPE IS NOT ABOVE TRADITION --- THE FAITH DEPOSITED THROUGHOUT THE TIMES AND HAVE BEEN TAUGHT BY THE CHURCH.

When does infallibility apply on the Pope? Is the Pope infallible at all times? You should also be aware Father that a many bishops and priests today do not even follow the Holy Father in affirming the Faith. Where do you give the host ... hand? or tongue? The Holy Father expressed kneeling while receiving the host with the tongue and yet a many priests do not obey that call. And, now you qualify what is obedience and disobedience?

http://newsblaze.com/story/20090801065749zzzz.nb/topstory.html

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/pope_prefers_communion_on_the_tongue_msgr._marini_says/

Therefore father, when a Pope no longer confirm the faith of the Church -- it is not disobedience to the Church of not following a Pope's bad example. Infallibility does not rest on the Pope at all times.

Moreover, what the SSPX reject are teachings that goes contrary to what the Church have taught and declared Dogmatically. They do not question the Pope as successor of Peter. With that, the SSPX pray that the Pope continue to fight for the True Faith.

Do not be confused with the Anglicans. While the Anglican kept their own structure separate from the Church --- (a true sign of disobedience); the SSPX does not desire to have a new structure but only to continue what the Church have Infallibly taught throughout the times. Because of their desire to continue what the Church have brought to the world, they are scorned and declared to be disobeying the Pope.

Father Abe, cite one false Dogmatic teaching of Vatican 1 that Vatican II have corrected. Why then continuing what the Church clearly taught is a sin?

November 1, 2010 4:06 PM

Fr. Abe, CRS said...

[Vatican II did not declare to be a dogmatic council.]

THE SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL IS BOTH DOGMATIC AND PASTORAL. ALL ECUMENICAL COUNCILS ARE BOTH DOGMATIC AND PASTORAL.

VATICAN II ISSUED TWO DOGMATIC CONSTITUTIONS:

1. DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH [LUMEN GENTIUM]

2. DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON DIVINE REVELATION [DEI VERBUM]

AND 1 PASTORAL CONSTITUTION: GAUDIUM ET SPES.

[In matters of Faith and Moral no council can override what have been declared by previous 'DOGMATIC COUNCIL'.]

ONLY AN IDIOT WILL CLAIM THAT VATICAN II OVERRIDE ANY DOGMA OF THE CHURCH. IT IS IN PERFECT HARMONY AND CONTINUITY WITH THE PREVIOUS COUNCILS. AND IF THERE IS ANY CHANGE, THOSE WERE ON THINGS THAT ARE PASTORAL AND NOT DOGMATIC BECAUSE VATICAN II DEALT ALSO ON PASTORAL MATTERS.

[You for one should know that.]

I AM SURPRISED THAT YOU ARE IGNORANT OF IT.

[As said, it has always been the LAWFUL mass and not just selected Church.]

THE MASS IS LAWFUL IF IT IS CELEBRATED IN COMMUNION WITH THE VICAR OF CHRIST. IF IT IS NOT THEN IT IS ILLEGAL. THE MASSES OF SSPX ARE ILLEGAL BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT IN COMMUNION WITH THE VICAR OF CHRIST.

[The Catholic Church as declared by Pope St. Pius V allowed celebration of other norms, if and only if, it has been practiced for more than 200 years.]

POPE ST. PIUS V WAS REFERRING TO ALL THE VALID MASSES OF THE CHURCH. HE WAS NOT SAYING 'TRIDENTINE LATIN MASS ONLY'. THAT IS WHY IT IS FOOLISH TO INTERPRET HIS DECREE AS IF REFERRING TO TLM ALONE. BESIDES, THE POPE WAS REFERRING TO THE HOLY MASS BUT NOT TO THE PERPETUITY OF RITE OR LITURGICAL ACTIONS. THE MASS IS THE SAME AND UNCHANGING BUT THE LITURGY AND THE RITES ARE EXPERIENCING CHANGES THROUGHOUT THE CENTURIES.

[Others are bound to observe the Tridentine Latin Mass and no bishop can stop any priests wanting to celebrate it.]

THE BISHOP OF ROME CAN STOP ANY PRIEST IN USING ANY RITE OF THE CHURCH. THE TLM IS NOT DIVINE IN ORIGIN. IT WAS A LATER INVENTION ALSO. BUT THE POWER TO BIND AND TO LOOSE OF THE VICAR OF CHRIST IS DIVINE IN ORIGIN. HE CAN APPROVE OR DISALLOW ANY RITE IN THE CHURCH.

ARE YOU IGNORANT OF THAT?

[There is Wisdom to that, because St. Pope Pius V knew then that there will be people who shall adulterate the mass and distort the Faith of the Church.]

POPE ST. PIUS V NEVER TAUGHT THAT THE VICAR OF CHRIST WILL BE THE ONE TO ADULTERATE THE MASS. INSTEAD, THE TRUE MASS SHALL BE PRESERVED BY THE VICAR OF CHRIST. IT IS THE SSPX WHO ARE ADULTERATING THE TLM WITH THEIR CANONICAL DISOBEDIENCE AND LITURGICAL REBELLION.

[If then it is lawful why then you should follow one which was concocted by PROTESTANTS?]

PROTESTANTS? EXCUSE ME. IVE BEEN DEBATING PROTESTANTS HERE IN THIS GROUP AND AM DOING SO FOR MANY YEARS SINCE I WAS A LAD BUT I NEVER HEARD OF A PROTESTANT LOVING OUR VERNACULAR MASS. THEY HATE IT. PROTESTANTS HATE THE NOVUS ORDO JUST LIKE THE SSPX HATE THE NOVUS ORDO.

IT MEANS THE SSPX AND THE PROTESTANTS ARE POSSESSED BY THE SAME DEMON OF REBELLION AGAINST THE CHURCH AND THE POPE.

[Light have no part in darkness.]

THE SSPX IS IN DARKNESS BECAUSE INSTEAD OF CHOOSING PETER IT CHOSE LEFEBVRE THE CONTEMPORARY AGENT OF LUCIFER.

[And today, a many Catholics no longer know left from right and vice versa.]

DON'T INCLUDE US IN YOUR EVIDENT IGNORANCE.

[Then we go to obedience and disobedience.]

LEFEBVRE AND HIS MINIONS DISOBEYED THE CHURCH AND THE VICAR OF CHRIST AS LUCIFER DID TO GOD AND AS LUTHER DID CENTURIES BACK.

[Would st. paul then allow the action of St. peter that is not in line with Church's doctrine? Of course not.]

YOU SEE, YOU ARE ALREADY USING THE PROTESTANT ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE PAPACY. HA, HA, HA... THAT IS CLASSIC PROTESTANT ARGUMENTATION.

TO CORRECT YOUR IGNORANCE, ST. PETER DIDN'T COMMIT ANY INFRACTION ON MATTERS OF DOCTRINE BUT OF CONDUCT. IT WAS HIS ATTITUDE THAT ST. PAUL WAS CORRECTING. BUT ON MATTERS OF FAITH AND MORALS ST. PAUL IS NOTHING EQUAL WITH ST. PETER. IN FACT IN ACTS 15 ST. PAUL AND ST. BARNABAS WERE NOT BELIEVED BY THE CHRISTIANS AND IT WAS ST. PETER WHO SETTLED THE ISSUE. THE CHRISTIANS LISTENED TO PAUL AFTER ST. PETER SUPPORTED HIM.

[St. Paul in Acts corrected St. Peter.]

IDIOT. THAT IS NOT IN ACTS THAT IS IN GALATIANS 2:11. I'VE MEMORIZED THAT BY CONSTANT DEBATES WITH PROTESTANTS. THEY ARE USING THE SAME ARGUMENT AND REASONING THAT YOU DO.

ARE YOU THAT STUPID OF THE BIBLE? THAT IS ELEMENTARY MY DEAR DUDE D DUDE. HA, HA, HA... IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE LEARNING FROM LEFEBVRE, STUPIDITIES?

[ Correction does not mean schism.]

LEFEBVRE AND THE SSPX ARE NOT CORRECTING THEY ARE REBELLING. THEY ARE COMMITTING ACTIVE REBELLION FROM THE HOLY FATHER. THAT IS SCHISMATIC. YOU AND THEY ARE ACCUSING THE POPE OF HERESY, NOT ONLY THE POPE BUT ALSO THE LATEST ECUMENICAL COUNCIL AS WELL AS THE PAULINE MASS.

[And, in matters of confusion, one can follow what the Church has handed down with Infallible declaration by the Dogmatic Council -- Vatican 1.]

HA, HA, HA... THE VATICAN I DECLARES THE ABSOLUTE AUTHORITY OF THE POPE OVER THE CHURCH. THUS IN TIMES OF CRISIS THE FAITHFUL MUST CLING TO THE POPE NOT ON ANY SOCIETY FOUNDED BY A WACKY OLD FOOL.

[This is one thing Catholics need to discern.]

THE VATICAN 1 DECLARES THE ABSOLUTE AUTHORITY OF THE POPE OVER THE UNIVERSAL CHURCH. NO AUTHORITY IN THE CHURCH IS OVER AND BEYOND THAT OF THE BISHOP OF ROME, THE VICAR OF CHRIST.

[THE POPE IS NOT ABOVE TRADITION ---]

THE POPE IS NOT ABOVE TRADITION BUT LEFEBVRE AND THE SSPX ARE NOT ABOVE THE POPE. HA, HA, HA...

THE SSPX AND LEFEBVRE ARE INFERIOR ANIMALS IN COMPARISON WITH THE POPE.

THE POPE IS THE SUPREME GUARDIAN AND INTERPRETER OF TRADITION... NOT THE SSPX AND NOT THEIR WACKY OLD FOOL FOUNDER NAMED MARCEL LEFEBVRE.

[THE FAITH DEPOSITED THROUGHOUT THE TIMES AND HAVE BEEN TAUGHT BY THE CHURCH.]

THE SSPX IS NOT THE CHURCH. IT IS OUTSIDE THE CHURCH. LEFEBVRE WAS AN EXCOMMUNICATED FOOL.

[When does infallibility apply on the Pope?]

WHEN DOES INFALLIBILITY APPLY ON LEFEBVRE AND THE SSPX? DO THEY HAVE A GIFT OF INFALLIBILITY SO THAT WE CAN ENTRUST OUR SOULS TO THEM?

[Is the Pope infallible at all times?]

THE SSPX AND LEFEBVRE ARE NOT INFALLIBLE AT ALL TIMES. ALWAYS AND EVERYWHERE THEY ARE NOT INFALLIBLE AT ALL. NO, NO, NO... THERE IS NO ANY IOTA OF INFALLIBILITY IN THAT SATANIC CULT.

IS BERNARD FELLAY INFALLIBLE AT ALL TIMES? HOW ABOUT WILLIAMSON THE PRO-HITLER SSPX BISHOP? HA, HA, HA... BEFORE YOU QUESTION THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE APPLY IT TO YOURSELVES FIRST. YOUR ALTERNATIVE IS SATANIC AND UNACCEPTABLE.
[ You should also be aware Father that a many bishops and priests today do not even follow the Holy Father in affirming the Faith.]

IF THAT IS THE CASE THEY ARE IMITATING LEFEBVRE AND THE SSPX. SO YOU HAVE SOMETHING IN COMMON. AREN'T YOU HAPPY WITH THAT?

[Where do you give the host ... hand? or tongue?]

THE VICAR OF CHRIST APPROVED BOTH: OFFICIALLY ON THE TONGUE AND BY SPECIAL APPROVAL BY THE HAND. WHY? IS THERE A DOGMA LIMITING THE RECEPTION OF THE EUCHARIST TO THE TONGUE, FOREVER?

[The Holy Father expressed kneeling while receiving the host with the tongue and yet a many priests do not obey that call.]

THE HOLY FATHER DID THAT AS A PERSONAL CHOICE. BUT IF HE WILL ISSUE A DECREE REMOVING ALL APPROVAL FOR COMMUNION BY THE HAND AND IMPOSE COMMUNION ON TONGUE ONLY THEN EVERY BODY WILL FOLLOW.

[ And, now you qualify what is obedience and disobedience?]

OBEDIENCE AND DISOBEDIENCE STRICTLY SPEAKING IS BEING IN CANONICAL COMMUNION WITH THE VICAR OF CHRIST AND UPHOLDING EVERYTHING THAT HE TEACHES. DEFINITELY, LEFEBVRE AND THE SSPX ARE NOT QUALIFIED FOR THAT.

[Therefore father, when a Pope no longer confirm the faith of the Church -- it is not disobedience to the Church of not following a Pope's bad example.]

HA, HA, HA... YOU ARE ACCUSING THE POPE OF APOSTASY. HA, HA, HA... AND NOT ONLY THAT OF HERESY.

IF THE POPE DOES NOT CONFIRM THE FAITH OF THE CHURCH THEN THAT POPE IS HERETICAL AND HAD APOSTATIZED. HOW COME THE SSPX ARE STILL RECITING HIS NAME IN THE MASS? IF I AM CONVINCED THAT THE POPE IS NO LONGER CONFIRMING THE CATHOLIC FAITH IT WILL BE AGAINST MY CONSCIENCE TO RECITE HIS NAME IN THE ANAPHORA.

YOU ARE LYING HERE. YOU SAID THAT YOU ARE STILL IN COMMUNION WITH THE POPE. HOW CAN YOU BE IN COMMUNION WITH A POPE WHO IS A HERETIC? OR HAS APOSTATIZED?

STOP THROWING AT THE POPE THE EVIL THAT YOU HAVE EMBRACED. THE POPE IS CONFIRMING AND HAD AFFIRMED THE FAITH OF THE CHURCH. IT IS LEFEBVRE AND THE SSPX WHO HAD SUCCUMBED TO LITURGICAL AND CANONICAL DISOBEDIENCE TO THE CHURCH AND TO THE POPE.

[Infallibility does not rest on the Pope at all times.]

BUT INFALLIBILITY SHALL NOT REST ON ANYONE WITHOUT THE POPE WITH HIM. THE COLLEGE OF BISHOPS CAN BE INFALLIBLE ONLY IF THE POPE IS WITH THEM. THE CATECHETICAL MANUAL COULD BE INFALLIBLE ONLY AFTER THE POPE APPROVED IT BY APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY.

NO POPE, NO INFALLIBILITY AT ALL. NOT WITHOUT PETER. INFALLIBILITY IS GIVEN TO THE CHURCH UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF PETER. NOT WITHOUT PETER AND HIS SUCCESSOR.

[Moreover, what the SSPX reject are teachings that goes contrary to what the Church have taught and declared Dogmatically.]

THAT IS JUST AN ALIBI TO FIND JUSTIFICATION FOR YOUR LUCIFERIAN REBELLION. EVERY SCHISMATIC AND PROTESTANT HAS REASONS AND ALIBI TO JUSTIFY THEMSELVES. THE SSPX AND LEFEBVRE HAS LOST ANY CREDIBILITY ON THAT MATTER WHEN IT AIMED ITS GUN ON THE SUCCESSOR OF PETER.

[They do not question the Pope as successor of Peter.]

HYPOCRISY.

[With that, the SSPX pray that the Pope continue to fight for the True Faith.]

THE POPE IS ALREADY SUCH THEY ARE JUST TOO PROUD LIKE SATAN TO ACCEPT THAT THEY ARE IN THE WRONG AND THAT THE POPE IS RIGHT AFTER ALL.

[Do not be confused with the Anglicans. While the Anglican kept their own structure separate from the Church --- (a true sign of disobedience); the SSPX does not desire to have a new structure but only to continue what the Church have Infallibly taught throughout the times.]

THAT IS ONCE AGAIN HYPOCRITICAL. YOU ARE ALREADY HAVING YOUR OWN STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATION. ACTUALLY YOU ARE ALREADY INFILTRATING LOCAL DIOCESES WITHOUT COMMUNION WITH THE LOCAL BISHOPS AND ARE ESTABLISHING COMMUNITIES AGAINST THE KNOWLEDGE AND APPROVAL OF THE LOCAL BISHOPS.

WE KNOW YOUR ACTIVITIES. YOUR CLAIMS ARE DIFFERENT FROM WHAT YOU ARE DOING IN THE GRASSROOTS.

[Because of their desire to continue what the Church have brought to the world, they are scorned and declared to be disobeying the Pope.]

HA, HA, HA... NOW YOU ARE APPEALING TO PITY. AFTER YOU PRIDEFULLY ACCUSED THE POPE OF NOT AFFIRMING THE FAITH OF THE CHURCH IT IS HYPOCRITICAL OF YOU TO CLAIM THAT YOU ARE IN OBEDIENCE WITH HIM. HA, HA, HA... HOW CAN YOU BE IN OBEDIENCE WITH SOMEONE WHO IS NO LONGER A SERVANT OF THE CHURCH AND A TRUE GUARDIAN OF THE FAITH? YOUR CLAIMS ARE CONTRADICTORY.

[Father Abe, cite one false Dogmatic teaching of Vatican 1 that Vatican II have corrected.]

WHY SHOULD I? BOTH VATICAN I AND VATICAN II ARE IN HARMONY WITH THE OTHER. BUT THE SSPX IS VIOLATING VATICAN I FOR ITS DISOBEDIENCE TO THE POPE.

JUST BY TEACHING THAT THE POPE IS NOT AFFIRMING THE FAITH OF THE CHURCH IS ALREADY A HERESY AGAINST THE DOGMA OF VATICAN I.

[Why then continuing what the Church clearly taught is a sin?]

VATICAN II NEVER CONTINUE SOMETHING THAT THE CHURCH TEACHES AS A SIN. NEVER EVER.

November 1, 2010 6:04 PM