Recent posts

#1

General Catholic Discussion / Re: Mission of Divine Mercy re...

Last post by josh987654321 - Today at 10:46:32 PM

Also just a side note, we the faithful are expected to stick with the Vicar of Christ through the ups and downs, yet they themselves can supposedly just renounce it at will? Talk about double standards.

The Vicar of Christ is not God, his authority comes from God therefore he cannot use this authority to renounce such authority because it's not his to renounce.

10 Moses said: I beseech thee, Lord. I am not eloquent from yesterday and the day before: and since thou hast spoken to thy servant, I have more impediment and slowness of tongue. 11 The Lord said to him: Who made man's mouth? or who made the dumb and the deaf, the seeing and the blind? did not I? 12 Go therefore and I will be in thy mouth: and I will teach thee what thou shalt speak.

God Bless 

#2

The Sedevacantist Thesis / Re: The Great Western Schism &...

Last post by Miriam_M - Today at 10:36:49 PM

A few stayed SSPV, most just went independent.

Ah.  I figured.  Thanks.

#3

General Catholic Discussion / Re: Mission of Divine Mercy re...

Last post by Maximilian - Today at 10:06:36 PM

Where does 'Papal Infallibility' even come from?

The question that is on everyone's mind.

#4

General Catholic Discussion / Re: Mission of Divine Mercy re...

Last post by josh987654321 - Today at 09:43:15 PM

Why be Western Rite when the Eastern Rite is objectively better?

A few reasons, but the main one, is that Aaron was appointed High Priest in a single line of succession in the Old Covenant, when Christ established the New Covenant, it was modelled after the Old Covenant, with St Peter the 'Rock' upon which His Church would be built, Christ appointing him with Christ Himself being a New Moses, just as Aaron spoke on behalf of Moses, the Vicar of Moses if you will.

Aaron made the golden calf, St Peter denied Him 3 times... typology of old and new. 

A New Commandment, Blood in the New Covenant, A New Passover, A New Creation, A New Ark... all not doing away with the old but perfectly fulfilling it, infinitely greater than the Old. 

Aaron was the vicar of Moses not Moses himself, therefore Aaron could never renounce it by his own authority just as St Peter and his successors cannot.

Asking for a friend 

Haha

God Bless

#5

General Catholic Discussion / Re: Mission of Divine Mercy re...

Last post by josh987654321 - Today at 09:32:10 PM

St. Ambrose:

Where Peter is, there is the Church; where the Church is, there is no death, but eternal life.

St. Cyprian of Carthage:

If someone does not hold fast to this unity of Peter, can he imagine that he still holds the faith? If he [should] desert the chair of Peter upon whom the Church was built, can he still be confident that he is in the Church?

Amen, Amen.

Peter is then deposed and another man elected in his place, with Pope Celestine V being imprisoned and killed by his so called 'successor' who drafted the dubious clause in the first place.

So I am holding fast to St Peter and his successors. Bergoglio is not St Peter's successor because Pope Benedict XVI was elected as his successor and held it until death, just as St Peter held it until death.

God Bless

#6

General Catholic Discussion / Re: Mission of Divine Mercy re...

Last post by josh987654321 - Today at 09:17:20 PM

The material on the adjoining thread re St. Vincent Ferrer points out that Gregory XII, who is officially considered the "true pope," abdicated in favor of the Council of Constance. At the same time, Clement XIII was deposed for the offense of refusing to abdicate when requested by the Council. So there is at least 1 example between Celestine and Benedict.

I'll have to look into that, it was my understanding that he was another Antipope, but they sure created one heck of a mess of things after Pope Celestine V's error and usurpation by Boniface VIII.

We are heading down the exact same track unless things are corrected IMO.

God Bless 

#7

General Catholic Discussion / Re: Mission of Divine Mercy re...

Last post by josh987654321 - Today at 09:12:08 PM

If the Code of Canon Law can be wrong, why be Catholic?

Because it's the one true Church established by Jesus Christ Himself placing St Peter as it's head just as Aaron was the first in a single line of succession of High Priests and Jesus is a new Moses in terms of typology establishing the New Covenant modelled on the Old Covenant.

In the Old Covenant they made quite the mess of it also, with Annas being usurped by Caiaphas.

Bergoglio commemorating Luther, or your dear Benedict praying next to heretics and schismatics and a layman posing as clergy, are surely sinful, but not official acts of magisterium.

First, nobody has really clearly defined when this 'line' is crossed, it's as if he has to turn around touch the ground and pat his head three times in some special manner before it's considered ex-cathedra and officially beyond the pale... so we will see. We have so far had several heretical encyclicals, which are official teaching documents?

In terms of Pope Benedict XVI and others, Aaron made the golden calf and St Peter denied Our Lord 3 times, it's a difficult thing to stomach, but if it's part of the Divine plan then one can work with that, but not with a usurper.     

Are you opining then that these can have error? Is infallibility limited to only the extraordinary magisterium?

I don't know.

I just know that Pope Benedict XVI was not appointed by his own authority, he was not given the keys by his own authority, it was not under his own authority to bind and loose, to teach and guide the faithful, it was given to him by Our Lord Jesus Christ who first gave it to St Peter and by extension his successors, therefore he cannot use his own authority to renounce it, it's not his to renounce.

Where does 'Papal Infallibility' even come from? Is it not Our Lord Jesus Christ in his promise to St Peter? They have no authority to renounce it because it's not theirs to give and renounce at will. On one hand we expect the assistance of the Holy Spirit to reside with the Pope, the valid successor to St Peter, yet we say he can take it up and renounce it at will for any reason? Who is really in control here?

One says that a prerequisite for being Pope is not wanting it, but then adds a clause to ensure only the ambitious will ever hold it. One says that the protection of the Holy Spirit in Christ's promise to St Peter resides with the Pope, but then says that they can just renounce this at will for any reason by their own authority?

Last I checked Christ gave the keys to St Peter and his successors, Pope Benedict XVI was the current successor to St Peter, Bergoglio had no right to be elected, we cannot have two Popes. Pope Benedict XVI is not immune from erring, and he erred, which ought to have been corrected, same with Pope Celestine V.

"Our Lady of Victory, Ark of the New Covenant, Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate, Pray for us."

God Bless     

#8

The Sedevacantist Thesis / Re: The Great Western Schism &...

Last post by Bonaventure - Today at 09:09:18 PM

A few stayed SSPV, most just went independent.

#9

General News and Discussion / Re: How fast do you read?

Last post by Melkor - Today at 08:55:18 PM

I got 593 but I also know I read too fast so I slowed down a bit. Not kidding lol.

I do read fast and usually retain it pretty well, although I will re read certain sections if they are interesting e ough or if I didn't absorb it the first time.

#10

General News and Discussion / Re: Simping for Eva

Last post by Melkor - Today at 08:51:39 PM

A blond bombshell if ever there was one.

Her eyes look weird lol