The Indefectibility of the Church

[Stubborn]

Oh yeah. Things look very severe in the mainstream Roman Catholic Church today. It is only here that your sins are forgiven?
https://wdtprs.com/2022/07/a-unique-expression-of-the-lex-orandi-in-chicago/

And that's why we avoid all things NO always.

So the mainstream Catholic Church has defected? Or is it the one true Catholic Church where you can obtain forgiveness of your sins.

I go to where I know the priests and sacraments are valid, and the truth never changes. Which means the lines for confessions are usually pretty long. I have nothing to do with  the NO.

[AlNg]

I have nothing to do with  the NO.

So you reject the mainstream Catholic church of His Holiness the Vicar of Christ  Pope Francis? Are you in schism from the mainstream Catholic Church?

[Stubborn]

I have nothing to do with  the NO.

So you reject the mainstream Catholic church of His Holiness the Vicar of Christ  Pope Francis? Are you in schism from the mainstream Catholic Church?

For me, the mainstream Catholic church is Catholic in name only and is in schism from the Catholic Church, hence, I have nothing to do with it.

Before you ask lol, if the pope ever gives a command I can obey without offending God, then of course I will obey - but none of the conciliar popes have given such commands. But if he ever does, I'm sure I'll get wind of it somehow, if nothing else I'm sure that it'll be posted all over the forums.   

[AlNg]

For me, the mainstream Catholic  is in schism from the Catholic Church,

Depending on how you look at it, you are then in schism from the mainstream Catholic Church and as such, your sins cannot be forgiven, since it is only in the mainstream Catholic Church, under His Holiness the Pope of Rome, that your sins can be forgiven at least it would appear so according to what you have stated above.  You are in the same position as other schismatics who you have said cannot have their sins forgiven because they are not in the Catholic Church. Further, you are like a Protestant who believes in private and personal interpretation of theological issues and does not yield to the professional authority of 5600 Catholic bishops. There are 5600 Catholic bishops who profess allegiance to the mainstream Catholic Church (this includes some Eastern Catholic bishops who pledge allegiance to Pope Francis). How many bishops do you have in your schismatic Catholic Church who have publicly stated that they do not follow Pope Francis and his mainstream Catholic church? Even SSPX says that Pope Francis is the Pope of the Catholic Church and say that they are una cum Pope Francis in all their Masses.

[Julio]

^^I agree with you. The Pope maybe a sinner but the authority is in him being the holder of the sit of St. Peter. In the revelation of the Sacred Heart of Jesus to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque, He spoke about the importance of respect towards the authority. He also stated it here:

"Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples, saying, "The scribes and the Pharisees have taken their seat on the chair of Moses. Therefore, do and observe all things whatsoever they tell you, but do not follow their example. For they preach but they do not practice." (Mathew 23:1,2 and 3)

[Stubborn]

For me, the mainstream Catholic  is in schism from the Catholic Church,

Depending on how you look at it, you are then in schism from the mainstream Catholic Church and as such, your sins cannot be forgiven, since it is only in the mainstream Catholic Church, under His Holiness the Pope of Rome, that your sins can be forgiven at least it would appear so according to what you have stated above...

The pope in Rome is still the pope and I still am his subject - so your whole post is a waste of space. Thanks be to God that I will not be answering for him or all the corrupt NO laity, clergy and bishops - and neither will you.

[Stubborn]

^^I agree with you. The Pope maybe a sinner but the authority is in him being the holder of the sit of St. Peter. In the revelation of the Sacred Heart of Jesus to St. Margaret Mary Alacoque, He spoke about the importance of respect towards the authority. He also stated it here:

"Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples, saying, "The scribes and the Pharisees have taken their seat on the chair of Moses. Therefore, do and observe all things whatsoever they tell you, but do not follow their example. For they preach but they do not practice." (Mathew 23:1,2 and 3)

Yes, and Our Lord also warned us to beware of false prophets, which means He warned us to watch out for all those who preach false doctrines - this includes all those who preach NO doctrines.

You should read Jeremias, the whole chapter 23 as his prophesy applies to our times - it is recommended reading:

[1]Woe to the pastors, that destroy and tear the sheep of my pasture, saith the Lord.
[2] Therefore thus saith the Lord the God of Israel to the pastors that feed my people: You have scattered my flock, and driven them away, and have not visited them: behold I will visit upon you for the evil of your doings, saith the Lord.
[3] And I will gather together the remnant of my flock, out of all the lands into which I have cast them out: and I will make them return to their own fields, and they shall increase and be multiplied.
[4] And I will set up pastors over them, and they shall feed them: they shall fear no more, and they shall not be dismayed: and none shall be wanting of their number, saith the Lord.

[Julio]

^^Nothing is about disobedience or rebellion against the pastor as provided by Jeremias. Furthermore, it is about prophesy of Jesus creating and instituting His Catholic Church, by way of the New Covenant. Assuming that NO is incorrect, which I won't state anything because I will know about that as I die, but St. Vincent Ferrer served a bad Pope yet he was provided with God's gifts through His miracles. So I disagree with you on this matter.

[Stubborn]

^^Nothing is about disobedience or rebellion against the pastor as provided by Jeremias. Furthermore, it is about prophesy of Jesus creating and instituting His Catholic Church, by way of the New Covenant. Assuming that NO is incorrect, which I won't state anything because I will know about that as I die, but St. Vincent Ferrer served a bad Pope yet he was provided with God's gifts through His miracles. So I disagree with you on this matter.

There may be nothing about disobedience, but it is all about bad pastors within the Church.

For our part, we strive to remain the pope's good subjects, but God's first.

[Julio]

^^Nothing is about disobedience or rebellion against the pastor as provided by Jeremias. Furthermore, it is about prophesy of Jesus creating and instituting His Catholic Church, by way of the New Covenant. Assuming that NO is incorrect, which I won't state anything because I will know about that as I die, but St. Vincent Ferrer served a bad Pope yet he was provided with God's gifts through His miracles. So I disagree with you on this matter.

There may be nothing about disobedience, but it is all about bad pastors within the Church.

For our part, we strive to remain the pope's good subjects, but God's first.

Correct, it is about bad pastors and nothing about disobedience. Yes God must be first and He said this:

"If he refuses to listen to them, tell the church. If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector. Amen, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." Matthew (18:17 and 18)

That is a clear evidence of importance of the Church in our life. It also provides the power and authority of the successor of St. Peter. God must be first and respect to the authority is His command. Whether or not the holder of that sit is a sinner or not is the call of God. We may disagree with him but his authority remains as such. It is up for him to answer to God and rebellion is never taught upon us by Jesus. I say, we adore God like St. Vincent Ferrer irrespective of the acts by holder of the sit of St. Peter.

May I ask you, when Jesus ascended to Heaven, was TLM the Mass that was celebrated by His disciples? In my understanding that was not the case. In fact  the New Testament was not yet written at that time. It means that the holder of the sit of St. Peter made certain changes because like what Jesus said, he has the authority. If he abuse that such is another matter. I am saddened that Pope Francis banned it. I am against his actions on that. But TLM goers does not translate superiority over NO attendees. God bless brother.

[Stubborn]

^^Nothing is about disobedience or rebellion against the pastor as provided by Jeremias. Furthermore, it is about prophesy of Jesus creating and instituting His Catholic Church, by way of the New Covenant. Assuming that NO is incorrect, which I won't state anything because I will know about that as I die, but St. Vincent Ferrer served a bad Pope yet he was provided with God's gifts through His miracles. So I disagree with you on this matter.

There may be nothing about disobedience, but it is all about bad pastors within the Church.

For our part, we strive to remain the pope's good subjects, but God's first.

Correct, it is about bad pastors and nothing about disobedience. Yes God must be first and He said this:

"If he refuses to listen to them, tell the church. If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector. Amen, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." Matthew (18:17 and 18)

That is a clear evidence of importance of the Church in our life. It also provides the power and authority of the successor of St. Peter. God must be first and respect to the authority is His command. Whether or not the holder of that sit is a sinner or not is the call of God. We may disagree with him but his authority remains as such. It is up for him to answer to God and rebellion is never taught upon us by Jesus. I say, we adore God like St. Vincent Ferrer irrespective of the acts by holder of the sit of St. Peter.

I agree with all you say, what you seem to be missing is the fact that we cannot follow bad pastors who preach bad doctrines no matter who they are - not even popes. This does not mean they are not pastors, but it does mean we cannot go along with them lest we be driven away from the Church with the rest of scattered flock who listen to them.

     

May I ask you, when Jesus ascended to Heaven, was TLM the Mass that was celebrated by His disciples? In my understanding that was not the case. In fact  the New Testament was not yet written at that time. It means that the holder of the sit of St. Peter made certain changes because like what Jesus said, he has the authority. If he abuse that such is another matter. I am saddened that Pope Francis banned it. I am against his actions on that. But TLM goers does not translate superiority over NO attendees. God bless brother.

The Law of the Liturgy, Quo Primum, was established by Pope St. Pius V in 1570.

In the second paragraph, he states:

Hence, We decided to entrust this work to learned men of our selection. They very carefully collated all their
work with the ancient codices in Our Vatican Library and with reliable, preserved or emended codices from
elsewhere. Besides this, these men consulted the works of ancient and approved authors concerning the same
sacred rites; and thus they have restored the Missal itself to the original form and rite of the holy Fathers.
When this work has been gone over numerous times and further emended, after serious study and reflection,
We commanded that the finished product be printed and published as soon as possible, so that all might enjoy
the fruits of this labor; and thus, priests would know which prayers to use and which rites and ceremonies
they were required to observe from now on in the celebration of Masses.

So for our purpose, the True Mass is the same Mass as the original, which is to say it is traced all the way back to the Apostles. Whereas the new "mass" needed the approval of 6 protestant ministers before it could be released. But most people who go to it fail to see the protness which is all over it and inherent within the evil thing.

If you read the link, you will not be able to deny that the new mass clearly goes against the law of Quo Primum.

The words of Fr. Wathen below are indisputable, particularly the boded text:

"People have been given the idea that whatever the pope has the authority to do he may morally do, we deny both that the pope has the authority to introduce a new mass and we insist that the introduction of a totally new Rite with a questionable theology, and that is putting it mildly, the introduction of a new Rite with a questionable theology is not only unlawful, that is, it goes clearly contrary to the established law, but it is immoral, independent of the law of which the pope is bound.

People have the idea that the pope, because he is the head of the Church, has limitless authority. This is altogether wrong. He is not at all limitless in what he may do, he is strictly bound to what he must do and he is bound to adhere to what has been established. The role and the duty of the pope not to deviate from what has been established, but to make sure that all his subjects don't deviate from it."

[Julio]

^^Yes, I agree that we are not suppose to follow the bad pastor. That is what Jesus said. We have our deposit of faith and like what you stated the Law on Liturgy was established in 1570 by St. Pope Pius V. Just a side note, I highly admire this Saint for organizing the Holy League. Assuming that the statement of the authority perfectly fits to the form as it declares that it is a restoration of the original form and rite of the holy Fathers, it does not follow that the form of Missal prior to that which may not be in keeping with the original form is by itself heretic. Ergo, further changes on the basis of the authority emanating from the sit of St. Peter and the Second Ecumenical Council does not translate violation of the form of any missal due to the authority juxtaposition to the amendment that happened in 1570. Those missal in between the period where any possible changes were made from the time the rite was established by the holy Fathers until such time it was restored was not declared under the reign of St. Pope Pius V heretical. It has its own charism and the same value of adoration in the perspective of the truth of the teachings of the Catholic Church as established or made by Jesus.

Take note, when St. Pope Pius V, established that Law of the Liturgy, nothing is mentioned about declaration of wrongness or heretical description of the past rite that was changed by that. That being the case, his action was to restore the original rite. Were the holy Fathers were all saying the Mass in Latin? I say no, the Book of Acts is so clear that they spoke in several languages during the Pentecost:

"And suddenly there came from the sky a noise like a strong driving wind, and it filled the entire house in which they were. Then there appeared to them tongues as of fire, which parted and came to rest on each one of them. And they were all filled with the holy Spirit and began to speak in different tongues, as the Spirit enabled them to proclaim." Acts of the Apostles (2:2,3 and 4)

Again, I am saddened of dismissal of TLM by Pope Francis. TLM however is among the tradition but not the Tradition. The Bible itself did not state that Latin was the exclusive language spoken by those who evangelize the Words of God. The ultimate prayer and form of evangelization is the celebration of the Holy Mass. I say each of those Apostles of Jesus celebrated the Mass in different languages. Take note also that the Apostles themselves have disagreements in certain matters. They however were still unified under the sit of St. Peter as God made that.

I have no disagreement with you with not following pastors with bad doctrines. I do not agree that doctrinal matters like giving an opinion on who must receive Communion must be made as a pastoral issue the way Pope Francis explains that. I also do not agree that his power is limitless because he is not God. To think that way is pagan and is not Catholic. But he is still the Pope, and for whatever reason he is there, God knows why.

[Stubborn]

^^Yes, I agree that we are not suppose to follow the bad pastor.

This is what it pretty much boils down to.

[King Wenceslas]

Oh yeah. Things look very severe in the mainstream Roman Catholic Church today. It is only here that your sins are forgiven?
https://wdtprs.com/2022/07/a-unique-expression-of-the-lex-orandi-in-chicago/

And that's why we avoid all things NO always.

So the mainstream Catholic Church has defected? Or is it the one true Catholic Church where you can obtain forgiveness of your sins.

The visible Church you see today contains both the anti-church and the Church of God. Comingled together like the wheat and chaff in the field. They will be separated at harvest time. The chaff will then be thrown into the fire (hell) and the wheat will be stored away (into heaven).

Now is the time of the great test with Francis the Destroyer on the Chair of Peter.

Case in point:

Fourteen Republicans who voted in the U.S. House of Representatives to codify same-sex "marriage" via the so-called "Respect for Marriage Act" are Catholics, adding to the 89 total Catholics who voted for the bill.

The Tuesday vote by these GOP members, as well as the Democrat Catholics they have joined, defies the fundamental, dogmatic teaching of the Catholic Church that a marriage, by its definition, unites a man and a woman, and by its nature is ordered toward the procreation of offspring.

The gay "marriage" legislation would repeal the recognition of marriage as a man-woman union in federal law, federally recognize any "marriage" lawfully performed by any state, and force every state to recognize any "marriage" of any other state "between two individuals" without regard for "the sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin of those individuals."

These are the chaff, members of the anti-church led by Francis the Destroyer.

[Sgc909]

I heard that the SSPX has no such trouble with their exorcisms. Would be interested if somebody had more information about that.

I would be interested as well.

I have been attending church regularly with the SSPX for the past 2 years, and also have an interest in exorcism due to past experience with seeing someone become demonically possessed and many years of first-hand experience in an extremely haunted/infested house. Such experience is, in fact, why I became Catholic.

This led me to inquire about the involvement of the SSPX with exorcism. It's not a common question, so church members were a bit surprised I asked but willing to share, nevertheless.

The SSPX has their own bishops and structure within the Church. As a result, they are not under a Novus Ordo diocese. They also have their own seminaries which follow the traditional pre-Vatican II way of ordination. Thus, EVERY bishop, priest, deacon, sub-deacon, and acolyte is an ordained exorcist. They combine the ordination to acolyte and exorcist into one step. As they move up the ladder of ordination, the exorcist ordination remains with them.

As to what they can do with it, they all practice general spiritual warfare. The only solemn exorcism I know for a fact was done by the SSPX, was performed by the prior (head priest) of the local SSPX who (like diocesan exorcists) had to obtain permission first from higher up.

A long time member I spoke with said it must have been quickly effective because he returned 3.5 hours later saying it was done/complete. Anyone who follows Fr. Ripperger, Fr. Lampert or others like them knows that solemn exorcisms of severe cases through Novus Ordo channels are now taking 2 years or more.

As far as I'm concerned, this simple fact speaks louder to me of their legitimacy than any other argument in their defense (and there are many good ones). When I found out, I knew I was in the right place.