“If you could only see the other stuff that we won't show you, then you would know how the leaked stuff that we wouldn't show was not the whole story.”
"If you could only see the other stuff that we won't show you, then you would know how the leaked stuff that we wouldn't show was not the whole story.”
L.O.L.!!!!!!!! (really. I really did. :-)
This could be said of the whole Vatican II scam, from the very beginning. I was a little girl in third grade when Vatican II began. I was a freshman in high school when the "new mass" was officially promulgated. In all those years no one I knew...not a priest, not the nuns who taught at our school, not a single Catholi adult I knew opined that the Church was old fashioned and out of step with the "modern" world, nor did I hear them talking about others like bishops saying such things. All this was coming out of the very Leftist priests at Catholic universities at the time; a very, very small minority, but like the Leftists of today, with big, big megaphones.
Vatican II itself, and the almost everything that has come afterwards has been one big gaslighting scam. It's been going on for over 60 years. They got away with it before because the laity of the 1960s, not being college educated, were trained to trust them, the way, I expect, we would trust a St. Peter, or St. Paul. The Modernists that took over in the '60s used that trust to ram through apostasy. The problem for them now is that subsequent generations are better educated and can (and do) read and understand more complex documents, and raise relevant questions, and are not fooled or subdued by the Modernists' gaslighting answers. This is when they get heavy handed, and start issuing edicts based on Apostolic authority, which used to make Catholics fall in line, but which now falls flat, because we all know no one has to follow a heretic.
I am really hoping all this light starting to illuminate the antics and tactics of the last 60 years is Our Lord saying, 'Okay, enough. Now, what you have done in the dark will be brought to the light.' I really, really hope so.
Not really. We all knew — or should have known — Bergoglio was lying the day he released Custodes Traditionis. He already had a reputation for manipulating synods which all came out with the pre-ordained conclusions.
Agreed; the whole thing — meaning the attempted destruction of the Old Latin Mass as a capstone to the entire evil Bergoglian antipapacy — is indeed scandalous.
I wonder what percentage of subscribers here are convinced that the antipapacy actually began with John XXIII. I am, and I think there is more than enough evidence at novusordowatch.org/john-xxiii to persuade anyone for whom the truth is more important than the social or any other price required for accepting it.
The website has a wealth of other info hard to find elsewhere.
Have they no shame? Not a rhetorical question. Pope Bob is only one month on the throne. There’s no delegating this scandal to a congregation head or press secretary. It’s a steaming plopper on the Papal desk. In another week it will be maggoty. In a month it will be moldy. In a year it will be a disgusting permanent stain and the stink will have infested the carpets and walls.
The Vatican reacting like some pharmaceuticals company or polluter responsible for doing great harm to a trusting public. I guess it would be far beneath the present Discerner in Chief to appear before the press in person and make some equally evasive comment.
Prevost was still a bishop in 2020, right? I wonder if he answered the questionnaire ....
By contrast, they [Father Bux and Gaeta] note “the extremely low participation of South American dioceses” which “led the officials of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to suggest that this might be due to ‘the presence of the SSPX, since the fraternity is present in every country in South America, with a total of one major seminary, 10 priories, 61 chapels, and 8 schools.’ In fact, no response was received from Argentina, Chile, Ecuador, the Falkland Islands, Peru, or Venezuela,” it said.
Bp Williamson told we need conditional confirmation. Msgr Lefebvre told we need conditional confirmation. Bp Fellay told we don't need conditional confirmation.
When I decided to notice it became plain that there really is no 'resist' in the R&R. Recognise and Revise is what's going on. According to one sedevacantist Bishop the justifying 'doctrine' of R&R was made up by a priest at Econe out of thin air. "The erroneous position at Econe is that the infallible Universal Ordinary Magisterium is only such when the 'pope in moral unaimity with the bishops' is repeating that which was taught by his predecessors. Therefore, the 'pope in moral unaimity with the bishops' can universally prescribe evil beliefs and practices with authority apart from the UOM and thus fallibly teach error universally." Needless to say such a doctrine denies indefectability and Christ's promise.
The R.R. and Sedes positions can be understood from the situation of the occupied country:
In Hungary, the communists imprisoned and tortured the last legitimate Hungarian head of state, Cardinal Prince Primate Mindszenty. He was released in 1956, and then fled to the American embassy when the Soviets invaded. He did not leave the country because he could not do so as the last legitimate head of state. Finally, Paul VI (Vladimir Ilyich Paul) declared his seat vacant in accordance with the communists' request, lying that he had resigned as a justification. After this, not accepting the Vatican captivity, he fled to Vienna so that he could provide spiritual care to Hungarians who had emigrated from the communists all over the world.
In the occupied country, there are two options: emigrate or remain. Lefebvre wanted to remain in internal emigration, as internal resistance. This is what R.R. wants to express. "I will stay, I accept that they own the state organization, but I will tell the truth." From here there are two paths: either they will imprison me, or they will recruit me as an agent, a "priest of peace." Williamson and through him Lefebvre were betrayed like Mindszenty was betrayed by Paul VI. And the remnant SSPX chose the line of the "priest of peace", compromise with the revolution of V2.
The sedesvacantists are like emigrated dissidents: this is an occupied country, we will escape, we will declare that it is an occupied country, an ex lex state, and we will continue to live as refugees.
After all, both positions are emigration, and agents are organized in/from both groups. Lefebvre did not want to be outside, but John Paul II (who had previously reported to the communists about the Archbishop of Warsaw, according to Polish sources) betrayed him. In other words, if God had still kept him alive, he would most likely have declared that Sede vacante. After Assisi he was already inclined to do so, but I think he did not want to believe what he saw: that the entire priesthood was corrupted in the same way as at the time of Jesus’ incarnation, when only the one Saint John the Baptist was worthy of the Holy Spirit.
And all this leads to the realization that we are living in the end times: the new Israel has also lost its earthly kingdom. Let us seek sanctifying grace so that we can enter the kingdom of heaven. Let us seek valid priests, confession, Holy Mass. Let us pray the rosary, which represents our Christ, the prophet, priest and king.
It's an interesting analogy but the Body of Christ is supernatural with supernatural promises established by and in Eternal Truth. The reasoning of R&R is 'profane' in the sense that 'the pope' ends up being little more than a 'fetishised' prime minister in a cabinet of ministers for the governing of a community of properties and people that, like any government, can use its power for evil. This is not Christ's Church. Stones for bread, scorpions for eggs, serpents for fish cannot come from the Vicar of Christ and to insist from the pulpit that the congregations who are fed at the SSPX believe that the dispenser of stones, scorpions and serpents is the Vicar of Christ is objectively wicked. Kyrie eleison.
Archbishop Lefebvre stated in 1976 that the Conciliar church was a schismatic Church: it had its own theology, its own sacraments, and its own clergy, all distinct from the Catholic Church. He reiterated that position prior to the 1988 consecrations.
he went back and forth between sspx view, and sede view. Big problem. See Father Cekada's video on Lefrebve, Sedevacantist (Father Cekada did not say he was a sede, but he had statements on both sides)
Was Lefrbrve controlled opp? SSPX is our main enemy. They keep the great apostasy going with this diabolical idea you can call someone Pope and then NOT SUBMIT TO HIM, (THE ITEM IN CAPS IS AN EDIT , THANKS TO DJR)
SSPX have nicer churches, many more masses- the laity will be a heavy price. they are not Catholic
I accept these as Bishops, but not Catholic Bishops. I will not refer to them as Bishops as if I was dying and they offered me last rites, I would dismiss them and tell them to convert to Catholic Faith.
I HAVE NO IDEA WHY SEDES REFER TO SUCH HERETICS AS BISHOP
Many sedes refer to them as "bishop" in limited and specifically circumstances. For instance, I am very careful to refrain from calling the head of the local diocese "the diocesan bishop", because technically, the diocesan see is vacant, and is usurped by a Modernist heretic. I will instead say "diocesan ordinary". However, when speaking with those who honestly believe these men to be bishops, I will say "bishop so-and-so"...but only when doing so is essential to preventing a discussion that is out of place.
Matteo Bruni’s performance at the Let’s Duck Presser was truly repulsive. He’s the kind of guy you can tell is lying if his lips are moving. Hell, he should’ve been a cardinal .
The little dog and pony show — with the equally if not more repulsive Czerny, and that sleazy Franciscan archbishop Vittorio Play Me Like A Fiddle — does serve one purpose (although it was perfectly obvious from day one that Bergoglio was lying with Custodes Traditionis).
The Three Shills confirm the authenticity of the leak, based on the old Vatican saw:
“Believe nothing in the Vatican until it is officially denied.”
btw, when I first heard Francis wasn't Pope, I went whoa, thought about it deeply for a weekend maybe, and then heard - there are 2 Churches.'
When I finally absorbed and accepted it... IT EXPLAINED EVERYTHING. decades of what the *** is going on.... Brown Scapular and Rosary, I credit Our Lady of Sorrows
Yes indeed he was not the Pope. But I suggest that he was pope starting January 30th, 2023 when he was elected by a group of Catholic faithful by Apostolic Right. See below the proof:
From 12:30h of that day he benefited from the prayer of Jesus (Luke 22:32 But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers.” and from that day forward he was Catholic in his words and actions. His homily during his trip to Congo is an example.
And in December of thay same year he signed Fiducia Supplicans, basically rejecting the special graces he was receiving from Jesus's prayer for the pope. But even then the Holy Spirit acted through his church.
Firstly, a lightening bolt blew the keys and halo off the status of St Peter at the Virgen del Rosario shrine north of Buenos Aires where he had been Bishop for many hears.
An imperfect conclave. 2nd Prophecy that St Peter and St Paul will descend from Heaven and crown some one Pope (and I am sure they will get it right, male and Catholic. I am waiting for the v2 folks to elect a transgender or maybe Mr Ed)
3rd way- which is wrong, Thesis. It has so many errors, and no one ever answers my objections. and I have gone on MHTS site, youtube videos. Maybe I am too harsh, but the quetions are legit.
on these 3 - I am a nobody, with no formal Catholic training after 1st Grade. I cannot answer. Sorry. but there are some very intelligent Catholic Priests who can. Peace
The real scandal is that the bishops understood what Summorum Pontificum really was: a means of controlling the faithful into accepting the Conciliar hierarchy as legitimate when they had abandoned the True Faith. Vigneron admitted as such: SP pacified the faithful with allowing them to experience the smells and bells, but only within the confines of the council. By providing people with the TLM in a conciliar setting, they prevented them from hearing sound doctrine.
The "disappearing" of Sr Lucia & he replacement by a now proven impostor, sisterlucytruth.org, is an important part of the Great Apostasy Puzzle. She needed to be prevented from revealing the Third Secret of Fatima, which is not what the Vatican revealed as the "Third Secret" in 2000.
Few know that Pius XII had an unpublicized reading of the Third Secret of Fatima in 1957 with various prelates, one of them the American Cardinal Stritch, who indirectly told 2 priests 2 parts of it.
And that can only happen under a false pope, "the top," as Cardinal Mario Ciappi revealed. Cardinal Ciappi, who read the Third Secret of Fatima, said, "In the Third Secret it is revealed, among other things, that the Great Apostasy in the Church will begin at the top." (letter to Prof. Baumgartner, 1995) What is "the top" but the papacy?
"God is giving two last remedies to the world: the Holy Rosary and devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. And, being the last remedies...there will be no others." (Sr Lucia, 1957; last public words before being "disappeared" and replaced by an impostor) radtradthomist.chojnowski.me/2019/03/is-this-interview-that-caused-her.html
Liberals always call for tolerance until they have power then they reign with cruelty. What Francis did to Catholics who love the TM was cruel; what the Bishops have done at his behest makes them unworthy of the office.
Liberals always call for tolerance until they have power then they reign with cruelty. What Francis did to Catholics who love the TM was cruel; what the Bishops have done at his behest makes them unworthy of the office.
"If you could only see the other stuff that we won't show you, then you would know how the leaked stuff that we wouldn't show was not the whole story.”
L.O.L.!!!!!!!! (really. I really did. :-)
This could be said of the whole Vatican II scam, from the very beginning. I was a little girl in third grade when Vatican II began. I was a freshman in high school when the "new mass" was officially promulgated. In all those years no one I knew...not a priest, not the nuns who taught at our school, not a single Catholi adult I knew opined that the Church was old fashioned and out of step with the "modern" world, nor did I hear them talking about others like bishops saying such things. All this was coming out of the very Leftist priests at Catholic universities at the time; a very, very small minority, but like the Leftists of today, with big, big megaphones.
Vatican II itself, and the almost everything that has come afterwards has been one big gaslighting scam. It's been going on for over 60 years. They got away with it before because the laity of the 1960s, not being college educated, were trained to trust them, the way, I expect, we would trust a St. Peter, or St. Paul. The Modernists that took over in the '60s used that trust to ram through apostasy. The problem for them now is that subsequent generations are better educated and can (and do) read and understand more complex documents, and raise relevant questions, and are not fooled or subdued by the Modernists' gaslighting answers. This is when they get heavy handed, and start issuing edicts based on Apostolic authority, which used to make Catholics fall in line, but which now falls flat, because we all know no one has to follow a heretic.
I am really hoping all this light starting to illuminate the antics and tactics of the last 60 years is Our Lord saying, 'Okay, enough. Now, what you have done in the dark will be brought to the light.' I really, really hope so.
This is truly scandalous! Thank you for an excellent article!
Not really. We all knew — or should have known — Bergoglio was lying the day he released Custodes Traditionis. He already had a reputation for manipulating synods which all came out with the pre-ordained conclusions.
You’re right, we did know it. But it is still scandalous.
Agreed; the whole thing — meaning the attempted destruction of the Old Latin Mass as a capstone to the entire evil Bergoglian antipapacy — is indeed scandalous.
I wonder what percentage of subscribers here are convinced that the antipapacy actually began with John XXIII. I am, and I think there is more than enough evidence at novusordowatch.org/john-xxiii to persuade anyone for whom the truth is more important than the social or any other price required for accepting it.
The website has a wealth of other info hard to find elsewhere.
The post conciliar church is a counterfeit church. When most laity realize this the church will start healing.
Yes, we knew it, but now we have documented proof.
Have they no shame? Not a rhetorical question. Pope Bob is only one month on the throne. There’s no delegating this scandal to a congregation head or press secretary. It’s a steaming plopper on the Papal desk. In another week it will be maggoty. In a month it will be moldy. In a year it will be a disgusting permanent stain and the stink will have infested the carpets and walls.
“Have they no shame.” My friend, if that’s not a rhetorical question the only response is —
lol
The Vatican reacting like some pharmaceuticals company or polluter responsible for doing great harm to a trusting public. I guess it would be far beneath the present Discerner in Chief to appear before the press in person and make some equally evasive comment.
Prevost was still a bishop in 2020, right? I wonder if he answered the questionnaire ....
https://dianemontagna.substack.com/p/traditionis-custodes-new-book-supports
By contrast, they [Father Bux and Gaeta] note “the extremely low participation of South American dioceses” which “led the officials of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to suggest that this might be due to ‘the presence of the SSPX, since the fraternity is present in every country in South America, with a total of one major seminary, 10 priories, 61 chapels, and 8 schools.’ In fact, no response was received from Argentina, Chile, Ecuador, the Falkland Islands, Peru, or Venezuela,” it said.
Leo must make good on this or lose all credibility.
The SSPX has been screaming, uh, well, nothing.
sspx priest told me I did not need conditional confirmation. My sede Priest said I did, and got Bishop DANIEL Dolan to confirm me (not timmie boy)
A
Bp Williamson told we need conditional confirmation. Msgr Lefebvre told we need conditional confirmation. Bp Fellay told we don't need conditional confirmation.
When I decided to notice it became plain that there really is no 'resist' in the R&R. Recognise and Revise is what's going on. According to one sedevacantist Bishop the justifying 'doctrine' of R&R was made up by a priest at Econe out of thin air. "The erroneous position at Econe is that the infallible Universal Ordinary Magisterium is only such when the 'pope in moral unaimity with the bishops' is repeating that which was taught by his predecessors. Therefore, the 'pope in moral unaimity with the bishops' can universally prescribe evil beliefs and practices with authority apart from the UOM and thus fallibly teach error universally." Needless to say such a doctrine denies indefectability and Christ's promise.
The R.R. and Sedes positions can be understood from the situation of the occupied country:
In Hungary, the communists imprisoned and tortured the last legitimate Hungarian head of state, Cardinal Prince Primate Mindszenty. He was released in 1956, and then fled to the American embassy when the Soviets invaded. He did not leave the country because he could not do so as the last legitimate head of state. Finally, Paul VI (Vladimir Ilyich Paul) declared his seat vacant in accordance with the communists' request, lying that he had resigned as a justification. After this, not accepting the Vatican captivity, he fled to Vienna so that he could provide spiritual care to Hungarians who had emigrated from the communists all over the world.
In the occupied country, there are two options: emigrate or remain. Lefebvre wanted to remain in internal emigration, as internal resistance. This is what R.R. wants to express. "I will stay, I accept that they own the state organization, but I will tell the truth." From here there are two paths: either they will imprison me, or they will recruit me as an agent, a "priest of peace." Williamson and through him Lefebvre were betrayed like Mindszenty was betrayed by Paul VI. And the remnant SSPX chose the line of the "priest of peace", compromise with the revolution of V2.
The sedesvacantists are like emigrated dissidents: this is an occupied country, we will escape, we will declare that it is an occupied country, an ex lex state, and we will continue to live as refugees.
After all, both positions are emigration, and agents are organized in/from both groups. Lefebvre did not want to be outside, but John Paul II (who had previously reported to the communists about the Archbishop of Warsaw, according to Polish sources) betrayed him. In other words, if God had still kept him alive, he would most likely have declared that Sede vacante. After Assisi he was already inclined to do so, but I think he did not want to believe what he saw: that the entire priesthood was corrupted in the same way as at the time of Jesus’ incarnation, when only the one Saint John the Baptist was worthy of the Holy Spirit.
And all this leads to the realization that we are living in the end times: the new Israel has also lost its earthly kingdom. Let us seek sanctifying grace so that we can enter the kingdom of heaven. Let us seek valid priests, confession, Holy Mass. Let us pray the rosary, which represents our Christ, the prophet, priest and king.
It's an interesting analogy but the Body of Christ is supernatural with supernatural promises established by and in Eternal Truth. The reasoning of R&R is 'profane' in the sense that 'the pope' ends up being little more than a 'fetishised' prime minister in a cabinet of ministers for the governing of a community of properties and people that, like any government, can use its power for evil. This is not Christ's Church. Stones for bread, scorpions for eggs, serpents for fish cannot come from the Vicar of Christ and to insist from the pulpit that the congregations who are fed at the SSPX believe that the dispenser of stones, scorpions and serpents is the Vicar of Christ is objectively wicked. Kyrie eleison.
this would do well in a political class, maybe.... but no way to discuss a theological issue.
There is Catholic teaching on who can become a Pope.
There is Catholic teaching on what we should do if a non Pope is elected- reject him fully
There is Catholic teaching on what you owe someone if you accept him as Pope.
SSPX strickes out on all 3.
Sedes follow Catholic teaching on all 3.
your going into a historical situation- shows you maybe don't want to look at Catholic teaching?
Archbishop Lefebvre stated in 1976 that the Conciliar church was a schismatic Church: it had its own theology, its own sacraments, and its own clergy, all distinct from the Catholic Church. He reiterated that position prior to the 1988 consecrations.
he went back and forth between sspx view, and sede view. Big problem. See Father Cekada's video on Lefrebve, Sedevacantist (Father Cekada did not say he was a sede, but he had statements on both sides)
Was Lefrbrve controlled opp? SSPX is our main enemy. They keep the great apostasy going with this diabolical idea you can call someone Pope and then NOT SUBMIT TO HIM, (THE ITEM IN CAPS IS AN EDIT , THANKS TO DJR)
SSPX have nicer churches, many more masses- the laity will be a heavy price. they are not Catholic
I accept these as Bishops, but not Catholic Bishops. I will not refer to them as Bishops as if I was dying and they offered me last rites, I would dismiss them and tell them to convert to Catholic Faith.
I HAVE NO IDEA WHY SEDES REFER TO SUCH HERETICS AS BISHOP
Many sedes refer to them as "bishop" in limited and specifically circumstances. For instance, I am very careful to refrain from calling the head of the local diocese "the diocesan bishop", because technically, the diocesan see is vacant, and is usurped by a Modernist heretic. I will instead say "diocesan ordinary". However, when speaking with those who honestly believe these men to be bishops, I will say "bishop so-and-so"...but only when doing so is essential to preventing a discussion that is out of place.
the sspx is not Catholic. to be fair - the date of the confirmation should be stated. Mine was May/ June 73.
So a v2 confrimation of 1980 would need to be redone.
one in 1967 - it would be the correct rite... I don't know about if it counts if a Vatican II herretic does it. beyond me
Where’s the Catholic outrage? Where’s the call for a FULL investigation? What’s next ?
https://ordodei.net/2025/07/02/the-catholic-burden-in-an-age-of-infidelity-by-fr-hansen/
Matteo Bruni’s performance at the Let’s Duck Presser was truly repulsive. He’s the kind of guy you can tell is lying if his lips are moving. Hell, he should’ve been a cardinal .
The little dog and pony show — with the equally if not more repulsive Czerny, and that sleazy Franciscan archbishop Vittorio Play Me Like A Fiddle — does serve one purpose (although it was perfectly obvious from day one that Bergoglio was lying with Custodes Traditionis).
The Three Shills confirm the authenticity of the leak, based on the old Vatican saw:
“Believe nothing in the Vatican until it is officially denied.”
btw, when I first heard Francis wasn't Pope, I went whoa, thought about it deeply for a weekend maybe, and then heard - there are 2 Churches.'
When I finally absorbed and accepted it... IT EXPLAINED EVERYTHING. decades of what the *** is going on.... Brown Scapular and Rosary, I credit Our Lady of Sorrows
Bp Pivarunas gave a 30 minute talk that refutes the objections to the sedevacantist conclusion.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vSkwPiqyv-k&list=PLND6aDj870JwIxsg3Kf8fDFNryBHxlB3P&index=27&pp=iAQB
Yes indeed he was not the Pope. But I suggest that he was pope starting January 30th, 2023 when he was elected by a group of Catholic faithful by Apostolic Right. See below the proof:
https://www.fromrome.info/2024/01/29/first-anniversary-of-the-election-of-pope-francis/
From 12:30h of that day he benefited from the prayer of Jesus (Luke 22:32 But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers.” and from that day forward he was Catholic in his words and actions. His homily during his trip to Congo is an example.
https://www.fromrome.info/2023/02/01/pope-francis-homily-at-ndolo-airport-feb-1-2023/
https://www.fromrome.info/2023/02/01/pope-francis-confessed-that-god-gives-everyone-the-chance-to-start-anew/
https://www.fromrome.info/2023/02/04/congo-pope-exhorts-bishops-to-give-forgiveness-when-forgiveness-is-sought/
Here are a few more:
https://www.fromrome.info/2023/02/17/feb-2-2023-pope-francis-says-petrine-ministry-is-for-life/
https://www.fromrome.info/2023/02/20/pope-francis-human-augmentation-compresses-not-elevates-man/
https://www.fromrome.info/2023/02/20/pope-francis-addresses-the-circle-of-st-peter-feb-20-2023-a-d/
https://www.fromrome.info/2023/02/28/efficacy-of-the-prayer-of-the-high-priest-jesus-christ-report-week-4-of-pope-francis-pontificate/
https://www.fromrome.info/2023/03/24/vatican-pope-francis-calls-for-restoration-of-perpetual-onsite-confessors/
Then in July of 2023 he was visited by Bill Clinton and Alex Soros.
https://www.fromrome.info/2023/07/06/vatican-in-secret-pope-francis-meets-with-bill-clinton-alex-soros/
And in December of thay same year he signed Fiducia Supplicans, basically rejecting the special graces he was receiving from Jesus's prayer for the pope. But even then the Holy Spirit acted through his church.
Firstly, a lightening bolt blew the keys and halo off the status of St Peter at the Virgen del Rosario shrine north of Buenos Aires where he had been Bishop for many hears.
https://www.fromrome.info/2023/12/31/exclusive-photo-of-struck-st-peters-statue-national-shrine-of-st-nicholas-argentina/
Secondly, there was a great reaction against FS from many Bishops and laity, something that had not been seen when Amoris Laetitia was published.
https://www.fromrome.info/2023/12/23/the-advent-miracle-of-2023-brought-to-you-by-the-holy-spirit-faithful-catholics/
Finally, God removed his life giving force from Pope Francis and his health declined until he died in April 2025.
https://www.fromrome.info/2025/03/27/jesus-christ-has-now-checkmated-pope-francis/
this "election" was / is considered a joke by sedevacantism . who in general terms are only Catholics left
So in your view, could there ever be a legitimate pope? If so how?
There are 3 ways that Father Cekada cited:
An imperfect conclave. 2nd Prophecy that St Peter and St Paul will descend from Heaven and crown some one Pope (and I am sure they will get it right, male and Catholic. I am waiting for the v2 folks to elect a transgender or maybe Mr Ed)
3rd way- which is wrong, Thesis. It has so many errors, and no one ever answers my objections. and I have gone on MHTS site, youtube videos. Maybe I am too harsh, but the quetions are legit.
Bad sign when questions are ignored
Apart from option 2, what papal laws support these alternatives?
on these 3 - I am a nobody, with no formal Catholic training after 1st Grade. I cannot answer. Sorry. but there are some very intelligent Catholic Priests who can. Peace
If v2 folks elected a Catholic, a sede clergy - could we even accept him? it's a different darn church
This is not just about the Church's memory, identity, and continuity. It's about sanctifying grace and the salvation of souls.
Let none forget that Bergoglio denied sanctifying Grace. That was the chief apostasy in Amoralis Laetitia.
The VatiTweedledee “church” is a lie from the moment it was put on foot by Montini.
The real scandal is that the bishops understood what Summorum Pontificum really was: a means of controlling the faithful into accepting the Conciliar hierarchy as legitimate when they had abandoned the True Faith. Vigneron admitted as such: SP pacified the faithful with allowing them to experience the smells and bells, but only within the confines of the council. By providing people with the TLM in a conciliar setting, they prevented them from hearing sound doctrine.
Catholics that submit to non Catholics: 1. get what they deserve and 2. soon won't be Catholic (catch 22 of heresy or schism)*
* I am investigating deeper into 2nd statement....
About Sister Lucy…
The "disappearing" of Sr Lucia & he replacement by a now proven impostor, sisterlucytruth.org, is an important part of the Great Apostasy Puzzle. She needed to be prevented from revealing the Third Secret of Fatima, which is not what the Vatican revealed as the "Third Secret" in 2000.
Few know that Pius XII had an unpublicized reading of the Third Secret of Fatima in 1957 with various prelates, one of them the American Cardinal Stritch, who indirectly told 2 priests 2 parts of it.
youtube.com/watch?v=nO-8UhGOagg&t=4s (3 min, 40 sec; the YT channel has more little known info)
Part of that coincides with what Benedict XVI when cardinal credibly revealed to Fr Dollinger, a close friend of his, that the Third Secret of Fatima included the foretelling of "a bad council and a bad mass": onepeterfive.com/cardinal-ratzinger-not-published-whole-third-secret-fatima
And that can only happen under a false pope, "the top," as Cardinal Mario Ciappi revealed. Cardinal Ciappi, who read the Third Secret of Fatima, said, "In the Third Secret it is revealed, among other things, that the Great Apostasy in the Church will begin at the top." (letter to Prof. Baumgartner, 1995) What is "the top" but the papacy?
"God is giving two last remedies to the world: the Holy Rosary and devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. And, being the last remedies...there will be no others." (Sr Lucia, 1957; last public words before being "disappeared" and replaced by an impostor) radtradthomist.chojnowski.me/2019/03/is-this-interview-that-caused-her.html
Liberals always call for tolerance until they have power then they reign with cruelty. What Francis did to Catholics who love the TM was cruel; what the Bishops have done at his behest makes them unworthy of the office.
Liberals always call for tolerance until they have power then they reign with cruelty. What Francis did to Catholics who love the TM was cruel; what the Bishops have done at his behest makes them unworthy of the office.