|
Post by Nightowl on Jul 20, 2018 12:21:48 GMT
How many times do I have to ask, why doesn't fr. Pfeiffer Leave Williamson alone and utilize Moran, who fr. Pfeiffer adamantly finds legitimate?
Nightowl, we see the colors of your feathers. Appears you are only interesting in your own answers. First, regarding your above question, it was already answered here thecatacombs.org/post/2222/thread
Second, seeking Bishop A, B, or C is not a personal thing. Bishop Williamson denying service in a time of necessity, as we said multiple times, is what is wrong. Seems you are comfortable to have a hodge-podge Church just being a matter of getting along while omitting the supremacy of Her doctrine. Who is really the victim here? Christ.
Wouldn't it dawn on you as a catholic, if you are, to ask that basic question about doctrine. And you are fine for a bishop to dismiss catholic priests requests for no reason at all except I do not want to? That doesn't disturb you?
Your above statement highlights your intention loud and clear. You only wish OLMC to go away and obscurely throw a bone to them as to go after another 'personality' bishop ambrose. But to rid yourself in conscience the struggle the Holy Spirit convicts the false resistance with, does not go away. And, we are not going away. The complacency of the false resistance is seen to be quite happy; we know that. Well, we are not happy doing less and make a religion out of it. Catholicism has order. Something of which the false resistance threw away. So I can understand why you say what you do. Religion becomes personal for those who walk without the yoke of Christ.
It doesn't matter if b. Williamsons choice disturbs me or not. He has made his choice, several times, and there is nothing to do about it but pray for him. I dont think badgering him and chastising him on the internet will help. Your assumptions are false. My point is that fr. Pfeiffer has a bishop he believes to be legitimate who IS WILLING to work with him. Why not utilize his services? Being "closer to home" in beliefs doesn't cut it for me because it seems to me, with all the things b. Williamson has said, he and fr. Pfeiffer are miles apart in beliefs.
|
|
|
Post by Nightowl on Jul 20, 2018 12:24:06 GMT
I believe when the time is right God will send a bishop. God created heaven and earth if He wanted OLMC to have a bishop right now there would be one, there is nothing He can't do, but I think sometimes we forget that. He knows what He is doing and He has provided OLMC with everything they've needed so far. Perhaps He already did?
|
|
|
Post by Nightowl on Jul 20, 2018 12:25:30 GMT
Which adds to the next observation - These false bishops said they were going to "Crush" OLMC. How could that be possible for catholic bishops to do such an evil thing? The word 'crush' was used as a verb. An action! What more effectiveness can a bishop do to stop priests from growing the Church in Her missions? Answer - Not to provide the treasures and service of the Church to them.
This is what Bishop Fellay had done stopping the Avrille Dominicans and Capuchins in 2012 and 2014. These defunct sspx bishops are using the sacraments as weapons. The same is happening in violent mentality in the persons of the other four false resistance bishops.
Just ask yourself the question again. How can a catholic bishop do such an evil thing against Christ? Starting to see a demonic tree?
St John said "Every spirit that dissolveth Jesus, is not of God". (1 John 4) Dissolveth His Church, is not of God!
EVERY group has done the same. I am not saying it is right, just that it is done.
|
|
|
Post by Nightowl on Jul 20, 2018 12:30:48 GMT
Same answer. Which of the bishops is closer to the nature of the Church.
It was already noted what is Bishop Williamson's position. What of Bishop Ambrose?
Validity - They both are valid bishops and have apostolicity. BW in the Roman rite and BA in the Catholic Ukraine rite. ambrosemoran.wordpress.com/
Doctrine - Present 2018, Bishop Williamson is in the Roman rite where Bishop Ambrose is bi-ritual both Catholic Ukraine rite and Roman rite. Bishop Williamson professed the true religion and now mixes the evil new religion. Bishop Ambrose professed the true religion through the Ukraine rite and roman rite [1]. Bishop Ambrose was baptized Catholic, received his priesthood in the Catholic faith, and at some point left the Catholic faith to the Orthodox religion promoted through ecumenism of the new church he was in. Placing more than a defect but an apostation to the Catholic faith, he later rejected Orthodoxy and converted back to Catholicism. We know he made a confession during that time, and publicly made a Catholic profession of faith with other norms provided in the Church before others and us years ago. Bishop Williamson states he is traditional while acting against the Church destroying her order and structure. Bishop Ambrose states he is now traditional through the books of Archbishop Lefebvre and coming to know the old sspx, and for what we know, acts in desire to build the Church.
Political - We know Bishop Williamson rejects the mission to convert nations [2]. Bishop Ambrose was willing to work more to do so but was attacked by socialist Catholics not to. (The socialist catholics i.e. the false resistance.)
Social - in the same manner. BW seeks to destroy the social family structure and its order to replace it with the religion of man [3]. Bishop Ambrose sought to help build that order in our dilemma, but again was attacked by the Catholic left.
Moral - BW cannot pursue Holiness with the grave sin upon him rejecting to serve the Church and her needs in this crisis. Bishop Ambrose I do not know enough of him in this area other than wishing to keep the Four Marks of the Church facilitating his service to build the Church.
What does it mean? At this point in 2018, Bishop Williamson and his three other bishops maintain doctrinal error and compliance to BW obstinance to draw closer to the nature of the Church. In comparison where Bishop Ambrose having both validity and doctrine is closer in its degree.
_____________________________________________
[1] Though with one dimension and difficult to understand for the west roman rite, the Ukraine rite accepts married priests which Bishop Ambrose being a part of also accepts.
[3] Idem.
Machabees, I highlighted in red the statement of interest. This is the first time I am hearing you state that Ambrose Moran joined the Orthodox religion. I am impressed. However, the Kentucky Fathers do not hold this position. They hold that Ambrose Moran was always Catholic. Now if he left the Catholic Church and became Orthodox, he should have renounced his Orthodoxy in front of the Kentucky Fathers during his profession of Faith. He did not do that. Therefore, you too should be concerned about this. I hope you are not serious. EM. Fr. Pfeiffer believes Moran to be legitimate. I think most of the rest of the world does not. For this reason, and this reason alone is why fr. Pfeiffer doesn't use Moran.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2018 13:21:44 GMT
Machabees, I highlighted in red the statement of interest. This is the first time I am hearing you state that Ambrose Moran joined the Orthodox religion. I am impressed. However, the Kentucky Fathers do not hold this position. They hold that Ambrose Moran was always Catholic. Now if he left the Catholic Church and became Orthodox, he should have renounced his Orthodoxy in front of the Kentucky Fathers during his profession of Faith. He did not do that. Therefore, you too should be concerned about this. I hope you are not serious. EM. Fr. Pfeiffer believes Moran to be legitimate. I think most of the rest of the world does not. For this reason, and this reason alone is why fr. Pfeiffer doesn't use Moran. What statement did I make in my above post that you don't agree with?
|
|
|
Post by Nightowl on Jul 20, 2018 13:53:33 GMT
I hope you are not serious. EM. Fr. Pfeiffer believes Moran to be legitimate. I think most of the rest of the world does not. For this reason, and this reason alone is why fr. Pfeiffer doesn't use Moran. What statement did I make in my above post that you don't agree with? You imply that all Moran has to do to be accepted to the world is to make a profession of Faith. If his ordination and consecrations are legitimate, then they are. If they are not, Then they are not. A profession of Faith will not change an illegitimate ordination/consecration to a legitimate one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2018 14:00:37 GMT
What statement did I make in my above post that you don't agree with? You imply that all Moran has to do to be accepted to the world is to make a profession of Faith. If his ordination and consecrations are legitimate, then they are. If they are not, Then they are not. A profession of Faith will not change an illegitimate ordination/consecration to a legitimate one. No. I did not mean to imply that. I was looking at it from Machabees' perspective. He accepts Ambrose Moran as a true Catholic bishop, but at the same time he acknowledges that Ambrose Moran left the Catholic Church for the Orthodox sect. Machabees should have a problem that Ambrose Moran did not renounce his schismatic past in front of the Kentucky Fathers.
|
|
|
Post by Nightowl on Jul 20, 2018 14:08:34 GMT
You imply that all Moran has to do to be accepted to the world is to make a profession of Faith. If his ordination and consecrations are legitimate, then they are. If they are not, Then they are not. A profession of Faith will not change an illegitimate ordination/consecration to a legitimate one. No. I did not mean to imply that. I was looking at it from Machabees' perspective. He accepts Ambrose Moran as a true Catholic bishop, but at the same time he acknowledges that Ambrose Moran left the Catholic Church for the Orthodox sect. Machabees should have a problem that Ambrose Moran did not renounce his schismatic past in front of the Kentucky Fathers. I see. yes, he should. And he should also have a problem with Moran's legitimacy, as most of the rest of the world does, unless macabees is just a mouthpiece for fr. Pfeiffer...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2018 15:59:10 GMT
Same answer. Which of the bishops is closer to the nature of the Church.
It was already noted what is Bishop Williamson's position. What of Bishop Ambrose?
Validity - They both are valid bishops and have apostolicity. BW in the Roman rite and BA in the Catholic Ukraine rite. ambrosemoran.wordpress.com/
Doctrine - Present 2018, Bishop Williamson is in the Roman rite where Bishop Ambrose is bi-ritual both Catholic Ukraine rite and Roman rite. Bishop Williamson professed the true religion and now mixes the evil new religion. Bishop Ambrose professed the true religion through the Ukraine rite and roman rite [1]. Bishop Ambrose was baptized Catholic, received his priesthood in the Catholic faith, and at some point left the Catholic faith to the Orthodox religion promoted through ecumenism of the new church he was in. Placing more than a defect but an apostation to the Catholic faith, he later rejected Orthodoxy and converted back to Catholicism. We know he made a confession during that time, and publicly made a Catholic profession of faith with other norms provided in the Church before others and us years ago. Bishop Williamson states he is traditional while acting against the Church destroying her order and structure. Bishop Ambrose states he is now traditional through the books of Archbishop Lefebvre and coming to know the old sspx, and for what we know, acts in desire to build the Church.
Political - We know Bishop Williamson rejects the mission to convert nations [2]. Bishop Ambrose was willing to work more to do so but was attacked by socialist Catholics not to. (The socialist catholics i.e. the false resistance.)
Social - in the same manner. BW seeks to destroy the social family structure and its order to replace it with the religion of man [3]. Bishop Ambrose sought to help build that order in our dilemma, but again was attacked by the Catholic left.
Moral - BW cannot pursue Holiness with the grave sin upon him rejecting to serve the Church and her needs in this crisis. Bishop Ambrose I do not know enough of him in this area other than wishing to keep the Four Marks of the Church facilitating his service to build the Church.
What does it mean? At this point in 2018, Bishop Williamson and his three other bishops maintain doctrinal error and compliance to BW obstinance to draw closer to the nature of the Church. In comparison where Bishop Ambrose having both validity and doctrine is closer in its degree.
_____________________________________________
[1] Though with one dimension and difficult to understand for the west roman rite, the Ukraine rite accepts married priests which Bishop Ambrose being a part of also accepts.
[3] Idem.
Machabees, I highlighted in red the statement of interest. This is the first time I am hearing you state that Ambrose Moran joined the Orthodox religion. I am impressed. However, the Kentucky Fathers do not hold this position. They hold that Ambrose Moran was always Catholic. Now if he left the Catholic Church and became Orthodox, he should have renounced his Orthodoxy in front of the Kentucky Fathers during his profession of Faith. He did not do that. Therefore, you too should be concerned about this.
EM, I have said this many times over the years during the investigation. You can go back to all the other forums and see it. The information comes from you NOT the fathers. If the fathers have a different knowledge today, and I will add, if I misunderstood, then I will retract what I wrote and say here - THE ALLEGATION THAT BISHOP AMBROSE DEFECTED TO THE ORTHODOX RELIGION.
At the end of the day we all have to accept the outcome of the FULL investigation that did not just happen in one's mind for a period you think, but from those priests under God and the pain of eternal damnation had to make in the evidences and circumstances providence provided.
So if I or anyone had to make a choice of where is the credible source and outcome of an objective finding is, is with the CHURCH in her priests who are tasked with a true canonical ecclesiastical investigation (yet should have been through the bishops but they refused, wonder why?).
What needs to be understood from a practicing catholic, these priests are putting their salvation before God, laymen do not, yet are held accountable for what they say, but laymen choose to have a thousand public OPINIONS and biases to thwart the Church we see prevalent today. Many people get personal when they are not believed they are dogmatically right. Why, what is the motive?
I will stick with the Church and her ministers who have the grave responsibility before God; in which I have no privy to the Ecclesiastical investigation. The is no different when priests ecclesiastically look into a marriage or other, the public has no right to impede or obstruct; only help in the spirit of the Church and provide anything they may objectively believe will assist. But today there is an agenda from socialist Catholics who think the Church is democratic and must include their opinions as fact judgement and law.
If one believes strongly on something, on any subject, where is the spirit of propriety and submission to the Church? Regarding the SSPX-mc priests, I get it, it is to discredit them in every breath they live so to prop up saint opinion and bias brother because there is the new majority personal religion out there we must conform to or be martyred.
What would be disgusting for a practicing catholic is to negate another Catholic's baptism to foster a branded opinion to set an agenda. Fr. Chazal does this and his new socialist friends who do the same. But I get that too. Since Bishop Ambrose is a valid Catholic proved with a baptismal certificate the fathers had seen in their investigation from its origin no less, it crashes the mantra bishop ambrose is an orthodox. The catechism is in order. Once you are baptized a catholic you are ALWAYS a catholic regardless where you go, profess other, or what others think in view of the world.
Whether Bishop Ambrose defected to orthodoxy or not means nothing in the objective order of the Church. I would have been a sin and a grave sin for that individual who only exists thereafter for the mercy of God and return to him. And whether he was allegedly consecrated a bishop in the Orthodox religion would make it a CATHOLIC consecration by the valid orders of the Orthodox church. Thus it would be a valid consecration because he is a baptized catholic but illegally done in the Church.
Further, I know as a fact, which the fathers have said many times in sermons and conferences, only wanting to be thrown off and denied by the detractors, that Bishop Ambrose had made every canonical form before the fathers: a profession of the Catholic faith, including the denouncing and rejection of any and all other religions, making claim holding Jesus Christ and His Catholic Church as the supremacy and source of salvation... These are Ecclesiastical norms. But laymen WANT it to be different to serve their bias agendas. I get it.
So what is the motive of these socialist catholics, as with these few guests on this forum in the past few days? Clearly and audibly is to hail their trad-ecumenist idol Bishop Williamson as the ONLY bishop in the world we MUST submit too and follow. (sic) So the whole of the universality of the Catholic Church is succumb to one valid bishop and any other valid bishops in the membership of Christ's Church in present time is not. (sic) Like God cannot convert the pope back or another valid bishop to help his Church? It has to be an errant BW or nothing? Why such a narrow view of God and His Church? That would be a cult mentality if I ever heard of one. The same goes for an inordinate worship of Archbishop Lefebvre. He would rebuke anyone who thought the same of him. He is only a real Catholic Bishop who was a transparent window for others to see God not to be an obstacle as others bishops in the world are doing.
Again, when can we have a conversation about the rights of God and His order than all this man perceived stuff claiming their own rights. Where is the critical thinking in submission to and for Christ the King?
The saints and angels can only look down and shake their heads seeing stubborn Catholics effectively setting agendas trying to trip up other people in their snare putting their own salvation in jeopardy.
No, God is God and it is his Church to purify from these wayward thoughts and inordinate sins of those in his own house. That is what this crisis, and all other crises are all about, purification and sanctification. Will we have humility to his order and omnipotence to listen?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2018 16:35:39 GMT
Machabees,
That the Fathers believe that Ambrose Moran was always Catholic is not my invention. I had direct contact with the Fathers in this regard. I challenge you to show me one piece of public evidence that shows that the Fathers believe that Ambrose Moran defected from the Catholic religion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2018 17:07:06 GMT
Adding to,
My understanding given through the Church and the canonical provisions in a State of necessity taught ( here and here) on the pulpits of the SSPX for many years is there is a difference between the State of necessity and a State of emergency. That is what this topic is conveying discussing the mission and nature of the Church.
The State of necessity is what we have been living through for 60 years with no relief or recourse from the prevailing Churchmen committing their sin Heaven said would happen. It is a provision through Canon law making know "The highest law in the Church is for the salvation of souls" to provide the natural right of Catholics with every means necessary to help them in graces and treasures of the Church for their salvation not to be blocked by errant stewards.
Meaning, if the normal routes to receive the graces of Redemption are block, a catholic has the right and obligation to go around them to receive those graces.
The State of Emergency by way of an example is one who is dying on the side of a road and want/need the sacraments, the Church allows in these cases souls can receive them so called [illegally] but validly through a passing errant priest, immoral priest, heretic priest, or other who have valid orders even though they may be in an illegal state with the Church.
Meaning, there is a present crisis in the Catholic Church making a State of necessity we already know giving rise to the Catholic resistance in Tradition necessitating Archbishop Lefebvre to do what he did outside the normal means of the Church to acquire and protect the mission and nature of the Church to continue; even though some did not understand and left, he said he had to do it for the continuance of the Church. Time passed still in this crisis another crisis formed to where his own priests and four bishops succumbed to modernism when they were trained to detect and fight, had fallen too. Which gave rise again to another State of necessity in extension. As such, the Catholic resistance continued to fight now under another burden and crisis to where one of the sspx bishops (Bishop Williamson) was unjustly and illegally removed by the sspx superiors to effect their deal with the modernist, and said he would help. Time passed and he too showed in his writings and conference a pertinacity to open the door to modernism making another crisis and State of necessity... Regardless of the layers of purification God is allowing, the Catholic Resistance continues. But in what condition, what ailments, what injury?
Here now is the question.
The Catholic Resistance is now on the side of the road thrown out and trodded by their own selfish churchmen like the injured in the story of the Good Samaritan. The injured person, us, called out for help to the churchmen and they walked away uninterested, we called out to the next passersby sspx, and they too walked away not to be bothered having things to do, then we called out to the next passersby the bishops in the 'resistance' and they too walked away laughing. The injured, us, are dying for the graces of Redemption. Who will help? Our Lord sent a Samaritan. One who is scorned and outcast by the elite pharisees who walked by. The injured was/is now in a State of emergency about to die and needing to receive the sacraments to continue the mission and nature of the Church. God does know and who is he preparing OUTSIDE the thoughts of men as He did with the Good Samaritan. Time will come. God provides for those who love him.
We are in a State of emergency put on us by the errant churchmen who only laugh at us. But God has the last laugh. He will not be mocked or obstructed to provide for His Church.
This is the situation we are in now. We are in a State of Emergency and only will get deeper if God allows to go through to a physical catacomb and blood of martyrdom coming by the hands or sinful priests and bishops making the sacrifice of us in blood to God to give us who are faithful the crown and they their punishment.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2018 17:21:10 GMT
Machabees, That the Fathers believe that Ambrose Moran was always Catholic is not my invention. I had direct contact with the Fathers in this regard. I challenge you to show me one piece of public evidence that shows that the Fathers believe that Ambrose Moran defected from the Catholic religion. Did you not read. If the fathers have a different knowledge today, and I will add, if I misunderstood, then I will retract what I wrote and say here - THE ALLEGATION THAT BISHOP AMBROSE DEFECTED TO THE ORTHODOX RELIGION.
I have no interest in straw-men arguments with you again, and again, and again as you do throughout these years. The foundation is Bishop Ambrose is a catholic; you need to submit to this and stop your deflection to build your case he is not; but only an orthodox. EM, your the greatest offender to the Church in this process. I have no interest to haggle on your hypotheticals what is not true.
I am not taking your baits but wish you to accept what we all have to as practicing Catholics the voice of the Church communicated through the grave burden these priests have on their souls to provide for what is right before God and not an opinion you have. I'm not interested in unproductive conversation when you refuse to build on a catholic foundation Bishop Ambrose is a catholic. Until then I or anyone cannot help you but to make headlines of sensual round robin arguments going nowhere like a few guests are doing now. They too refuse to accept any facts but their own answers for a bias agenda they wish to deny.
EM, staying in your own public opinion does not help yourself or anyone you are effectively tripping up in false narrations.
God bless.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2018 17:59:53 GMT
Machabees, That the Fathers believe that Ambrose Moran was always Catholic is not my invention. I had direct contact with the Fathers in this regard. I challenge you to show me one piece of public evidence that shows that the Fathers believe that Ambrose Moran defected from the Catholic religion. Did you not read. If the fathers have a different knowledge today, and I will add, if I misunderstood, then I will retract what I wrote and say here - THE ALLEGATION THAT BISHOP AMBROSE DEFECTED TO THE ORTHODOX RELIGION.
I have no interest in straw-men arguments with you again, and again, and again as you do throughout these years. The foundation is Bishop Ambrose is a catholic; you need to submit to this and stop your deflection to build your case he is not; but only an orthodox. EM, your the greatest offender to the Church in this process. I have no interest to haggle on your hypotheticals what is not true.
I am not taking your baits but wish you to accept what we all have to as practicing Catholics the voice of the Church communicated through the grave burden these priests have on their souls to provide for what is right before God and not an opinion you have. I'm not interested in unproductive conversation when you refuse to build on a catholic foundation Bishop Ambrose is a catholic. Until then I or anyone cannot help you but to make headlines of sensual round robin arguments going nowhere like a few guests are doing now. They too refuse to accept any facts but their own answers for a bias agenda they wish to deny.
EM, staying in your own public opinion does not help yourself or anyone you are effectively tripping up in false narrations.
God bless.
The Kentucky Fathers have and still do believe that Ambrose Moran never defected from the Catholic Church. If someone can prove me wrong, please go ahead.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2018 18:09:37 GMT
Adding to,
My understanding given through the Church and the canonical provisions in a State of necessity taught ( here and here) on the pulpits of the SSPX for many years is there is a difference between the State of necessity and a State of emergency. That is what this topic is conveying discussing the mission and nature of the Church.
The State of necessity is what we have been living through for 60 years with no relief or recourse from the prevailing Churchmen committing their sin Heaven said would happen. It is a provision through Canon law making know "The highest law in the Church is for the salvation of souls" to provide the natural right of Catholics with every means necessary to help them in graces and treasures of the Church for their salvation not to be blocked by errant stewards.
Meaning, if the normal routes to receive the graces of Redemption are block, a catholic has the right and obligation to go around them to receive those graces.
The State of Emergency by way of an example is one who is dying on the side of a road and want/need the sacraments, the Church allows in these cases souls can receive them so called [illegally] but validly through a passing errant priest, immoral priest, heretic priest, or other who have valid orders even though they may be in an illegal state with the Church.
Meaning, there is a present crisis in the Catholic Church making a State of necessity we already know giving rise to the Catholic resistance in Tradition necessitating Archbishop Lefebvre to do what he did outside the normal means of the Church to acquire and protect the mission and nature of the Church to continue; even though some did not understand and left, he said he had to do it for the continuance of the Church. Time passed still in this crisis another crisis formed to where his own priests and four bishops succumbed to modernism when they were trained to detect and fight, had fallen too. Which gave rise again to another State of necessity in extension. As such, the Catholic resistance continued to fight now under another burden and crisis to where one of the sspx bishops (Bishop Williamson) was unjustly and illegally removed by the sspx superiors to effect their deal with the modernist, and said he would help. Time passed and he too showed in his writings and conference a pertinacity to open the door to modernism making another crisis and State of necessity... Regardless of the layers of purification God is allowing, the Catholic Resistance continues. But in what condition, what ailments, what injury?
Here now is the question.
The Catholic Resistance is now on the side of the road thrown out and trodded by their own selfish churchmen like the injured in the story of the Good Samaritan. The injured person, us, called out for help to the churchmen and they walked away uninterested, we called out to the next passersby sspx, and they too walked away not to be bothered having things to do, then we called out to the next passersby the bishops in the 'resistance' and they too walked away laughing. The injured, us, are dying for the graces of Redemption. Who will help? Our Lord sent a Samaritan. One who is scorned and outcast by the elite pharisees who walked by. The injured was/is now in a State of emergency about to die and needing to receive the sacraments to continue the mission and nature of the Church. God does know and who is he preparing OUTSIDE the thoughts of men as He did with the Good Samaritan. Time will come. God provides for those who love him.
We are in a State of emergency put on us by the errant churchmen who only laugh at us. But God has the last laugh. He will not be mocked or obstructed to provide for His Church.
This is the situation we are in now. We are in a State of Emergency and only will get deeper if God allows to go through to a physical catacomb and blood of martyrdom coming by the hands or sinful priests and bishops making the sacrifice of us in blood to God to give us who are faithful the crown and they their punishment.
If the Kentucky Fathers want Bishop Williamson to come to the Our Lady of Mount Carmel Seminary church to ordain seminarians and administer Confirmation, then I have a difficult time seeing how Fr. Hewko would be able to continue preaching that we should not attend Bishop Williamson's Masses.
|
|
|
Post by guest on Jul 20, 2018 18:31:00 GMT
Adding to,
My understanding given through the Church and the canonical provisions in a State of necessity taught ( here and here) on the pulpits of the SSPX for many years is there is a difference between the State of necessity and a State of emergency. That is what this topic is conveying discussing the mission and nature of the Church.
The State of necessity is what we have been living through for 60 years with no relief or recourse from the prevailing Churchmen committing their sin Heaven said would happen. It is a provision through Canon law making know "The highest law in the Church is for the salvation of souls" to provide the natural right of Catholics with every means necessary to help them in graces and treasures of the Church for their salvation not to be blocked by errant stewards.
Meaning, if the normal routes to receive the graces of Redemption are block, a catholic has the right and obligation to go around them to receive those graces.
The State of Emergency by way of an example is one who is dying on the side of a road and want/need the sacraments, the Church allows in these cases souls can receive them so called [illegally] but validly through a passing errant priest, immoral priest, heretic priest, or other who have valid orders even though they may be in an illegal state with the Church.
Meaning, there is a present crisis in the Catholic Church making a State of necessity we already know giving rise to the Catholic resistance in Tradition necessitating Archbishop Lefebvre to do what he did outside the normal means of the Church to acquire and protect the mission and nature of the Church to continue; even though some did not understand and left, he said he had to do it for the continuance of the Church. Time passed still in this crisis another crisis formed to where his own priests and four bishops succumbed to modernism when they were trained to detect and fight, had fallen too. Which gave rise again to another State of necessity in extension. As such, the Catholic resistance continued to fight now under another burden and crisis to where one of the sspx bishops (Bishop Williamson) was unjustly and illegally removed by the sspx superiors to effect their deal with the modernist, and said he would help. Time passed and he too showed in his writings and conference a pertinacity to open the door to modernism making another crisis and State of necessity... Regardless of the layers of purification God is allowing, the Catholic Resistance continues. But in what condition, what ailments, what injury?
Here now is the question.
The Catholic Resistance is now on the side of the road thrown out and trodded by their own selfish churchmen like the injured in the story of the Good Samaritan. The injured person, us, called out for help to the churchmen and they walked away uninterested, we called out to the next passersby sspx, and they too walked away not to be bothered having things to do, then we called out to the next passersby the bishops in the 'resistance' and they too walked away laughing. The injured, us, are dying for the graces of Redemption. Who will help? Our Lord sent a Samaritan. One who is scorned and outcast by the elite pharisees who walked by. The injured was/is now in a State of emergency about to die and needing to receive the sacraments to continue the mission and nature of the Church. God does know and who is he preparing OUTSIDE the thoughts of men as He did with the Good Samaritan. Time will come. God provides for those who love him.
We are in a State of emergency put on us by the errant churchmen who only laugh at us. But God has the last laugh. He will not be mocked or obstructed to provide for His Church.
This is the situation we are in now. We are in a State of Emergency and only will get deeper if God allows to go through to a physical catacomb and blood of martyrdom coming by the hands or sinful priests and bishops making the sacrifice of us in blood to God to give us who are faithful the crown and they their punishment.
If the Kentucky Fathers want Bishop Williamson to come to the Our Lady of Mount Carmel Seminary church to ordain seminarians and administer Confirmation, then I have a difficult time seeing how Fr. Hewko would be able to continue preaching that we should not attend Bishop Williamson's Masses. Seriously? Your pretty stubborn.
|
|