Tuesday, 20 April 2010


A Roman priest wrote, making use also of other studies, this article is to continue to bear witness to the truth to light between the faithful who suffer injustice without appeal of error disclosed without restraint by those illegally occupying government posts in the Church.

We are in a situation unprecedented in the history of the Church. One of the new and most important of this crisis is that people who occupy the position of supreme authority, so it should be the guardian that transmits the deposit of faith, act counter to its mandate, that systematically demolishes the dominant Catholic and is an apostle of a new religion. How is this possible? How is it possible to preserve the faith is not obliged to follow the teachings of the Magisterium reconcile and post? How can you not be obliged to observe the laws, both disciplinary and liturgical? How, then, that in order to remain faithful to the doctrine and law of the Church always has been obligated not to submit to the shepherds of the church after the Council and, indeed, to come out of it? Because if someone thinks and acts in accordance with the new rules, inevitably "goes away in an impressive manner" by the faith of all time. This situation has started on "Vatican II, whose decrees already appeared clearly at odds with Catholic doctrine, particularly the "Gaudium et Spes," the "Nostra Aetate" and the declaration Dignitatis Humanae personae Religious Freedom-sa. All subsequent documents were informed by the same spirit. Can not be addressed in this article combine all documentation and all acts of Paul VI to John Paul II c, the limited space, it suffices, however, cite some facts and some of the most significant statement in which the apparent contrast with the doctrine and practice of traditional Church.

Karol Wojtyla, already a cardinal, a spiritual retreat in 1976 to Paul VI at the Vatican prophecy the New advent of humanity, " or-never mature to understand that "Christ is the center of the cosmos." Pearl's "Universal Redemption," "Christ in his birth has united all people, to every man"; humanity.

On 7/11/1980 John Paul II during a trip to Germany, went to a Lutheran church and declared: "I come to you to the spiritual heritage of Luther" and praised the deep spirituality of quell'eresiarca.

On 25/5/1982, England, attended the Anglican worship in Canterbury Cathedral, and together with the Anglican archbishop blessed the crowd.

'S 11/12/1983 preached in the Lutheran church in Rome. He stated that it will "Repeat the process more objective Luther" giving to understand that the sentence of Pope Leo X on matters of faith was unjust and reform.

Since 1984 he regularly receives representatives of the powerful Jewish Masonic B'nai B'rith, which has forged links. On 10/5/84, Thailand, officially visited (such as "Vicar" of Jesus Christ) one of the leaders of Buddhism and bowed before his throne at the base of a statue of Buddha. L '11/6/1984, in Rome, sent a representative to the location of the first stone of what will be the largest mosque in Europe, built in the heart of Christianity. The 8 / 8 / 1985, Togo, participated in a "sacred forest" in pagan ceremonies and a few days later took part in satanic rituals (all pagans are demons ", Psalm 95) and Kara Togoville.

On 2/2/1986, India, received in the forehead by a priestess of Shiva (god of death and destruction) sign the "tilak" by their worship of Shiva. And the 5 / 2, during the same trip, in Madras, the ashes of dung initiation of "sacred cow".

On 13/4/1986, in Rome, officially visited the synagogue where he recited the psalms with the great rabbi and other Jews who repeated the words of accusation against the Church.

In 1993, Benin, met the high priests of the satanic sect and Voodoo delivered a short speech of praise in which inter alia said"(...) compared to the true values, wherever they are, especially compared to the 'man who tries to live by these values ... You are strongly attached to traditions that your ancestors have handed down. And 'legitimate be grateful to the elderly who have transmitted a sense of the sacred, faith in one God and good taste of the celebration ...". (Note that the Voodoo god adoption Rano python).

John Paul II also uttered some fundamentally heretical propositions (here I cite only a few):

"You can say full of a particular hope of salvation for those who do not belong to 'the visible body of the Church." (Discourse of 21.5.1980).

As this formula reduces to a useless concept need to belong to the Church to arrive at eternal salvation: heretical (See Encyclical Humani Generis Pope Pius XII).

"Christians of different denominations are united in the Holy Spirit from the bonds of communion incomplete"; (Discourse of 24.2.1981).

As it gives to all Christians separated from the Catholic Church that can only relate to those known only by God on the other hand, have at least the virtue of supernatural faith and are united by a vote implicit in the Catholic Church: heretical.

"The firmness of belief of members of non-Christian religions is sometimes a result of the Spirit of truth operating outside the visible boundaries of the Mystical Body." (Enciclica. Redemptor Hominis the 4/3/1979)

As it attaches to the Holy Spirit the whole belief of the doctrine professed by members of non-Christian religions: heretical.

"The Holy Spirit is mysteriously present in non-Christian religions and cultures (...) Holy Spirit you could say: each part has one and they all have full, so your generosity is inexhaustible; (Discourse of 26.3.1982). In that it gives to all men, even those who do not have supernatural faith, of having "the Holy Spirit ": heretical.

"Muslims are our brothers in faith in God"; (Sermon to the Muslims, Paris 31.5.1980). Because it implies that Muslims, because of their belief to the uniqueness of God, possessing supernatural faith: heretical.

"The community of non-Catholic Christians have in common with the Catholic Church a common apostolic faith in Jesus Christ the Saviour"; (Talk to representatives of other religions, Nairobi 7/5/1980).

As it attaches to all non-Catholic Christians the supernatural virtue of faith: heretical. "E ' must fight for this dignity that every person can turn on and continuously in Christ and that is the dignity of the grace of divine adoption and at the same time the dignity of the inner truth of humanity "; (Encyclical Redemptor Hominis - 11.4)

As the winds that every man has the dignity of the grace of divine adoption: heretical.

"The words of the Epistle to the Ephesians (Eph. I, 4.5 to 7.18) tell us about supernatural elevation of each man in Jesus Christ to the dignity of adopted children of God, of which we are gratified in Him" ; (Angelus' 11.7.1982).

Same theological note of the previous year.

"Every man in this body (the Mystical Body of Christ that God's people) penetrated by the breath of life ... which comes from Christ. "(Encyclical Redemptor hominis).

As the winds that every man is a member of the Mystical Body: heretical.

"The Council, however, open only the road to unity. Opener engaging in it first of all the Catholic Church, but the journey itself is a process, which should gradually make their way through obstacles, nature of doctrinal and cultural and socialWho have come to accumulate over the centuries. We must therefore, so to speak, get rid of stereotypes, habits. It should be especiallySee the unity that already exists in fact. (Crossing the Threshold of Hope. P.. 162) What are these "Barriers, stereotypes, abi-Tudini" if not those specific to each "religion" and then differentiate and divide?

As it gives to all Christians, even non-Catholics' s membership in fact the one Church of Christ heretical. As regards the Church's dogmas obstacles "unity": heretical.

27/10/1986 II in Assisi, promotes c presides over a prayer of "religion" for peace ceremony repeatedly up to lately, Thursday, November 3, 1994, for an interfaith gathering, this time held in the Vatican in the very place where the Apostle Peter shed his own blood to eradicate false beliefs and the establishment of the Holy Catholic Religion. Today, by contrast, seeks to destroy true religion founded by our Lord and to legitimize the cult of "False and liars".

Sunday, November 13, 1994 has reached its peak with "apostolic letter" "Tertio Millennium Adveniente which calls, inter alia, to the Holy Catholic Church for self-criticism for his past. He came to the absurd: not only says the opposite of Catholic doctrine, but directly attacks the Church as it is willed by our Lord.

These and others are heretical deeds and words and heresy, and is manifested by the facts and the words (Verb sive sive facto) as the theologians say (Merkerlbach, for example), which identifies the formal heresy three main signs: 1) who doubts in persistent or contempt of the Church, and avoid further seek the truth, 2) do not accept the truth enough, the proposal to follow his opinion or his sect, 3) those who learned the truth, persists in contradicting the Church as heretics are wont to do.

Nor is it conceivable that John Paul II and Paul VI before him were not aware of Catholic doctrine, not hold degrees in theology and having also been warned by several people, among others, the Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacaci, Mons . M. Archbishop Lefebvre and A. De Castro Mayer. We must also take account of the typical mode of action of the modernists, who say the truth then denying or emptying them of their meaning. In the book "Crossing ..." aforementioned John Paul II, for example, says in some passages is the unity of the Church but then continues: "We must not understand what stopping only visible aspect of the Church" p.. 154 ... "The Church as the Mystical Body of Christ, permeates all of us and includes all" p.. 156, up to "Unit that actually already exists" cited above. This alternation of pages Catholics and, to quote St. Pius X, shows, among other things, his knowledge of Catholic doctrine. In the face of everything a Catholic remains baffled and excruciating dilemma torments his conscience: follow what has been enshrined in the new course or the Church resist?

Has materialized so the Catholic resistance to the innovations of the Council, but this resistance rather than occur with a single solution is expressed in many forms.

1) Some people accept the new teaching, arguing that we should only oppose the abuses of the clergy progressive but in reality, there is a dichotomy, a break with tradition, it would therefore only opposition apparent that not mean anything to the problem of authority.

2) Others note that there is a certain contradiction therefore sought to address the problem of authority and conclude, considering only the pope infallible when he speaks "Ex cathedra" that everything that has been issued by the "Vatican" is merely a kind of fallible sottomagistero from which you could easily waive, mint authority retains its prerogatives.

3) Others go further, arguing that the council acts are in contrast to the dominating Catholic, and that since these documents covered by infallibility, highlight the loss of part of their promulgation, and thus the occupant primarily Throne Papal States, but would still remain materially the Successor of Peter.

4) Finally, some argue that the acts promulgated by the Roman, showing an irreconcilable conflict between their doctrines and dogmas of the Catholic faith, show that those who have adopted these acts are deprived of their public office for heresy and shows pertinacious, or have never been validly elected. The Apostolic See must then be considered vacant.

The faithful are still troubled by many different theological opinions.

We now want to address the problem without hesitation that may affect our reasoning.

The Church is essentially traditional, ie based on "Deposit of faith" transmitted by the Apostles until now. We must therefore always take into account what the Church has said or done over the centuries. When today we are faced with a doctrinal question, we must examine how the Church reacted in similar cases. This is a golden rule that, if forgotten, could generate a fantateologia.

In the case of the pope, we face a new situation, as we said, nevertheless there have been relatively similar, such as those of Pope Liberius, Honorius, Paschal, John XXII. For this reason, many theologians have addressed the hypothetical question of the Pope a heretic or schismatic, I say hypothetically because until now no pope has never fallen esplicitamene heresy.

So someone Ascoltiamone:

Uguaccione writes: "When the pope falling into heresy, may be judged by his subjects, in fact falling into heresy when the pope becomes not more but less than any Catholic."

John the Teutonic, great decretalist, the question arises whether it is permissible to accuse "the Pope in the event fall into heresy, since the Decretals pontifical councils and are forbidden to judge the First See. The royalties from the answer to question, because otherwise "Would undermine the good of the whole Church, which is not lawful; also 'Because of' heresy, the pope would cease to be head of the Church provided the crime is known for 'pro confessionem vel facti obvious' "- (For explicit affirmation or the evidence, such as, for example, bowing before an idol).

Cardinal Juan de Torquemada (not the Inquisitor) commenting on Corpus Iuris Canonici " IIe Distinction 21 "Before sedes" Distinction and 40 "Pope is" says: "I reply, this conclusion that the pope has no higher court on the ground, except in the case of heresy." Still continue the gloss says: "Deviant from the faith is when faith comes out stubbornly from the faith and stone falls, above the stone on which was founded cf. Matt. XVI [The pope] becomes less and less to any faithful and therefore be tried by Church, or rather be declared condemned, as it is written that whoever does not believe is already judged, and the pope can not establish a law which does not-can be accused of heresy, since so would compromise the whole Church would be confused and the general state of it. "

No more of the Popes said that heresy would make them be judged by the Church. Innocent III makes us witness to what, in the Middle Ages, when the Papacy reached the height of his power, and appeared less willing than ever to question its independence. The pope preached by custom on the anniversary of his coronation and consecration. In this circumstance Innocent III, in three different years, wanted to express his thoughts on the Roman Pontiff who bribes from heresy.

The Pope says expressly, in these three sermons that if he had fallen into heresy, it would be guilty of a crime against the faith, which is to him (as Pope) is absolutely necessary, and this would lead to be judged by the men in front of the Church. Indeed, not to judge, but already considered as "Non-believers - according to St. John - has already been judged. "

These judgments are gathered from medieval St. Robert Bellarmine in De Roman Pontiff " that, usto respect, says that the pope can fall into heresy, leaving, therefore, understood that in the case of doctrinal errors are found, we should infer that it has never been validly elected, then listing other opinion, however stated that should they fall into heresy would cease to be pope because "those outside the Church can be the Chief. "

In 1969 Card. Charles Journet wrote an article on the possible heresy of "pope" and declare: "Medieval theologians said that the council should not even depose him, but only note the fact of 'heresy and the Church means that he who had been deprived by the Pope's primacy function. Who could' has risen? No one outside of him same. How can he abdicate by an act of will, so may introduce voluntary, by itself, its decline, by an act of heresy.

The reason is that denying the faith, who was pope ceased to be part of the Church to be its member. Because the fact is publicly declared he could not therefore continue to be its head. In such a case, any decision of the Council is only declarative, and not in any way proclaims the supremacy of the council over the Pope. "

This ruling is admirably summarized from '' Enchiridion luris Canons "(Pecs 1940), edited by Stephen Sipos, which shows that the pope can stop by his office in several ways:

"1) For mortem

2 °) resignationem, (waiver)

3 °) amentiam joust et perpetuam (madness)

4th) for haeresim privatam notoriam et palam divulgatam. (For heresy private notorious and openly divulged.)

Moreover, the same Enchiridion claims that are ineligible to the Papacy as it does not "APTA matter:" Women, children, madmen, the non-baptized heretics and schismatics. "

At this point it should be noted that this is not much to see whether or not John Paul II has spoken heresy Ex Chathedra " but if he, personally, privately, is heretical or not.

A document of considerable legal and theological importance is given to us by the Apostolic Constitution "Cum ex officio Apostolatus" of Pope Paul IV, who plays all the characters belong to an infallible document. In it, the Pope committed the fullness of its powers: "By this Our Constitution, valid for ever, so great to hate crime (heresy), against which no one else can be more severe and pernicious in the Church of God in the fullness of Apostolic power, we determine, decree and define .

The Constitution states clearly that: "The same Roman Pontiff, who before his promotion to his elevation to Cardinal or Roman Pontiff, had deviated from the Catholic faith or had fallen into some heresy or a schism was committed or has caused this, is void, invalid, and no value, promotion or elevation, even if this occurred with the correlation and the unanimous consent of all the cardinals. " The same arguments were confirmed by St. Pius V by the Bull Inter Multiplices.

In any case, both for heresy before the elevation or subsequent heresy, what is clear from the judgments of the theologians and the Magisterium is that there is an absolute incompatibility between papal jurisdiction and heresy.

Also, after what we saw, as might be Pope John Paul II?

Starting from a principle of philosophy that sounds so: "Agere sequitur esse" (The action follows being), We can see clearly that the actions of this "Pope" does not correspond to what they should. If you do not act as a "pope" means that it is not.

Indeed, as might a pope to receive the sign in front of the worshipers of Shiva? Speaking of their " faith in one God and good " to worship the god of python? How could chair meetings such as Assisi and the like? In this regard we feel it says Pius XI Encyclical "Mortalium animosity" of 6 January 1928: "Convinced that rarely are men devoid of all, religious sentiment, hoping that argument seem to draw people, as dissenting from each other in matters of religion, yet to be agreed without difficulty in the profession of certain doctrines, as a common foundation of spiritual life. So wont hold conferences, meetings, conferences, with wide involvement of people, and invite you to discuss all promiscuously, and every infidel of graduation, and Christians, and even those who miserably apostatize from Christ or who with dogged pertinacity deny the deity of his person and mission. They can certainly obtain the approval of Catholics such attempts, as they are based on the false theory that assumes good and laudable every religion, because all, though in different ways, but also manifest and signify that inborn feeling for all for which we feel bring you to God and all'ossequente recognition of his domain. Now the followers of this theory are not only deception and error, but reject the true religion perverting the concept and pitch bend step to naturalism and to 'atheism; whence clearly follows that those who adhere to the proponents of these theories and attempts to move away completely (Omnino) the reli-gion revealed by God ". More later continues: "There are those who even has the pious desire to see the head of these Congress, let us say, colorful, the Pope himself! " . Pope evidently believed Wherefore as absurd, unthinkable, and in fact it is inconceivable that a true Pope may attend these meetings or even be the promoter.

But in particular, how can) enact laws that contain errors? And 'theologically certain doctrine that the Church in promulgating universal laws, whether disciplinary liturgical, is infallible. There can be nothing in these laws, which is contrary to the faith. (P. Salaverri, P. Cartechini, P. Zubizarreta, among others, and indirectly the Council of Constance).

Moreover, it is a dogma of faith that the Church is Holy. In this regard Pius XII encyclical Mystic corporis " Notes: "It, certainly, without any patches shines the pia mater sacraments, With which generates and feeds the children, faith that retains unspoiled, in the holy laws with which controls ,..."

How, then, that the Holy Church can give us the sacraments, faith, laws that are not holy?

Now it is certain that, for example, the New Code of Canon Law, the Novus Ordo Missae, contain errors. If the pope can not promulgate universal laws contrary to the faith and holiness of the Church means that his authority, if this occurs, it is not legitimate, there is no other explanation.

In summary, therefore, on the one hand we see from the speeches and the events that John Paul II is heretical pertinacity. We see that the other performs the actions that a legitimate pope could not do because dall'infallibilità guaranteed. As one of four cases of nullity of the supreme power only applicable to this reality, it is heresy, it necessarily follows, we see no other solution, that Karol Wojtyla can not be a heretic. This further illustrates, as a kind of litmus test, the absence of authority, probably from the beginning, in his person.

The largest and most serious objection that can be done in all this is that, in this case, the Church would no longer visible or no longer exists.

Before answering it must be emphasized that the visibility of the Church, as the theologians say, is detected by three main signs: profession of faith itself, use the same sacraments and obedience to the same shepherds. Then we see the church to reconcile, can not be the true Church because, for Catholics to remain, as we saw, we can not follow the doctrine, use of the sacraments and obedience to the pastors.

We can not say that Pope John Paul II c at the same time that is a heretic or apostate and therefore we can not smash, so where does the allegiance, the obedience to the Pope, the "sweet Christ on earth" (St. Catherine)? If you can not follow him because he is not pope. Where is the true Church?

We agree that there is great difficulty in finding an answer, because there is mystery in what is happening, but you can always respond by assuming that the Church is visible in those who are opposed to heresy, and who still have faith or which is undergoing an eclipse, as prophesied the Virgin Mary at La Salette.

Would, however, major difficulties if one accepts the hypothesis that Pope John Paul II is legitimate, as we demonstrated.

To exit from this crisis, the Church will one day while clarifying this dark period. Will inevitably find the nullity of documents of the council, of the liturgical reform of canon law, the catechism and twenty encyclicals.

Perhaps say that the Holy Spirit did not attend his church or who is wrong or has temporarily lost its holiness? Admittedly that would be quite unlikely.

Or will deny at least the "sanctity and infallibility of properties that are essential to the Church, which is not possible, or do not see another solution: to establish the illegality of those who promulgated the documents.

A champion of the Faith

No comments:

Post a Comment