Monday, May 18, 2020

The Phony Apparition Of A False Sect


One year ago, on May 12, 2019, the now Unholy See occupied by the false pope and Argentinian apostate, Jorge Bergoglio, officially permitted pilgrimages to Medjugorje. Most people, even the irreligious, have heard about the alleged "apparitions" of the Blessed Virgin Mary that began in 1981 and supposedly continue to this very day. Bergoglio has tacitly given credence to the biggest hoax regarding an apparition of the Blessed Mother. (See https://cruxnow.com/church-in-europe/2019/08/vatican-confirms-medjugorje-approval-by-joining-youth-festival/). It is obvious that a false pope would approve a false apparition. However, it goes farther than that. Medjugorje perfectly reflects everything that is wrong with the Vatican II sect.

Many people have asked why I disbelieve the alleged apparitions of Medjugorje when so many flock there and claim to be "healed," or "spiritually enlightened." What I've done for the purposes of this post is to condense the large volume of writings on the apparition into a concise summation of everything that's wrong with it. There are members of the Vatican II sect that might convert to the One True Church, but these "apparitions" keep them in Bergoglio's clutches. To write on every aspect of an almost thirty-nine year continuing so-called apparition would take more than a hundred posts in order to fully cover what's wrong. What I've done is to give the most salient points under four main categories dealing with the serious defects regarding: the "seers," the "Blessed Virgin," the clerics involved, and the content of the messages. It should (God willing) be enough to remove any doubt from a Traditionalist's mind that Medjugorje is a Satanic fraud, and will hopefully provide enough information to keep anyone you care about away from it (or even to abandon it).

A Brief Background
 The alleged apparitions began on June 24, 1981 in the small town of Medjugorje in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The "seers" were four boys and two girls; to wit: Mirjana Dragicevic, Marija Pavlovic, Vicka Ivankovic, Ivan Dragicevic, Ivanka Ivankovic and Jakov Colo. Three were born in 1965, one in 1964, one in 1966, and one in 1971. (Due to the length of their surnames, I will refer to them by their first names). According to the official website medjugorje.org: The BVM has come there "In Her own words She tells us, 'I have come to tell the world that God exists. He is the fullness of life, and to enjoy this fullness and peace, you must return to God'.

Our Lady's mission is one of peace. She has come to earth to reeducate us and to help us convert and recenter our lives back to God. Our Lady's role has always been one of guiding people to Her Son, Jesus. What an amazing opportunity we have before us! Our Lady's call to conversion is urgent, and we should respond with all our hearts." The six seers (referred to as "visionaries") have received apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary since June 24, 1981. In addition to Her public messages, Our Lady is to give each of the six visionaries a total of ten "secrets" of happenings that will occur on earth in the near future. Some of the secrets pertain to the whole world while others concern the visionaries themselves or the local village. Only one of the secrets has so far been revealed by the visionaries. In the third secret Our Lady has promised to leave a supernatural, indestructible, and visible sign on the mountain where she first appeared. "Our Lady" said: "This sign will be given for the atheists. You faithful already have signs and you have become the sign for the atheists. You faithful must not wait for the sign before you convert; convert soon. This time is a time of grace for you. You can never thank God enough for His grace. The time is for deepening your faith, and for your conversion. When the sign comes, it will be too late for many."

Finally, we are told, "Since the apparitions began in 1981, approximately 40 million people of all faiths, from all over the world, have visited Medjugorje and have left spiritually strengthened and renewed. Many bring back stories of miracles in the form of healings (of mind, body and spirit), supernatural visual signs, and deep conversions back to God. You owe it to yourself and your loved ones, to investigate with an open mind and heart the messages which are given to us by Our Lady of Medjugorje. I invite you to read these messages and decide for yourself how they will affect your life and that of your family." (Emphasis mine). I have accepted their invitation, and my findings on how these messages will affect anyone foolish enough to get involved, follows in the rest of this post. My sources will be listed prior to the conclusion.

Problems with the "Visionaries"
  • Unlike the seers of approved apparitions, the visions began with disobedient and sinful teenagers. Only one (Jakov Colo) was a true child at the time, being ten years of age. The average age of an approved seer is eleven, and those who were older led virtuous lives like St. Catherine Laboure, who was a holy nun of 24 when the Immaculate Virgin started appearing to her. These false "visionaries" were materialistic, disinterested in religion, and corrupted by the influences of the world in the 1980s
  • The first vision was allegedly seen by Mirjana (age 16) and Ivanka (age 17) when they saw a light which Ivanka claimed to be the Gospa (i.e. "Our Lady"). What were these two young teenage girls doing prior to this event? They had each stolen cigarettes from their father and went to smoke and listen to evil rock music. It reminds me of the false apparition of Garabandal where the seers had stolen apples prior to the first "vision." 
  • It was claimed, on reliable testimony, that Mirjana both used drugs and gave them to others
  • The visionaries were caught in numerous discrepancies ("lies") about various aspects of their experiences. They also claimed they were oblivious to anything when in "ecstasy" watching the Gospa
  • When in an "ecstasy" staring at the ceiling of the church where the Gospa was present (1985), a pilgrim named Jean-Louis Martin, was able to get near and went close to Vicka's eye with his finger as if to poke her. She jerked her head back and ran out of the room. She came back to explain that it wasn't the finger of Martin that made her move her head and run away, it was the impression she got that the Gospa was about to drop the Infant Jesus she was holding. God can't "fall," and Mary can't "drop the Divine Child." The very idea is manifestly absurd. In addition, none of the other visionaries thought this was happening. The discrepency was never explained. Their "spiritual director"  had the "apparition room" of the church closed to the public after that day
  • Threats: Ivan said in a letter to the Vatican II sect "bishop" who was refusing to approve the apparitions, that the Gospa demanded his "immediate conversion" and that he should stop emphasizing the "negative side" of Medjugorje (how could a visitation of Mary have anything "negative"?), otherwise she and her Son would punish him.
  • Vicka had frequent headaches and blackouts. In the opinion of the medical authorities who examined her, it was the result of an "hysterical stupor" and a psychologically unhealthy need of attention. Not only was she deemed psychologically unstable, she was ignorant of basic religious truths, such as the significance of the Annunciation. Yet we are to believe Mary appeared to her on a daily basis.
  • When their "spiritual director," the invalidly ordained "Fr." Vlasic, wanted to start a "mixed-sex religious community" in 1987, Mirija said the Gospa approved of such an abomination. The V2 priest started it with a woman named Agnes Heupel. When the Vatican II sect "bishop" ordered it closed, Marija retracted her statement in a writing in which she stated, "My first statement (about approval from the Gospa)...does not correspond to the truth" (Letter of July 11, 1988; Emphasis mine). Her change of heart might be explained by the fact that Vlasic and Heupel shared a room together which was locked at night. It is rumored that Mirija caught the couple having sex and didn't want the Medjugorje events damaged by such a revelation. Hence, her prior and clearly articulated approval (which came from Mary) was somehow "misunderstood" and not a lie
  • Unlike the seers of approved apparitions, none of the six visionaries became nuns, priests, or brothers. They were worldly and made huge sums of money off those with a dangerous desire for the miraculous. All kinds of "relics," religious articles, books, and even tours of Medjugorje made them opulent. The promoters of Medjugorje stated on the official website, "I know Marija, Vicka, and Ivan all seriously considered a religious vocation, but after much prayer, they discerned that their vocation was married life. We should not consider the decision to be parents and to bring life into the world a less important or holy vocation than a religious vocation."  (Emphasis mine) Compare the infallible decree of Trent: On Matrimony: CANON X.-If any one saith, that the marriage state is to be placed above the state of virginity, or of celibacy, and that it is not better and more blessed to remain in virginity, or in celibacy, than to be united in matrimony; let him be anathema. It was also stated on the official website: "Ivanka was the first to decide that her calling was married life, and asked for Our Lady's blessing. Our Lady joyfully gave Ivanka her blessing, and added that she had chosen the harder path for her life." (Emphasis mine). 
  • Today, the visionaries live in mansions with double garages and security gates, and one even has a private tennis court. They drive fancy cars (BMWs)  go on frequent and expensive foreign trips, and all have married.Ivan married a former Miss Massachusetts, Loreen Murphy, a beauty queen who dresses immodestly. He is obese (so much for frequent fasting); and this, by the way, is "the harder path for [their] life." 

Problems with the "Gospa" as She Appeared
  • Ivan claimed that the hands of the Gospa "trembled." This is clearly out of character for the serene Queen of Heaven, and she was not making a point about something; e.g., how people will tremble with horror for their sins, etc. That was simply how he perceived her.
  • The Gospa said nothing at the beginning of her appearances. Then she would merely answer questions from the visionaries. This is a complete departure from all approved apparitions whereby Mary had a mission and was never there for a "question and answer" session.
  • The visionaries claimed to be able to "kiss and touch" the Gospa, while she "laughed." In approved apparitions, Mary has occasionally been said to smile, but not laugh, nor was she "kissed and touched." It reminds me of Garabandal where the phony seers said Mary laughed and "played hide and go seek." 
  • It is asserted that one of the visionaries sprinkled the Gospa with Holy Water to make sure she wasn't a demon in disguise. Later, Vicka claimed it was only ordinary water but "contained some blessed salt."
  • Unlike all approved apparitions, the Gospa of Medjugorje appeared only gradually out of some orbs of light (sometimes a "blue mist"), as if she were composed of it. By contrast, in approved apparitions, Mary appears immediately with any light being totally distinct from her. 
  • The Gospa would "bless" the religious objects from pilgrims (as the visionaries collected donations), and impart to the six a "special grace" they could then give unto others. Only priests can bless religious objects, and Mary is not a priest. Imparting "special grace" (whatever that means) to have the six visionaries impose hands and pass it on sounds like an imitation sacrament from ersatz "priests" and "priestesses"
  • The Gospa would "burst into spontaneous laughter"
  • The Gospa would recite the Our Father with the visionaries. This is heretical and blasphemous to suggest. How could Mary ask God to "forgive us our trespasses" when she is without stain of sin?
  • Why is it taking almost 40 years--with no end in sight--for the Gospa to reveal her message to the world? Mary always gave a message in a short time in all approved apparitions. Whereas Fatima had three secrets given in less than a year, the Gospa has sixty (60) to give, and most of the content is virtually unknown to this day. 
 Problems with the Clerics
  •  "Father" Tomislav Vlasic (b.1942) was invalidly ordained in 1969. He was the "spiritual director" of the visionaries. There is much evidence he may have concocted much of the story by manipulating the kids. In 1976, he impregnated a Vatican II sect nun, Sr. Rufina (born Manda Kozul). He moved her to Germany where she gave birth to their child conceived in broken vows and lust. Vlasic made her swear never to reveal his paternity, and suffer in silence "like Mary" (!)
  • Kozul wrote Vlasic love letters and asked him to keep his promise to leave the priesthood and marry her. One of the letters fell into the hands of Kozul's landlord who turned it over to one "Cardinal" Ratzinger. Despite his knowledge of what happened, Vlasic was not defrocked until Ratzinger became "Pope" Benedict XVI, and Vlasic was formally laicized in 2009. 
  • After being involved with the "Charismatic Catholic (sic) Movement" he heard about Medjugorje, and immediately went there to be the "spiritual director." The money came rolling in soon after his involvement. The Gospa gave messages to the visionaries about Vlasic's "sanctity."
  • He started the "mixed sex" religious congregation mentioned above, where he was accused of having sex with the woman co-founder, Agnes Heupel, who claimed a visit to Medjugorje "cured her partial paralysis."
  •  Vlasic was finally investigated in 2008 for "dubious doctrine," "manipulation of consciences," "suspected mysticism" [i.e.,occult practices], "sins against the Sixth Commandment" and "disobedience." Rather than be excommunicated, he asked to be reduced to the lay state ("laicized") and Ratzinger let him leave. 
  • As of 2012, Vlasic and his latest concubine joined "Central Nucleus," a New Age religious movement that engages heavily in pagan astrology. 
  • The official Medjugorje website has this to say of the demonic wretch Vlasic: "First, it is not important to go into detail of the charges against Vlasic, it can only make us become what the media sources are today – Scandal-makers. The Vatican itself sets that example with forgiveness and stopping the study of the Vlasic case, as a result of his request to be laicized." (Emphasis mine).  What spin-doctoring! "Who am I to judge?" 
  • There were two other "priests" involved with the visionaries: "Fr" Ivan Vego, who also impregnated a nun, and "Fr." Jozo Zovko (declared "saintly" by the Gospa) who was accused of multiple affairs and sexually assaulting an American woman, apparently while she was on a pilgrimage.  
Problems with the Messages of "the Gospa"

  • The Gospa accepts Vatican II and the "popes" from Roncalli to Bergoglio
  • The reason Bergoglio approves of Medjugorje is because it promotes ecumenism and has a sappy, "feel good" message
  • The stated purpose of the Gospa: "Our Lady's mission is one of peace. She has come to earth to reeducate us and to help us convert and recenter our lives back to God. Our Lady's role has always been one of guiding people to Her Son, Jesus." (Emphasis mine). Her message is one of peace? In what sense? Did not Our Lord say, "Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword." (St. Matthew 10:34). "Reeducate"? Yes, to brainwash the world into accepting Modernism. While the real Blessed Virgin Mary does indeed "guide people to her Son Jesus," this "Gospa" is leading people away from Christ. There is only salvation in the One True Church, yet the Gospa says otherwise
  • Gospa: Once stated that most souls go to Purgatory and not Hell. So the world has gotten more holy since Fatima?
  • Gospa: "All religions are equal before God" This is "Positive Indifferentism," the teaching that all religions are equally good and all roads lead to God. There is no One True Church
  • Gospa: "...Jesus prefers that you address your petitions directly to Him, rather than through an intermediary." This is Protestantism
  • Gospa: "In God there are no divisions or religions; it is you in the world who have created divisions."
  • Gospa: "...The Muslims [Moslems] and the Orthodox, like the Catholics, are equal before my Son and before me, for you are all my children." (Emphasis mine)
  • In addition there is the problem of what the Gospa never says. If you go to the "Concordance" of the official website, where you can search for key words in the messages of the Gospa since at least 1984, here are words that the Gospa never uses: abortion, contraception, homosexual, molestation, and divorce. With these huge evils, and almost four decades of hundreds of messages, Mary never condemns the murder of innocent unborn children? She never condemns the proliferation of contraception and its acceptance by over 85% of the Vatican II sect? No mention of sodomite "marriage" and sodomite clergy molesting thousands of children? No mention of the ease of divorce and sinful remarriage? (See https://www.medjugorje.ws/en/messages/concordance) 
Sources
Davies, Medjugorje After Fifteen Years: The Message and the Meaning (1998)
Foley, Understanding Medjugorje: Heavenly Visions or Religious Illusion? (2006)
Laurentin & Ljudevit, Is the Virgin Mary Appearing at Medjugorje (1988)
Laurentin, Medjugorge Testament: Hostility Abounds, Grace Superabounds (1999)
Weible, The Final Harvest: Medjugorje at the End of the Century (1999)
Official Medjugorje website: medjugorje.org
Various websites that have referenced and corroborated the information above.
The works by "Fr." Laurentin are pro-Medjugorje as is the official website; the other sources are critical. 

Conclusion
 I have frequently wrote against those I label "Apparitionists:" They are people who exalt private revelations and apparitions whether approved by the Church (such as Our Lady of Fatima and Our Lady of Lourdes) or not (such as Our Lady of the Roses or Garabandal) over the teaching of the Church. It should be painfully apparent how placing these apparitions over doctrine leads to people being trapped in falsehood. Whether Satanic, fraudulent, or a combination, one thing is certain: they do not come from or lead to God, and the Blessed Virgin Mary never appeared there.

Now, the Vatican II sect has approved pilgrimages to a place where heresy is taught, people are swindled out of their hard-earned money to make phony, disreputable visionaries rich, and it was promoted by invalid priests who led debaucherous, pagan, evil lives. If anyone thinks a true pope could approve anything connected with this abomination, I question not only their faith, but their sanity. 

118 comments:

  1. It is too bad there are trads who also fall into the “apparitionist” obsession. Most notably the Fatima Industry. Having a devotion to Our Lady of Fatima is noble and holy, but their obsessive curiosity over the third secret and the consecration of Russia is dangerous. It is obvious that Our Lady’s warning at Fatima went unheeded and we are now being punished. Russia has certainly spread the error of socialism and communism throughout the whole world. The NO sect had to silence the real Sr Lucy. It seems there is solid evidence they did. But none of that is necessary for our salvation and if it takes our eyes off Christ we should leave it behind.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tom,
      I agree totally! I refuse to get drawn into an argument of particulars with Traditionalist Apparitionists. They will obsesss over the “true meaning” of alleged quotes (e.g., Portugal will always keep the dogma of the Faith”), while their knowledge of doctrine that must be believed is incredibly low. They risk their faith and salvation as a result.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. What are the best arguments against agnosticism, the belief that "we can´t know" wether there is a God or not?

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    4. Poni,
      Look at last week’s post. See also the work of Edward Feser “Five Proofs For the Existence of Gos” on Amazon. You can purchase it for under $15.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    5. As far as Fatima, Pope Pius XII did consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary on July 7th 1952. It may not have been the proper way as to how Mary had asked but she did say that the "pope would consecrate Russia to me." Of course I don't know what the third secret was, but I would say we are probably living in it. A worldwide apostasy and a false religion to replace the Catholic Church. How could it get any worse than that and if I'm wrong for guessing, at least I can say what I know what isn't the Catholic Church (the Vatican II counterfeit Church). It would be interesting to know what happened to the real Sr. Lucy, but if I never find out, I won't worry about it. Dr. Peter Chronowski is doing a good job exposing the fake one and hopefully it will just make the Vatican II church look that much worse for lying about Fatima over the years. I wouldn't say I'm "obsessed" with apparitions like Fatima which basically tell us to to pray the Rosary every day and to consecrate oneself to the Immaculate heart of Mary and to (if one can) perform the first five Saturday devotions. These things are suppose to help humble us to adhere to all Church teachings which are essential. That is the true purpose of approved church apparitions.

      What annoys me more than apparitionist are those trads who call themselves sedevacantist and reject Pius XII's reforms and yet those same trads pick and choose which of those reforms they will follow. Example: Some will fast only till noon on Holy Saturday but yet these same people have evening Masses and adhere to three hr fast (which they should) even though these were part of Pope Pius XII's same changes. I call that an "obsession" to blame everything on "Bugnini leading the liturgy into the Novus Ordo" just because they don't like changes made by a true pope.

      Lee

      Delete
    6. I would not call what Pius XII did to the liturgy a “reform.”

      Delete
    7. Tom,
      Lee is correct that a true pope made the reform and a pope is protected by the Holy Ghost from making ANY changes which are false or an incentive to impiety. The only way (to at least be logically consistent) is reject the papacy of Pope Pius XII from ages least 1951, which one of my readers does.

      However, a defeater for that position is to “show me the heresy.” Even Fr Cekada, SSPV, etc, do not claim to reject the changes based on heresy or impiety but because the law of Pope Pius XII allegedly ceased to bind.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    8. Nor do I say what Pius XII changed made anything heretical or evil. It was not a needed reform. The Holy Week Liturgy did not need any reform at all. The purpose of the changes in Holy Week were forerunners of the changes to come. While Pius XII was protected from error, it does not translate that the Holy Ghost wanted Holy Week changed. It just means that any change Pius XII made would be free from error. Personally, I think he was a weak administrator and he let evil men gain too much influence.

      Delete
    9. Tom A,

      Why wasn't it a needed reform? Why do you say the purpose of the changes was a forerunner of the changes to come, implying that the changes to come are the Novus Ordo liturgy? Why do you say the Holy Ghost did not want Holy Week changed?

      According to the theologian Van Noort, "The Church's infallibility extends to the general discipline of the Church...it can never sanction a universal law which would be at odds with faith or morality or would by its very nature conducive to the injury of souls...The Church's infallibility extends to the general discipline of the Church...By the term "general discipline of the Church" are meant those ecclesiastical laws passed for the direction of Christian worship and Christian living." (See Dogmatic Theology, 2: 114-115; Emphasis mine).

      Also According to theologian Hermann, "The Church is infallible in her general discipline. By the term general discipline is understood the laws and practices which belong to the external ordering of the whole Church. Such things would be those which concern either external worship, such as liturgy and rubrics, or the administration of the sacraments…" ( See Institutiones Theologiae Dogmaticae 1:258)

      This means you cannot say what you said if you believe Pius XII to be the last pope.

      Introibo,

      With all do respect to Fr. Cekada (I understand he is ill) he said in a 2012 article "the many parallels in principles and practices between the Missal of Paul VI and the 1955 reforms now render continued use of the LATTER HARMFUL, because such a use promotes (at least implicitly) the DANGEROUS ERROR that Paul VI’s ‘reform’ was merely one more step in the organic development of the Catholic liturgy.”

      I don't think he is merely arguing that the law ceases to bind but that the discipline of the liturgy Pius XII enforced on the whole church was harmful.

      I'm sorry for bringing up another subject in a combox that has nothing to do with what you wrote regarding Medjugorje. If you want me to stop here I will. I just wanted to prove a point from my first comment, that Trads have many unnecessary problems with theology way worse than being obsessed with private revelations. It's like that article you wrote about Mary being the Co-Redemptrix. While we have pope after pope teaching it, the point is Trads just don't want to believe in popes. It's really pathetic.

      Lee

      Delete
    10. Lee,
      You are correct that there is a break in logic between what Fr Cekada PROFESSES as the problem (a law that ceases to bind) and what his argument ACTUALLY AND NECESSARILY IMPLIES (Pope Pius XII introduced false principles).

      He also refers to the pre-55 Holy Week as “Bugnini free” as if it were his creation and not protected by the Holy Ghost.

      We MUST believe true popes.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    11. Not believing in true Popes and picking and choosing what to believe because we don't like it, or wish it were different, sounds alot like Protestantism to me and the Novus Ordos.
      The mindset that wants to alter, deny or change changes made by true Pope's is not Catholic!

      JoAnn

      Delete
    12. Joann,
      I can’t disagree!

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    13. Lee, why do you say the Holy Ghost wanted Holy Week reformed? The point is the Pope is protected from error. That does not mean that the Pope’s every action, appointment, decision, utterance, and command is an inspiration from the Holy Ghost. To date, I have not read nor heard any theological argument why the changes made by Pius XII are better than those that came before. The only argument I hear is that Pius XII was a real Pope so his changes are therefore legit. I do not disagree with that at all. There is absolutely nothing evil or harmful in the changes made by Pius XII. But that fact does not translate into the fact that they were inspired or that the older Rites were wanting. Until we get a new Pope, there is no authority stopping anyone from using the pre-55 Rites. Personally, I believe that Bugnini and Co. hoodwinked Pius XII into making “reforms” in order to prepare the faithful for more “reforms” to come at later dates. Looking at it in retrospect, this is exactly what happened.

      Delete
    14. Tom,

      I didn't say the Holy Ghost wanted Holy Week reformed. I asked, why do you say the Holy Ghost didn't want Holy Week changed.

      You said "To date, I have not read nor heard any theological argument why the changes made by Pius XII are better than those that came before." Here is a link that explains why Sacred Congregation of Rites had them changed: https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=11136 Scroll down to

      Seven months later Pope Pius XII said: “the faithful must seek from Scripture, tradition and the SACRED LITURGY as from a DEEP UNTAINTED SOURCE.” Haurietis Aquas, May 15, 1956.

      You can personally think Pius XII was a weak administrator, but you cannot say Bugnini "hoodwinked" him because you are implying that Pius XII was deceived and did something wrong on behalf of the whole Church. He wasn't hoodwinked.

      Lee

      Delete
    15. Council of Trent
      Session XII
      Canon XIII - If any one saith, that the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church, wont to be used in the solemn administration of the sacraments,may be contemned,
      or without sin be omitted at pleasure by the ministers,
      or be changed,by every pastor of the churches,into other new ones;let him be anathema.

      -Andrew

      Delete
    16. Lee,

      https://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/f089_Dialogue_14.htm

      Bugnini was behind the changes. Go to them if you wish. I’ll stick to the pre ‘55 while we wait for a Pope to settle the issue.

      Delete
    17. Lee, your source, CatholicCulture.org thinks Wojtyla the Ecumenist is a saint. Why would you ever use them to bolster your argument?

      Delete
    18. Andrew,

      Session XII Canon XIII doesn't apply to Popes who make changes such as Pope Pius XII. If you believe it does then you would also have to condemn Pope St. Pius X, Pope Leo XIII, Pope Clement VIII, and Pope Urban VIII who also made changes to the missal after that Canon came out. Popes can make changes to the missal. They cannot change the Catholic Faith.

      Tom,

      The link I provided was a direct source to Maxima Redemptionis Nostrae Mysteria with the General decree from the Sacred Congregation of Rites back in Nov of 1955.
      It doesn't matter whether it came from that website if it's the actual document. What you said is like saying one shouldn't go to the papal encyclicals website because it has the post conciliar "popes" encyclicals listed on it, even though the true popes encyclicals are also on there.

      Since you want to go that route, Tradition in Action is a pro SSPX website, so why would you use their website to defend your position? You see Fr. Cekada and sedevacantist clergy who used to be with the SSPX are all guilty of still being R&R. They are sede XXers or Sede R&Rers, which makes them hypocrites for criticizing the very SSPX they attack for not obeying the current "pope."

      I'll stick with Pope Pius XII who approved of the changes and who had a good reason to. You can knowingly reject him and make the excuse that we will have to wait until a pope settles it even though a Pope (Pius XII) has already settled it.

      Lee

      Delete
    19. Tbe Popes you reference made minor small changes that didnt completely alter the Rite nor create something entirely new such as replacing the Apostolic Holy Week.
      Andrew

      Delete
    20. Andrew,

      The problem is you are trying to make it sound like Trent applies to popes. I told you it does not because if it did then changes even if they are minor would have to apply. What you call "new" to Pius XII's Holy week changes were actually not new but a restoration of some traditions for holy week.

      Lee

      Delete
    21. Please explain because
      Monsignor Leon Gromier held a press conference in 1960 + talked about the pre-1951 Holy Week had been destroyed.
      He said it was tantamount to sacrilege because the traditional Holy Week were among the oldest ceremonies in
      all of Christendom.
      -Andrew

      Delete
    22. Andrew,

      So Monsignor Leon Gromier is saying that the Church can allow an evil discipline in the liturgy on behalf of the whole Church? This is heresy. What "tantamount sacrilege" are you he referring to?

      Lee

      Delete
  2. Much like the alleged visions of Sr. Faustina (aka the originator of the "Divine Mercy" devotion), it cannot be said that the Medjugorje events were unequivocally supernatural in origin (which was a key factor in apparitions getting approved by the Church in the past).

    Sincerely,

    A Simple Man

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Simple Man,
      Yes, but this is even more—a blatant fraud without hint of the supernatural; except for the work of Satan.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  3. There's also some new alleged visions. Example: Our Lady of Akita from Japan, Our Lady, Mediatrix of All Graces from Philippines. The latter was declared a hoax by six Filipino bishops prior to Vatican II.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon@9:09
      Indeed, there are MILLIONS of false apparitions. From 34-1958, only 17 apparitions of the BVM has been declared “worthy of belief.”

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. Isn't it 33, not 34, Introibo?

      Delete
  4. I knew Medjugorje had heretical messages that promoted the Vatican II church, but I never really got into much about the seers and the "priests" who were involved. "By their fruits you shall know them." Medjugorje is the definition of the Vatican II church in action. Together they are a cesspool and will one day meet Sodom and Gomorrah in hell.

    Lee

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lee,
      The apparitions are indeed wicked. They are now tacitly approved by Bergoglio! God help us.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. "Father" Tomislav Vlasic kinded reminds me your post about Fr. Leonard Feeney (how they kept things silent up in the New England area about the sexualization of children) with regards to how you mentioned he made the Vatican II sect nun Sr. Rufina who he impregnated to swear never to reveal his paternity, and suffer in silence "like Mary." What is wrong with these people? Are they trying to outdo the devil in wickedness?

      Lee

      Delete
    3. Lee,
      Yes, they seem to be in competition for “most wicked.”

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    4. It´s basically forcing virtue on others not for their edification but to abuse them more.

      Delete
  5. It’s definitely a sign of our times. This is only the beginning, I refer to Sodom and Gomorrah as reference, it seems to be the punishment God is sending and people are definitely ignoring. We go merrily on the path towards Hell, people are saying God loves us and wouldn’t do that.No Hell, No Heaven. You’ll be surprised!!!

    ReplyDelete
  6. The majority of people today are not looking for the truth. Unfortunately, most are seeking "miracles" and scentstalionalism. Medjugorje fills the bill. We must receive a love for and of the truth or we will be deceived.

    "And in all seduction of inquiry to them that perish: because they receive not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Therefore, God shall send them the operation of error to believe lying."
    2 Thess 2:10

    JoAnn

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Joann,
      Those with a dangerous desire for the miraculous will most likely be led astray. The verse you quote is directly on point!

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  7. Thanks for this article; I appreciate it very much!

    Now that the reasons are known, so, there’s no need for me to proceed with reading the books on Medjugorge and Garabandal!, which are still lying on my coffee table…

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unknown,
      I’m glad it helped you! Get some books by the approved theologians pre-V2 and get better insights into the True Faith!

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. Nice try! Why do you throw Garabandal in the mix? Introibo write about Medjugore. The apparitions at Garabandal are true and have been much maligned purposely, but the messages of Gabarbandal were approved by the Bishop of Santander and many miracles took place.
      First message:October 18th 1961:

      We must make many sacrifices, perform much penance, and visit the Blessed Sacrament frequently. But first, we must lead good lives. If we do not, a chastisement will befall us. The cup is already filling up, if we do not change, a very great chastisement will come upon us.

      Second message DURING Vatican 2:
      The second message was given on June 18th 1965. Since it pained Our Lady so much it was given instead by St Michael the Archangel:

      As my message of October l8th has not been complied with and has not been made known to the world, I am advising you that this is the last one. Before, the cup was filling up. Now it is flowing over. Many cardinals, many bishops, and many priests are on the road to perdition and are taking many souls with them. Less and less importance is being given to the Eucharist. You should turn the wrath of God away from yourselves by your efforts. If you ask His forgiveness with sincere hearts, He will pardon you. I, your mother, through the intercession of Saint Michael the archangel, ask you to amend your lives. You are now receiving the last warnings. I love you very much and do not want your condemnation. Pray to us with sincerity and we will grant your requests. You should make more sacrifices. Think about the passion of Jesus.

      The miracles that took place are countless, just countless. I agree that many questionable people have attached themselves to Garabandal afterwards, like Fatima, but the messages are solid and the miracles that occurred in that village are undeniable over many years.

      Medjugorje is a blatant satanic hoax. Garabandal blasted Vatican 2, and the messages were approved by the Bishop of Santander. Padre Pio approved as well.

      It is in the interest of the Enemy to disparage Garabandal. But people love to jump to conclusions without even looking into the miracles or the messages. And there is much more...







      Delete
    3. Bishop Eugenio Beitia Aldazabal stated in 1965 that “we have found no grounds for an ecclesiastical condemnation.”

      According to Bishop Jose Cirada Lachiondo, the messages of Garabandal “do not contain anything contrary to traditional Church teaching on Faith and Morals.”

      Bishop Beitia stated that the spiritual recommendations made at Garabandal were under “traditional praiseworthy forms.”

      Garabandal is ongoing, and has never been condemned.

      There is a lot of false information about Garabandal, especially outside Spain. But Our Lady clearly condemned the ongoings at Vatican 2 and held the clergy responsible! And we must transform our lives. Two solid messages with nothing contrary to Catholic Faith and Morals.

      Delete
    4. @anon1:22 and 12:59
      What you have presented is the sanitized version of Garabandal. To read all that's wrong with it, please read my Post: http://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2019/11/garabandal.html

      In 1965 Bishop Aldazabal was an apostate who had joined the V2 Sect and lost his authority (along with his faith).

      Another apostate bishop says, "“do not contain anything contrary to traditional Church teaching on Faith and Morals.” Really?

      How about this:The “Virgin” asked that the girls not bring blessed sacramentals [rosaries, crucifixes, etc.], because she wanted to bless these objects herself. The vision is reported to have blessed and kissed hundreds of objects, such as pebbles, which were treated as "sacramentals." This is troubling for two reasons: first, because only blessed sacramentals affect the devil and fallen angels; second, the Blessed Virgin Mary IS NOT A PRIEST and therefore she cannot confer a priestly blessing--especially upon mundane objects like pebbles.

      At the death of Roncalli (John XXIII), many people wished the Council to end. Conchita said that she knew that the next "pope" would continue the Council, and she was happy about it. Happy about Vatican II and all its heresies? The Great Apostasy is not contrary to faith and morals? Not according to the apostate bishop who went along with It!

      Read my post for all the demonic manifestations at Garabandal.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    5. P.S. It is incorrect that the visions "blasted Vatican II" Conchita (like the other "seers") all attend the Vatican II sect. Sadly, Conchita lives in New York within an hour of the SSPV, SSPX, and Fr. DePauw's Ave Maria Chapel, none of which she will attend, because she fully accepts Vatican II.

      As for Padre Pio, I have my serious doubts about him. See my post:
      http://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2017/01/was-padre-pio-ecumenist.html

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  8. To Introibo:

    Please keep up the great work! I've decided to link your weekly posts (and as well as NOW's posts) in the active sedevacantist community in Reddit, r/Sedevacantists. (Reddit is a famous online network of communities ("subreddits") based on people's interests, where you share infos, news, memes, jokes, etc. which has hundreds of millions of users).

    To Redditors here lurking in Introibo's blog:

    I've decided to create r/Sedevacantists because we were orphans in our original community, r/sedevacantism. It only has one mod, who never posted nor commented anything in our subreddit. It has no design nor rules, and is bombarded by feenyite trash and non-sedevacantist troll junks.
    The modernist r/Catholicism (sic) has literally thousands of members, and the illogical R&R r/sspx, which just had about 30 members a few months ago, has more than 300 members now! (idk was it because of the SSPX scandal?)

    Our new subreddit has 5 mods, 11 rules, logo, design, etc. Please join r/Sedevacantists if you haven't yet, and keep it active by sharing content. Maybe help linking Introibo's weekly posts! Reddit has about 330 million users, and Church is in eclipse. This is war.

    (Sorry if I consumed a lot of space, Introibo)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon2:27
      Take up as much space as you need, my friend! Thank you for spreading the word! Conversions is what matter. If I can be God's unworthy instrument to help people see and follow the Truth--that's my sole purpose for writing this blog.

      God Bless,

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. I haven't used reddit in ages because of all the garbage that is on there, but if there's an actual Sede community I'd be totally down to give it a go. I'll check it out for sure! Thanks for letting us know about it in the comments.

      Delete
    3. Yes, I've seen you comment in my post commemorating Bp. des Lauriers' consecration 39 years ago.

      Ages? You're active a month ago.

      Anyway, by the fact that you read Introibo's blog, I may make you a moderator. Do you wish to be a moderator?

      Delete
    4. Well, perhaps some hyperbole was used hehe. In my defense though, my activity on reddit for the past months has been a far cry of what it used to be, whereas I no longer spend hours at a time on it, instead just occasionally looking up something on a relevant subreddit.

      As to moderating, send me a direct message on reddit and we can go over all that.

      Delete
    5. Yeah, sure my friend.

      I have to admit though that based on your posts/comments, you really are a unique sede, hehe

      Let's see each other in the chat. Not a big issue for now as there are only 24 members (for now) and 5 moderators. The other mods seem to be intellectuals anyway. I do feel bad though for r/sedevacantism's only mod to decide one day to check his subreddit and figure out a "rebellion" just occured.

      Please familiarize the rules and know we're not really soft on feenyites!


      Thank you for letting us talk here Introibo. Please pray for us too and may God bless you.

      Delete
    6. @anon7:50
      I will indeed be praying for you and the success of your labors on behalf of the remnant Church.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  9. Speaking of Garabandal, just a little suggestion for those who automatically say that it is false and was condemned, which is not true, but nevertheless, if you don’t know anything about the very holy priest Fr. Luis Andreu, and his saintly death, or anything about his brothers, all priests and their mother who became a cloistered nun after Fr. Luis, Andreu’s saintly death, maybe you should reserve judgment and look into this priest and his family, very very well respected in their time in northern Spain.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. https://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2019/11/garabandal.html?m=1

      Delete
    2. @anon4:20,
      In my post on Garabandal (and everything that's wrong with it): http://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2019/11/garabandal.html

      I NEVER say anything bad about Fr. Andreu. I believe he was a good and holy priest. I never criticized him. The circumstances of his sudden death was like an "anti-miracle." People get better at Marian apparitions, not victims of suspicious deaths. Had he lived longer and saw all the evidence unfold, I believe he would have rejected those phony apparitions. It is true that the Church did not condemn it, but this was as Vatican II was beginning. In 1961 false pope Roncalli was the usurper, and the apparitions ended in 1965 with the birth of the New Sect and the Great Apostasy (which the seers ENDORSED). Read my post for more details, please.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    3. @anon9:00
      Thank you for referencing my post!

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    4. Loyal readers for an outstanding blogger, Introibo!

      Delete
  10. As far as I know, even apparitions that have been Church approved do not have to be believed or followed. Correct me if I am wrong.
    I do not understand why all the insistence that people believe in apparitions.
    Many people seek signs and wonders in addition to the Faith, as the Faith is evidently not enough for them.

    "He answered and said to them, “An evil and adulterous generation craves for a sign; and yet no sign will be given to it but the sign of Jonah the prophet".

    JoAnn

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Joann,
      You are 100% correct. There is nothing wrong with believing in approved apparitions to strengthen your faith. For example, I believe in Our Lady of Fatima. I pray the Rosary, wear the Five-Fold Scapular, add the "Fatima prayer" at the end of each decade of the Rosary, and attend the First Saturday Mass of each month whenever I can. These are all beautiful and fully Traditional Catholic things to do.

      However, I will NOT make Fatima the focus of my faith and argue the "true meaning" of the messages as if somehow my salvation depended upon it.

      Joann, "Apparitionists" have a dangerous desire for the miraculous and sensational. As you stated "Faith is evidently not enough for them."

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Introibo, I remembered that you said having the brown scapular just blessed can have you gain the indulgences from it, like kissing it giving you 500 days of indulgence.

      But I believe Catholics have always been invested with it. Not just blessed. Scapulars other than the green "scapualar" have forms of investitures.

      Personally though, I believe, with some theological foundations of course, that the promise (but not the Church indulgences) applies even if it was not blessed. Just like the Miraculous Medal which spread like wildfire because of the miracles, but they weren't blessed.

      (Also, Bp. Sanborn claims that the Church, through incorporating the account in the Matins of the feast, has approved the authenticity of the apparition of our Lady of Mount Carmel to St. Simon Stock, giving him the brown scapular. Is this true? He also said non-Catholics can't have sacramentals. Not what I was taught.)

      Delete
    3. @anon8:27
      You are correct. I referenced the legislation for the 500 days indulgence each time the scapular is kissed. It was granted by Pope Benedict XV on July 8, 1916. The Holy Father makes it clear that it is for “members” of the Confraternity which only comes with investiture. Therefore, I was mistaken that it only need to be blessed.

      Bp. Sanborn is mistaken about sacramentals. See my post: http://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2018/05/sacramentals.html?m=1

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    4. Introibo,

      Thank you for linking that post. I never wanted to make a big deal about what Bishop Sanborn said about sacramentals, but I knew he was wrong since the Miraculous Medal played a huge role in the conversion of a Jew. Can't wait to read that post on the topic you provided!

      Delete
  11. Introibo, what does it mean when sedevacantists say, that they are affiliated with an organization, say, CMRI, or SSPV? Does it mean that they are really part of it? Or does it only mean that they support it?

    If I ask you if you are affiliated with a sedevacantist organization, what is your response?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon6:21
      It means they support that sedevacantist organization, and/or attend Mass and receive the Sacraments from them. I’m most closely associated with the SSPV.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  12. "Pope" Francis is proposing an "Amazonian Rite". How people can't see Francis is not a true Pope is beyond me. Just like Medjugorje, nothing he endorses or proposes is Catholic in the least.

    https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2020/05/20/what-wrong-with-an-amazonian-rite/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Didn't false pope Francis actually "ban" pilgrimages to Medjugorje?

      Delete
    2. Joann,
      There's no end to his anti-Catholic evil!

      @anon8:49
      No, he did not. According to Vatican News: https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2019-05/pope-authorizes-pilgrimages-to-medjugorje.html

      Of course he states that this is not a decision on the truth of the apparitions, but a sort of celebration of "good fruits."

      It reads in pertinent part:
      "Considering the considerable flow of people who go to Medjugorje and the abundant fruits of grace that have sprung from it - continued Gisotti - this authorization is part of the particular pastoral attention that the Holy Father [SIC] intended to give to that reality, aimed at encouraging and promoting the fruits of good".

      "Abundant fruits of grace"? Is he for real? Why authorize a pilgrimage to something so manifestly false and evil--unless it is a reflection of you?

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    3. Oh ok. Thanks Introibo.

      Anyway, unrelated, should we call him an antipope?

      Delete
    4. @anon12:01
      Not technically. Antipope is used as shorthand for “false pope” but it really means an illegitimate claimant to the papacy against the real Pontiff. As we have no pope there can be no antipope; only a false pope.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  13. (Really) unrelated:

    May I ask if only the CMRI and Canons Regular of St. Augustine have coat of arms? Does the SSPV, IMBC, SST, etc. have, for those who know?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon12:04
      I don’t think if there’s such a thing in a time of sedevacante, but if anyone has an answer, I’d be happy to publish it.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. This article provides clarity on the history and general practice for ecclesiastical heraldry: https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07243a.htm

      From my understanding, aside from general customs regarding colors and symbols, there was not a specific Church body dedicated to regulating coats of arms.

      Sincerely,

      A Simple Man

      Delete
    3. Simple Man,
      Thank you for the information, my friend!

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    4. In light of the above, it does appear that the Most Reverend Daniel Dolan and Donald Sanborn have their own coats of arms as bishops, based on what's showing from their respective websites.

      Dolan: http://www.sgg.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/zelusdomustuae.png

      Sanborn: https://inveritateblog.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/inveritateimagefinal2.jpg

      Sincerely,

      A Simple Man

      Delete
    5. So do Bishops Pivarunas and Selway.

      I don't think bishops in a prolonged sede vacante should use coat of arms.

      But I see no problem in congregations like the CMRI having them. Why won't the SSPV, SST, IMBC, have them?

      Delete
    6. @anon2:00
      I honestly don’t know

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  14. Introibo, may I ask for your thoughts?

    From De Defectibus:

    45. [omitted part describing what to do when a Host falls] If it falls on clothing, the clothing need not be washed. If it falls on a woman's clothing, the woman herself is to take the particle and consume it.

    (It makes me wonder why doesn't Pope St. Pius V oblige washing the clothing and why won't the woman's fingers be washed? It seems to be a potential argument for the Novus Ordites,

    also, it almost makes not separating the canonical fingers like the priest does pointless.

    Even the Easterners don't have canonical fingers, while many of them use leavened bread!)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon8:37
      This is a case of grasping at straws.

      1. As to clothing not being washed when the Host is dropped, let us first remember that De Defectibus applies to the Latin Rite exclusively. The unleavened bread does not lend itself to leaving particles (when made correctly pre-V2. The corporal on the altar has the Host on it throughout the Mass, and after the priest has Communicated, the corporal is merely scrapped, not washed. If that satisfies the requirements for the corporal, why should a Host that falls on clothing necessitate washing?

      2. Notice what is legislated--to use your words, "If it falls on a woman's clothing, the woman herself is to take the particle and consume it." Why is a woman specifically mentioned? When knelling to receive Communion at the altar rail, where would a falling Host most likely wind up? Do you want the priest putting his hands on or very near her breasts? It has to do with modesty.

      3. Self-Communicating is NOT per se evil. You're permitted to self-Communicate to save the Blessed sacrament from profanation. If a Satanist has a Host and throws it to the ground, intending to stamp on It, a layman may rush in, scoop up the Host with his hands and consume the Blessed Sacrament. Such an exception also applies to a Host falling on a woman's clothes.

      4. I referenced three sources, all published pre-1960 on the Eastern Rites. In the 30 or so pictures of the priest after the Consecration, he is shown holding his fingers together. Ad arguendo, even if such was not required, it the Eastern Rites have their own elaborate ways of preventing profanation of the Holy Eucharist. For example, they Communicate by dipping the Sacred Species of Bread into the sacred Species of Wine with a Golden Spoon, and letting the Sacred Species glide off the Spoon into the open mouths of the Communicants.


      Anyone from the Vatican II sect who would make such an "argument" is saying the the exception to the Rule should become "The Rule of Exceptions."

      So, now what? The Vatican II sect can have crumbly bread leaving large particles? Allow women to distribute the bread and wine they claim to be Christ on a normal and regular basis? Have people stand and receive the bread in their hand while dressed like a slob or a prostitute? These are not incentives to impiety at the Novus Bogus?

      Sheer absurdity.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. There was a study made by an SSPX adherent in which a father and son made 30 "communions" in the hand. It turned out that it is very rare that there is no particle left on the finger. The SSPX has the study in pdf form in their website.

      I already very well understand that in regards to the woman, it is just modesty.

      So, based on your comment, the canonical fingers are not really necessary?

      Delete
    3. @anon7:33
      As a matter of Divine Positive Law, no, canonical fingers are not necessary. The Church has made them necessary by Ecclesiastical precept, as guided by the Holy Ghost. In the absence of such use, Holy Mother Church would need to supply means of protecting against profanation. In like manner, the ceremonies surrounding Baptism are not necessary by Divine Law, but why would you want to abolish or omit them? Did not Christ say to His first Pope and Bishops, "He who hears you hears Me." (St. Luke 10:16)

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    4. Introibo, you wrote: "If that satisfies the requirements for the corporal, why should a Host that falls on clothing necessitate washing?"

      If a Host falls on the clothing, and you just pick It up and eat it, then doing a *triple* wash when a Host falls on the floor is literally uneccessary. Don't more particles even stick to clothing than to a floor? Why triple?

      Ok I admit though that I'm ignorant.

      Delete
    5. @anon3:38
      The unleavened bread made correctly is not highly susceptible to crumbling. I’m not talking about V2 hosts made a million different ways and often invalid matter. When a Host hits the floor (especially in the time of St Pius V) it was made of marble, a hard substance that can fracture the Host. Not so with soft clothing.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    6. Thank you for the response and may God bless you.

      Delete
  15. Introibo,
    How many Church approved apparitions of Jesus are there?
    JoAnn

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Joann,
      To the best of my knowledge and belief, there are no official statistics. Where Christ appeared with Mary during an approved Marian apparition would certainly count, as would the apparitions of the Most sacred Heart of Jesus. The exact number, I do not know. If any of my readers has a reliable source, please pass it on.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Does Christ's apparition to St. Paul count?

      Delete
    3. @anon7:33
      In my opinion, yes.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  16. Can Traditional Roman Rite Catholics go to Coptic Orthodox for confession?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon4:50
      Not outside the danger of death. There are extremely rare exceptions, with many conditions attached. They most probably don't apply in 99.9% of cases. So the general rule is NO.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. Ok.
      The nearest trad chapel is 140 miles away and I drive 2,000 miles a week.
      I'm exhausted and need a break 1 or 2 days a week.
      Would that qualify?
      -Andrew

      Delete
    3. Andrew,
      Read my post on Monday. It discusses the rare exception from theologian Szal in part of what I write. I’m not going to tell someone to go to a Schismatic. Outside of danger of death, I would not go to a Schismatic.

      I wish I could give a precise answer, but I’m not a theologian.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    4. Thank you Sir.
      I completely understand no problem.
      God bless + thank you for your time and honesty.
      -Andrew

      Delete
    5. Andrew,
      When I first found Tradition 5 yrs ago, I was told by a very well known Sede Priest that I could go to Confession to a pre-Vatican II ordained Priest. I realize many will not agree with this, but it was a Sede Priest who told me it was fine.
      JoAnn

      Delete
    6. Joann,
      At least the V2 sect priest (pre-V2) is an undeclared heretic. The Coptics are declared non-Catholics. If someone would otherwise be burdened with mortal sin for a considerable time, unable to satisfy an Act of Perfect Contrition, I could see the possibility of using the pre-V2 priest provided there is no danger of scandal or corruption. That would be my application of the theological principles.

      Personally, I would not go, but I am not a theologian and have no Magisterial authority to decide matters that the Church could not decide post-V2.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    7. Introibo,
      Isn't it true that once a Priest always a Priest? The valid pre-Vatican II Priests were ordained with the traditional Latin Rite and are Priests forever. The problem is there are very few pre-Vatican II Priests still living and it may be difficult to find one.
      JoAnn

      Delete
    8. Joann,
      Once a priest, always a priest is 100% true. Trying to find one for a necessary confession as I indicated above, is increasingly difficult as they go to Judgement. The youngest age of the last group of Validly ordained priests is 77.
      In another 10 years they will be almost all gone.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    9. I was fortunate 5 yrs ago and was able to find 2 pre-Vatican II validly ordained Priests nearby for confession. One Priest was 89 yrs old and the other Priest was 82 yrs old. When people are new to Tradition such as I was, or don't have access to Traditional Chapels, I do not understand why Trad's become adamant against those who go to validly ordained pre-Vatican II Priests for confession?? It makes no sense to me. Would they rather people go without Confession? Seems perhaps they would unless one is able to attend Confession at a Trad Chapel.
      JoAnn

      Delete
    10. Joann,
      There are some problems. Certain of those priests, who were Modernists from the outset, use an incorrect form of absolution such as "You are forgiven. Go in peace and the Lord be with you." That is not a valid form for absolution.

      In the mid-1980s, my father had an operation, and while recovering at home, was told not to make trips over 15 minutes for one month. That meant he couldn't go to Fr. DePauw for Confession. At the time we lived just a couple of blocks from a V2 sect church that had a valid priest ordained in 1961. My father decided to go there for Confession on Saturday. The priest asked him what "mass" he attended in that parish, and my father told him he went to Fr. DePauw exclusively. The priest told him he was "against the pope," a mortal sinner, and a terrible person for going there. My father left and told me I was right, and he would never go to a V2 sect priest outside the danger of death.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    11. Introibo,
      I was told upfront by the Sede Priest who said I could go to a pre-Vatican II validly ordained Priest for confession to not engage in a conversation with the Priest, but to go in the Confessional, say the Confession, and promptly leave. I wondered, at the time, why I was being instructed in this way, now I understand. Also, one needs to learn and know the proper form of absolution before going to any Confession.
      All I know for sure is that I went to Confession to a validly ordained pre-Vatican II Priest and my life was changed positively and dramatically. I went in the Confessional and came out a new person and on fire for the Lord and his true Church!!

      JoAnn

      Delete
    12. Joann,
      I'm glad your experience was positive! Unfortunately, people must be careful and, if they choose to go, minimize the possibility of having the negative experience of my Dad (God rest his soul).

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    13. Introibo,
      I had a very negative experience 5 yrs ago when I was new to Tradition with a certain Trad Chapel. By your criteria, I guess I should just stay away from all Trad chapels due to my negative experience with one Trad Chapel. The way I was treated by the Trad Chapel was scandalous as people in my family who I was trying to convert to Traditionalism saw the way I was treated and were thoroughly turned off of Traditionalism as a result.
      JoAnn

      Delete
    14. I've been to confession with 2 different valid novus priests ordained in the 1950's.
      One of them even absolved in the traditional Latin formula that i printed out for him.
      Unfortunately he's dead God rest his Soul.
      Introibo is correct in another 10 yrs there will not be one
      single valid Priest or Bishop in the Novus Ordo.
      Pray one of the 29 remaining valid Novus Ordo Bishops finds tradition and passes on valid Catholic Apostolic succession.
      -Andrew

      Delete
    15. Andrew,
      I join you in that prayer!

      —-Introibo

      Delete
  17. I really can't help but disagree with you in regards to attending valid FSSP Masses/Eastern Divine Liturgies, Introibo.

    They're undeclared heretics, who are in communion with another declared heretic. I don't see anything wrong.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon1:17
      We there is one HUGE problem with the FSSP: they’re not validly ordained. The traditional Rite was used by “bishops” consecrated with the invalid Pauline Rite. They are laymen except for the few founding members who were ordained by ABp. Lefebvre.

      The Eastern Rite also has everything tampered with in 1990 when their Canon Laws were “updated” to be in line with V2.

      Yes, they are undeclared heretics, but even assuming valid orders, there is scandal and danger of corruption. Unlike R&R they ACCEPT FRANCIS AND ARE SUBJECT TO HIM. THEY ACCEPT VATICAN II AND ITS HERESIES. They accept the new “mass” and sacraments. Your donations go to help and spread the errors of the V2 sect.

      I think that’s more than enough reason to stay away.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. I wrote "valid FSSP"

      What if I don't give donations?

      I meant that why can't they be approached if there is no sedevacantist nor SSPX around?

      First, you said that they are undeclared heretics. Then you say that the problem however, is that they are heretics. (?) My question is, why not approach them as a last alternative?

      The Holy See has allowed going to undeclared heretics for Mass, as theologian Cardinal DeLugo says. St. Hypathius remained in communion with his bishop, who remained in communion with Nestorius who was not yet condemned. St. Thomas More received communion from undeclared heretics who recognized Henry as the head of the Church.

      Delete
    3. Also, yes, I'm not attending those silly Novus Ordite version the Maronite Rite, nor attend liturgies of "priests" who were "ordained" by Novus Ordite "bishops".

      Also, anglican heretics don't get to be consecrated when becoming Eastern Orthodox, and Eastern Orthodox don't get investigation when becoming Novus Ordite, so yes, a big problem with needed investigations first.

      I'm talking about last resorts.

      Delete
    4. I echo Introibo, just stay away from anything or anyone associated in anyway with the Novus Ordo Vatican 2 false church. Even if they have pretty vestments, say a reverent “mass,” or give good solid talks on You Tube etc. If they accept Bergoglio (or Ratzinger) as Christ’s Vicar on earth, then there is some error in their thinking or formation. Stay away. Practice “ecclesial distancing.” Stay 6 miles away from them!

      Delete
    5. @anon9:23 and 9:27
      I never said they were declared heretics and I’m well aware of the teaching of DeLugo and the majority of theologians on undeclared heretics. As this has Vatican support, I fully agree.

      The problem is what Tom articulated. Remember, I talked about SCANDAL, DANGER OF CORRUPTION, and there acceptance of all things Vatican II. As Tom said, “If they accept Bergoglio as Christ’s Vicar on Earth, then there is some error in their thinking or formation.” This will inevitably come through.

      You also fail to take into consideration the false doctrines inherent in their Rite. The FSSP and Eastern Rites have calendars that include the feast of “Pope St. John Paul the Great.” Do you really want to attend a valid Mass offered by an undeclared heretic in HONOR of one of the greatest destroyers of souls?

      Those are my reasons and form the basis of my opinion. If you feel those (few) valid Masses are not scandalous, nor a danger to your faith, and not incentives to impiety, it is not my place to tell people not to go.

      Anything attached to Vatican II is bad news and I always have —and always will—stay away. I want to borrow Tom’s phrase “Ecclesial distancing”!

      I pray God will lead you to make the right choice.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    6. Thank you and may God bless you too.

      (How about St. Hypathius? He didn't know there was such scandal or danger or corruption. He was far from being a Nestorian. How about St. Thomas More. He was far from being an Anglican. I'm far too from being an Eastern Novus Ordite. If it is a near occasion of sin to addend the Masses of heretics, so is it for Sts. Hypathius and Thomas More.

      The FSSP having JPII in their 1962 calendar? The Easterners having JPII despite not having Sts. Thomas Aquinas and Pius X? Sources please?

      If scandal is the only problem, SSPX corrupts me for the second reason below:

      (1) They believe a heretic can become a pope. Not a heresy and does not make one a non-Catholic.

      (2) They reject discipline and "doctrine" from their recognized "pope"

      I remember you saying the SSPX is okay, as they are not in actual communion with Francis.

      But that's not the problem. Regardless of their union status, they are heretics, as Pope Pius XI wrote to those Chaldeans who acknowledged him as pope but resisted the papal reforms on them, calling it a heresy. That's R&R. A heresy, a condemned heresy.

      But the SSPX are uncondemned heretics. So I don't avoid attending them.

      Delete
    7. WAIT!!!

      You said one can attend a pre-Vat II priest in communion with Francis.

      Why not a valid FSSP then? Difference?

      Delete
    8. @anon6:03&6:04
      1. I never said you can attend pre-V2 Priest’s “mass” in Union with Bergoglio who apostatized to the sect. Can you go to Confession in a pinch? I wouldn’t, but that might be a case of necessity as per, e.g. theologian Szal. The same would hold to valid FSSP.

      2.That the Fraternity of St. Peter has not been exempt from contamination is evident in the very letter of Bergoglio for their jubilee: they are required to follow the orientations of the Conciliar Constitution on the Liturgy, and the Catechism of the Catholic (sic) Church, which includes the new doctrines of Vatican II; they are required to work for a “better comprehension and application” of Vatican II. A “priest” of the FSSP has told me that Propers for Wojtyla and Roncalli are in the works for next year to “better apply” V2. The Eastern Rites has become more like the Novus Bogus all the time and a member of the Maronite Rite told me they will be celebrating Wojtyla with a special “mass” this year. Let’s see if that happens!

      3. As far as the saints you cite:
      St Thomas More had —literally—-no choice.
      The number of sects and the dangers posed were no where near as great as today. It’s nice to think you have a faith as strong as these saints (maybe you do) but I sadly, do not. To expose yourself to such on a regular basis is foolhardy to say the least.

      4. Your charge of heresy doesn’t hold for SSPX. If The rejection of a papal command is based on his official capacity as pope. The person is guilty of schism and is no longer a member of the Church because he does not wish to submit to the authority of the pope who gave the command. (See theologians McHugh and Callan, Moral Theology 1: 542-543)

      Yet their very “Pope” gives them “jurisdiction” for marriage and Penance. Heresy must have pertinacity, yet they have reason to believe they are allowed to act as they do. They are WRONG but do what they do PRECISELY BECAUSE THEY WANT TO BE CATHOLIC.

      However, I will not (like certain clergy) make up sins. If you wish to go to those in actual union with Bergoglio you are putting your faith in danger, and may give scandal. God will judge, not a blogger with no authority. I cannot endorse your decision, and I will warn against it, but that’s all.

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    9. 1. I understand, sorry for what I said.

      2. Thank you for that. I'm not gonna attend a valid FSSP. In regards to the Maronite, I said I'm not going to any Novus Ordite version. Plus, the Byzantine's more common.

      3. I'm not attending the SSPX either if there is a sedevacantist chapel around. I'm talking about a last alternative. I figured you'll say about me not having faith like them. Correct, I don't. Hence I wrote that if it's a near occasion of sin to me , so is it to them. Perhaps you're also accusing them of pride because you're basically saying that they're attending liturgies of heretics because they think they have string faith. If having strong faith is the only thing that can make you go to a liturgy of a heretic, St. Thomas More will probably not receive because he's humble. Yes, I'm not attending if the sermons are bad. Sermons are not that regular anyways.

      4. Those Chaldees will say the same! They are Catholics when Pope Pius XI condemned them, if what you said in regards to SSPX is true.

      ** Being a heretic to not be a heretic makes you a heretic.

      The Monophysites! Look at them. They did not want to be Nestorians and look at what happened to them.

      Thank you for not inventing sins, by the way, and may God bless you and your work.

      Delete
    10. FSSP + ICKSP don't have many valid Priests.(Novus Ordo
      "Bishops" do their "ordinations")
      I've only seen one valid Bishop in 1993 confer valid ordinations for the ICKSP.
      Stay away from them there is a good overwhelming vast majority of these "Priests" are not valid.
      God bless
      Andrew

      Delete
    11. Andrew, I see what you mean

      Delete
    12. Introibo, I know you've read Mr. Lane's article, but here:

      Question 4, Against Assistance v.) There may exist a danger of perversion from bad sermons, faulty advice in the confessional, and various other means, which ought to be avoided.

      His counterargument:

      v.) This danger is far from absent with sedevacantist clergy in many cases, also. Many serious examples could be given here.

      You're lucky the SSPV doesn't have these corruptions/dangers, while the CMRI and SSPX, and the Eastern Novus Ordites do.

      Delete
    13. According to the below article it looks like "Pope" Francis is trying to ban the FSSP, etc., and using the virus as an excuse to do so. If Francis does ban the Novus Ordo FSSP, etc., perhaps the people that were attending there will find the true Church.
      https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/pope-francis-targets-latin-mass

      Delete
    14. Joann,
      I sure hope so! As to your bad experience with a Traditionalist chapel, I’m sorry you had to endure that. However, the difference between that and the V2 sect should be apparent. The danger is inherent where V2 is accepted, and exists in Traditional Chapels in SPITE of the good they try to accomplish. All I’m saying is whenever dealings are necessary with the V2 sect be super-cautious as that Traditionalist priest wisely advised you!

      —-Introibo

      Delete