Skip to main content

Dogmatizing Opinion

Image
By
+
JMJ

One of the facets of this crisis is that the Church Authorities, in general, are either actively working to change the Dogmas / Doctrines of the Catholic Church (ie Heretics such as Kasper, Daneels, Cupich) or are undermining them by not promoting the same Dogmas / Doctrines (my Canadian Diocese appears to fall under this classification).

The result is the biblical: Strike the Shepherd and the Sheep will scatter.



How is this manifested in the Church today?

Well first of all, we have the persecution of faithful Catholics who want to continue to believe what the Church has taught ... all of it ... not just the moral teachings (read: Sin Crying to Heaven for Vengeance, Abortion, "Legalizing" the access of public sinners to eat & drink judgement to themselves).

For those who've recently realized that all is not well within the Barque of Peter, I'm making a distinction between yourselves and the Catholics who recognized the seeds of the wicked tree which are now blossoming in the Church - seeds that were planted in the first Modernist crisis, watered during the Second Vatican Council.  The first fruit of which was, I believe, the Novus Ordo Missae (ie New Mass).

The second is true scandal.  People are scandalized by the words and actions of the leaders of the Church and make a collection of correct and incorrect conclusions.

Such as:
  • There's a major doctrinal and now moral crisis in the Church of Christ (Correct)
  • The Pope can't teach error therefore:
    • This is all ok (the Pope is protected from error - Pope {J23,P6, JP1,SJP2,B16,F} are Pope so the Holy Ghost is in charge, we can't criticise the Pope etc).
      • Incorrect: The actions of the Pope (kissing Koran etc) can be objectively wrong / sinful and therefore the Pope is not to be followed in these actions.
    • This is not ok, there is objective heresy in the words / actions - Pope {J23,P6, JP1,SJP2,B16,F} can't be / have been Popes.
      • Incorrect: 
        • First Church Doctrine holds that the Universal acceptance of a new Pontiff by the Church Teaching (Bishops) establishes an infallible dogmatic fact that the election was valid  ... some theologians include the Faithful as well but the Bishops will suffice.
        • Heresy is the denial of a de fide teaching of the Church. To assert that the Second Vatican Council taught explicitly a denial of a de fide teaching of the Church contravenes both the reality and the doctrine of indefectibility.
  • The 'Visible Church' united under the Pope IS the Conciliar Church and no longer the Catholic Church
    • Incorrect: The Four Marks have to exist somewhere and the Pope is one half of the Mark of Unity (Government).
  • "... Catholics cannot accept (FYI: "resistor" speak)
    • the Council "95% percent in light of Tradition"
      • Incorrect: This IS what Archbishop agreed to do:. To accept the Second Vatican Council in the Light of Tradition, accepting those doctrines that repeat prior teaching, accept with the traditional interpretation those that are ambiguous, and require those that contradict prior doctrine be corrected (see Four Points).
      • "new mass as legitimately promulgated" 
        • Incorrect: This can be a point of legalism, the point is that the NOM was promulgated and this does not contravene the indefectibility of the Church.
        • new hybrid TLM/NO Mass 
          • I haven't seen anything promulgated at this point so I have no idea what the author of this post (who is given to significant outlandish conspiracy theories that make Bishop Williamson look good).
        • these are all compromises of the Faith which may cost a soul salvation itself.  
          • Incorrect: 
            • This is an unsubstantiated opinion because firstly there are large tracts of the Second Vatican Council that are traditional or simply ambiguous.  Case in point, I've demonstrated the continuity between Pius IX and V2 on the teaching of Outside the Church there is no Salvation (aka EENS).
            • How is the legitimate promulgation of the Novus Ordo Missae a point of faith?  
            • How can something that doesn't exist except in the mind of the 'resistor' be a compromise of the Faith?????
      • "...  that Priesthood  (SSPX) suffered a terrible offence,  when the Superiors  of  the  SSPX began to recognize (FYI: "SSPX-MC Resistor Position)  
        • the Council  of Vatican II, 
          • Incorrect: 
            • V2 was convoked by the Pope, attended by the Bishops of the Catholic Church, and closed by a Pope. It is an infallible dogmatic fact that it was a Council of the Catholic Church.
            • Archbishop Lefebvre voted non-placet on only a few of the documents. What these 'faithful son's ("resistors") of Archbishop Lefebvre really saying that sedevacantists haven't said before???
        • New  Mass 
          • Incorrect: Accepting the New Mass as legitimately promulgated is not that same as saying that it is not 'evil' due to the absence of a due good.
        • New Code of Canon Law
          • Incorrect: This is the strangest point. It is was promulgated by the Pope and that's it ... unless the 'resistors' are really closet sedevacantists.
      • This 'resistance' believes itself to be " ...A  remnant of  priests  willed to  fulfill  their Oath against modernism by  having nothing to do  with  such wicked and premature compromise. (Incorrect: what compromise??? ) They  began to resist the new  liberal tendencies, by  simply  remaining  “a little army  of rebuilders”, doing  what an army  does, fighting,  until
        • the new  mass  is forbidden, 
          • Incorrect: How is this a condition for lawful obedience to an authority?  (see obedience)
        • Vatican II anathematized 
        • the  old Code of Canon  Law enforced again by  the Eternal Rome; 
          • Incorrect: See above.
        • Tradition itself, not us, little soldiers, be  recognized by  a fully  converted Papacy. 
          • Incorrect: Here we have the Liberalism showing itself.  Liberals put themselves over authority - looking to their feelings about a Pope instead of the order being issued by the Authority. (Liberalism is a Sin: Liberalism is the absolute sovereignty of the individual in his entire independence of God and God's authority - God's authority is represented by the will of the Superior).
      • One can never, ever, criticise the Pope - or as CMTV stated here, " ... ChurchMilitant.com does not and will not engage in public criticism of the Pope. Other Catholic apostolates do. We believe they should not ... It is our judgment that most Catholics should neither read nor have easy access to articles and essays that could be judged critical of the Pope. 
        • Incorrect: The principle espoused here is that in the face of a Pope that speaks un-Pope like, promulgates ambiguous doctrines, etc the Faithful are left in their confusion.  This is more of a danger to their Faith than reading the Remnant, CFNEWS and SSPX websites.  
        • Further: Taking their principle of the criticism of authorities within the Church, CMTV et al should cease and desist criticism of all authority within the Church.
        • Correct Principle: What is sinful in a Sister, Nun, Brother, Monk, Priest, Bishop, Cardinal is also sinful in the Pope.  When a scandalous action is performed, the truth of such an action needs to be explained for the confused Faithful, explaining why it is a sinful or bad action.  

      How do I know the opinions that I noted as 'incorrect' are actually 'incorrect'?  By simply comparing them and their conclusions with the Dogmas, Doctrines, and Principles of the Catholic Church.  This is the Gold Standard, and if the leaders of the Church today deny something authoritatively taught yesterday - "Vatican, we have a problem!".

      In short, if an opinion or belief runs contrary to the actual Teaching of the Church - then it is well within prudence to declare it as error.

      P^3


      Labels:

      Comments

      Post a Comment

      Popular posts from this blog

      De Veritate - St. Thomas Aquinas - What is necessary to believe explicitly?

      By
      I was recently introduced to a work of St. Thomas De Veritate ( Source ) in the course of an argument concerning the minimum content of explicit faith.  When I submitted the following quote as proof: Theological faith, that is, a supernatural faith in Revelation, is necessary, and this is an effect of grace (D 1789); nemini unquam sine ilIa contigit iustificatio (D 1793). As far as the content of this faith is concerned, according to Hebr. 11, 6, at least the existence of God and retribution in the other world must be firmly held, necessitate medii (by the necessity of means) with explicit faith. In regard to the Trinity and the Incarnation, implicit faith suffices. The supernatural faith necessary for justification is attained when God grants to the unbeliever by internal inspiration or external teaching a knowledge of the truths of Revelation, and actual grace to make the supernatural act of faith. Cf. De verite 14, I I.Ott - Fundamentals of Dogma p241 In response my opponent ...
      Post a Comment
      Read more

      Comparision of the Tridentine, Cranmer and Novus Ordo Masses

      By
      + JMJ I downloaded the comparison that was linked in the previous article on the mass (here) . ... a very good reference! P^3 From: Whispers of Restoration (available at this link) . CHARTING LITURGICAL CHANGE Comparing the 1962 Ordinary of the Roman Mass to changes made during the Anglican Schism; Compared in turn to changes adopted in the creation of Pope Paul VI’s Mass in 1969 The chart on the reverse is a concise comparison of certain ritual differences between three historical rites for the celebration of the Catholic Mass Vetus Ordo: “Old Order,” the Roman Rite of Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal, often referred to as the “Traditional Latin Mass.”The Ordinary of this Mass is that of Pope St. Pius V (1570) following the Council of Trent (1545-63), hence the occasional moniker “Tridentine Mass.” However, Trent only consolidated and codified the Roman Rite already in use at that time; its essential form dates to Pope St. Gregory the Great (+604), in whose time the R...
      Post a Comment
      Read more

      Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 5b - How Did We Get Here??? ... A Continued Anlaysis using ChatGPT.

      By
       + JMJ Part 5b How Did We Get Here??? So in the previous ChatGPT analysis the LLM ‘concluded’ that there was continuity in doctrine. So now we’re going to explore this element. There is some repetition but I don't have time right now to do a lot of editing.  I think instead we'll have a Part 5c where I try to pull it all together with some old fashioned human sense making. At the end point, I think the LLM collects an interesting if somewhat skewed perspective: The SSPX mapping hinges on this claim: That Vatican II affirms (at least implicitly) propositions that the Syllabus of Errors explicitly condemned. The broader Church response is: The same propositions are still rejected—but Vatican II is addressing different categories (political, pastoral, anthropological) rather than reversing doctrine. While the summary of the SSPX position seems close, that of the broader Church seems to be either an outright AI hallucination or a consensus point from the literature that it used...
      Post a Comment
      Read more

      News Roundup: April 30, 2026

      By
       + JMJ I just realised that I haven't posted the latest Roundup ... and there is a lot in the roundup as the media storm around the SSPX continues! I also just noticed this article: European Conservative: Why the SSPX Bishop Decision Matters Far Beyond Church Politics (link) .  P^3 === Popes Past Present and Future Papal News and Views Cardinal Fernandez maintains that Francis is not dead- metaphorically Pope Leo XIV Reopens Amoris Laetitia File | FSSPX News Pope Leo: “We Do Not Agree with the Formalized Blessing of …Homosexual Couples” - OnePeterFive RORATE CÆLI: How Pope Leo is Reshuffling the Curia: Musical Chairs and Power Games RORATE CÆLI: A Giant Leap: The meaning of Cardinal Eijk’s Pontifical High Mass and the Rebirth of Dutch Catholicism RORATE CÆLI: A Sign of Continuity with the Pre-Francis Papacy: Pope to Wash Feet of Twelve Priests RORATE CÆLI: Vatican Blocks Continuity of Procedure of Beatification and Canonization of Argentine Bishop -- no new Satanellis Pope Leo...
      Post a Comment
      Read more

      Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 5 - How Did We Get Here???

      By
       + JMJ This is the fifth in this series and I think it may require a part b to show the controversial documents and teachings of the Pope post V2. P^3 Part 5 How Did We Get Here??? Introduction My family became ‘Traditional’ in early 1980’s and I didn’t realise until years later how early we entered the Fray. So the SSPX was slightly over a decade old when we started going to Mass. That is a young organization, as someone said at the consecrations “Aren’t you a little young to be a bishop?”, the response was, “That is something that time will change.” 1970: SSPX founded with diocesan approval (Abp. Marcel Lefebvre) 1974–1976: Vatican II disputes escalate; Lefebvre suspended a divinis 1988: Illicit episcopal consecrations → excommunications declared 2000: SSPX Jubilee pilgrimage to Rome (signals openness to talks) 2009: Excommunications lifted by Pope Benedict XVI 2011–2012: Doctrinal talks with CDF collapse 2015–2017: SSPX granted faculties for confessi...
      Post a Comment
      Read more