Breaking: St. Anthanasius Church in Vienna, VA Officially Renounces the Recognize and Resist Position: Straight from the Bulletin
Rev. Sam Osborne, Mysteries of the Mass, Gnosticon 4, Sept. 18th 2021. An Explanation of the Gnostic Rite of "Mass" that Leads Us to Wonder Why this Intentional Mass of the Albigensian, Manichean, and Gnostic Heretics is Almost Identical to the New Mass of the Masonic Paul VI.
From the recent Gnosticon. We ask ourselves the question as to why this ritual, intentionally heretical and invoking all the major heretics of the distant past --- resembles so much the Novus Ordo Missae of the Masonic Paul VI, both in the ritual itself, the attitude of the celebrant (I think he would be classified as a "reverent" "conservative" "priest" --- by our friends on EWTN), and in the naturalistic Teilhardian theology articulated by the "priest." Could it be that the effective banning of the "Latin Mass" is payback by people associated with this Kabbalistic sect for the "burning of the Cathars," who are mentioned here as "saints"? The rejection of vicarious atonement by these heretics is very interesting, since we see the same thing in the theology of the Neo-Modernist heretic Josef Ratzinger. It is not the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ that is offered by these Neo-Manicheans, but rather the "
For all those catholics that are trying to defend the validity of the current papacy and the last 60 years of modernism, judaism and freemasonry that have destroyed both church and state...hear from the simple, chosen, and pure saint. St Bernadette....question, do you fear anything? Answer, I fear only bad catholics, question, you fear nothing else? answer, no nothing.
ReplyDeleteProblem is, recognize and resist ain’t even Catholics. They are apostates. Are apostates Catholics?
DeleteIt’s great news. As a parishenor, my prayers have been answered....
ReplyDeleteGood for Fr. Ringrose. Hopefully he has been cathing up on his theology since to get a better idea of the Cassiciacum thesis. For much has been written on this topic since the 1970's. And most still don't understand it for it is usually explained by those who don't understand it or reject it outright. What certainly needs to be cleared up is terminology and the essence of the thesis. First, there is no such thing as sedeprivationism. It doesn't correspond to the reality of the thesis. It is not the See that is struck with privation but the designee to the papacy. Second, the person designed to be Pope remains "pope" only materially because of the obstacle to his reception of Christ's authority. This obstacle is not heresy but the lack of an objective and habitual intention to procure the common good of the Church which is the glory of God and the salvation of souls. There is no talk of personal heresy in good articles on the thesis. This isn't any part of the argument. The material heresies proferred by the designee to the papacy only converge to the main point: that this designee has no real and efficacious intention to do what he is inteded to do as the Pope. This is an a posteriori proof that he is lacking Christ's authority. Hopefully all the priests that are looking into the Cassiciacum thesis take their time to study it for it is often distorted, even by its adherents. What is also very important is the fact that adherents of the thesis of Bp. Guerard des Lauriers formally agree with the totalist sedevacantism adherents. The "pope" materialiter is not the Pope of the Church. Hence the possible collaboration and so forth...
ReplyDeleteWhat "good articles on the thesis" did you have in mind when writing that none of them mention personal heresy?
DeleteR&R position is becoming more and more unsustainable by the day, God bless Fr. Ringrose for his courage in dropping a position which --objectively speaking-- isn't catholic.
ReplyDelete