en.news
321.9K
Roberto 55
Join SSPX .
Ultraviolet
Why join schismatics? The FSSP is still part of the The Church and His Holiness The Pope has not said otherwise. I'm still waiting to see where these "accusations" are coming from.
Roberto 55
SSPX is not schismatic. In this sense and in reality Novus Ordo is more schismatic and farther from Jesus' teaching then (according to you) SSPX. SSPX is doing what Church was doing for 16 centuries. NO is practically a new church...
Ultraviolet
"SSPX is not schismatic." The Church contradicts you. --"Hence such disobedience - which implies in practice the rejection of the Roman primacy - constitutes a schismatic act"

"Everyone should be aware that formal adherence to the schism is a grave offence against God and carries the penalty of excommunication decreed by the Church's law."--
Roberto 55
You can check T. Marshall last interview w. bp.A. Schneider about SSPX. Not everything is B&W....
Ultraviolet
You have never once shown any evidence that I "lie", Steve-O. You can't and you won't. Thus, you lie when you claim I lie. ...and I'm still waiting for that direct quote from The Church quoting what you claim is "Church teaching for centuries, bro".
Ultraviolet
I'll just tack this on here since the comment stream down below is bottoming out already... "The Catholic Church "showed it" for centuries, eg. the Inquisition" That isn't a quote from The Church showing your quote of "Church teaching for centuries, bro!". That's you repeating your original claim, absent the necessary citation. @Steve D

"You are EXHIBIT A of why even good people end up …More
I'll just tack this on here since the comment stream down below is bottoming out already... "The Catholic Church "showed it" for centuries, eg. the Inquisition" That isn't a quote from The Church showing your quote of "Church teaching for centuries, bro!". That's you repeating your original claim, absent the necessary citation. @Steve D

"You are EXHIBIT A of why even good people end up despising your tribe."

I am neither a Jew by race nor by religion. My 'tribe' is The Catholic Church and you're not "good people", either. Heck, you're not even "okay" people. :P

"You cannot reason with those who knowingly reject the Logos."

...said the E. Michael Jones fan-boy repeating the same failed teachings of his mentor. Protip: every non-Christian person alive today has rejected "the Logos" to use Jones' (mis)application of the word.

If your claim (and Jones') were true, then missionaries could never make converts.

...and yet they do. including Jewish converts, People may "knowingly reject the Logos" and then eventually accept reasoning which changes their mind.

St. Paul himself, one of your hated "Joos," was also one of "those who knowingly reject the Logos" and look at the profound spiritual legacy he left for The Church.

This is why I have such contempt for that fool Jones and the fools who are too stupid to see through his own stupidity. The whole sorry lot of you are so easily disproven.

The mistake you're making here is conflating "reason" (presenting a sound argument) with "agreement" (concurring with the argument's conclusion). One does not naturally presuppose the other.

...least of all in your case. You can't reason @Steve D. Almost every last one of our interchanges ends with me pointing out yet another of your errors in reasoning.

You should work on factually supporting your premises before attempting to link them together in an argument, i.e. "reason". I'm still waiting for that direct quote from "Chruch teaching for centuries, bro!" ;-)

By contrast, I can't reason with you because you're a moron who's turned his ignorance and his hatred into a fundamental aspect of his religion.

I can disprove passages in The Quran a dozen times in a debate with a Muslim. When he finally leaves in flurry of death-threats and butt-hurt, he will still believe every falshood I debunked and go on repeating them. Reason doesn't work on him and reason doesn't work on you and "Logos" has nothing to do with it.
jimcat
STM they are slowly being forced into the position of the SSPX in 1988. I respect the FSSP, but I think their position, though admirable, is ultimately untenable. I think they will eventually have to choose between the SSPX, and post-Catholic Rome.
123jussi
Let's hope the FSSP developers a spine for there will be a great need of courage in the future. So far ....not good.
Louis IX
There are modern Catholics out there who think going to a TLM is a schismatic act. Maybe it is time to suppress the NO? ;)
foward
Yes, still waiting for the 2VC
Ultraviolet
"...is now being accused of schism" -by whom, exactly? Is this just trash talk from the usual butthurt Vatican modernists? Or an official charge under a Vatican letterhead and signed by His Holiness Pope Francis?. Because if it isn't, then it's garbage and Fr. Zimmer needs to tell his accusers to either post proof with direct quotes or "STFU" -using that exact and full phrase.

GTV …More
"...is now being accused of schism" -by whom, exactly? Is this just trash talk from the usual butthurt Vatican modernists? Or an official charge under a Vatican letterhead and signed by His Holiness Pope Francis?. Because if it isn't, then it's garbage and Fr. Zimmer needs to tell his accusers to either post proof with direct quotes or "STFU" -using that exact and full phrase.

GTV has taught me one overriding Catholic truth, which is this: Charity, while a virtue, is almost always wasted on one's enemies. All they ever respect is force, ferocity, and an opponent who is utterly "vicious" --as one of my own critics (rightly) accused me of being late yesterday evening.

Fear is an ally. An enemy who fears you and fears the abuse they know you can deliver (either physical or verbal) is an enemy who is already half-beaten.

The FSSP needs to remember Pope Francis is fighting a proxy war through his stooges. He uses them to say what he wants to say without having the guts to put his own name behind the accusation.

Paradoxically, this is a good thing. Really, it is! :D Fr. Zimmer can be as "vicious" as he wants when tearing into such critics without running any risk of actual "schism" -with the Pope or The Church.

Ripping all the feathers off the "parrots" who sit on Pope Francis' shoulders isn't the same as spitting in the Pope's face.

Telling the "parrot" he's a brainless, yammering little idiot is not the same as saying so to The Pope. It doesn't matter "who" the parrot is unofficially quoting.

You're not attacking the Pope, only the "parrot". ;-)

This is the beautiful part of a proxy-war. When Pope Francis sees his "parrots" getting gutted, plucked and barbecued, he''ll understand exactly who's truly on the coals.
Ultraviolet
...said the Jew-hating bigot whose warped interpretation of Scripture was explictly refuted by The Catholic Church. Your kind are as "sick" as it gets

...which is why every Pope who saw the world you Jew-haters were creating back in the 1930s has condemned it and condemned you as contrary to everything the Church believes and represents.
Ultraviolet
"This is one of the rules for radicals: accuse your opponents of exactly what you are doing." Your words (quoted and linked) @Steve D. --and such unintentionally accurate self-criticism.
One more comment from Ultraviolet
Ultraviolet
That's a Tu Quoque Fallacy, Steve. pic related. Sloppy reasoning, too.

"So by your twisted logic..." ..and you're still wrong. It's astounding how poor you are at reasoning.. You assume (wrongly) I agree with Alinsky's premise. I don't, because it isn't univesal. That's a Fallacy of Composition. But in this case, it definitely applies to you. Gotcha! :D
stjoseph2
I must admit, I am surprised that the FSSP actually stood up to Francis and his employees. I thought that they were going to just go along. This is a great sign. Thank you father!
Defeat Modernism
This is why you cannot serve two masters. You cannot serve Christ who is found in the unchanging Traditions of the Catholic Church and also serve Satan in the Modernism of the Counterfeit Church. You must choose sides. I pray he chooses wisely.
Ultraviolet
This is why you don't know what the bloody-blue-blazes you're talking about. The FSSP -does- serve Christ -and- they serve His Church. Cafeteria-Catholics love bragging about the "unchanging Traditions of the Catholic Church" they interpret as they see fit. That kind of "tradition" is the same kind of "pick and choose" approach the Lutherans have to Scripture except a Cafeteria Catholic follows …More
This is why you don't know what the bloody-blue-blazes you're talking about. The FSSP -does- serve Christ -and- they serve His Church. Cafeteria-Catholics love bragging about the "unchanging Traditions of the Catholic Church" they interpret as they see fit. That kind of "tradition" is the same kind of "pick and choose" approach the Lutherans have to Scripture except a Cafeteria Catholic follows only those writers and traditions that agree with his own bias and then ignores all the rest.

You've chosen your side, that's for certain. The FSSP, happily, chose the right one.
Defeat Modernism
This why you DONT KNOW what you are talking about. They accept Vatican II and the New Mass, they are modernists. Saying the Latin Mass using the 1962 Missal doesn't make someone Catholic or Traditional. They are modernists wolves in Traditional Clothing. It is the Mass and the Faith that one must have to be a Catholic.
Ultraviolet
Modernists are people who "cancel" most of my comments on posts they startExternal Devotions are Useless if we do not Cleanse our Souls from Sin ;-) That mean YOU are a modernist @Defeat Modernism Every member of the FSSP still swears The Oath Against Modernism.

You can't "cancel" the truth here, can you? :D The truth is you don't know what "modernism" is... dummy.

"This why you DONT …More
Modernists are people who "cancel" most of my comments on posts they startExternal Devotions are Useless if we do not Cleanse our Souls from Sin ;-) That mean YOU are a modernist @Defeat Modernism Every member of the FSSP still swears The Oath Against Modernism.

You can't "cancel" the truth here, can you? :D The truth is you don't know what "modernism" is... dummy.

"This why you DONT KNOW what you are talking about.

Delicious irony when you delete my comments because you can't refute them.. :D

The FSSP doesn't celebrate the New Mass and they never have. That's why the FSSP was founded in the first place. So much for being "modernists", dummy..

"It is the Mass and the Faith that one must have to be a Catholic."

Schismatics are always talking about their "Faith." just like the heretical Lutherans do. The problem is they're both talking about it outside The Church.

"Saying the Latin Mass using the 1962 Missal doesn't make someone Catholic or Traditional."

The Church contradicts you. Enjoy your schism because it doesn't make YOU "Catholic or Traditional"... dummy.. :D
Defeat Modernism
You consistently show your lack of knowledge. The FSSP had to accept the New Mass and the heretical New theology. This is an disputable fact. I will, going forward, delete ALL of your comments on my channel because you are a petulant child who rejects the teachings of the Church and her saints thinking yourself wiser. You waste my time and try to confuse souls with your nonsense. I refute all of …More
You consistently show your lack of knowledge. The FSSP had to accept the New Mass and the heretical New theology. This is an disputable fact. I will, going forward, delete ALL of your comments on my channel because you are a petulant child who rejects the teachings of the Church and her saints thinking yourself wiser. You waste my time and try to confuse souls with your nonsense. I refute all of your comments because they are simple as you have no doctrine to back it up. I post writings of Saints, Popes and Councils. And you? Nothing at all put your erroneous opinions. I wish to no longer waste my time with someone of bad will and bad faith like you. As I said you keep digging your grave with your own mouth. Soon the Lord God will strike that mouth as you are coming closer and closer to the number of sins beyond which God pardons no more.
Ultraviolet
Modernists "cancel" online comments that disprove their lies. @Defeat Modernism. You do the same for the same reason. YOU are a modernist,

Explain how the FSSP accepts a "New theology" when every FSSP priest swears the Oath Against Modernism. Explain how the FSSP accepts a "New Mass" when the FSSP refuses to celebrate "the New Mass".

."I will, going forward, delete ALL of your comments …More
Modernists "cancel" online comments that disprove their lies. @Defeat Modernism. You do the same for the same reason. YOU are a modernist,

Explain how the FSSP accepts a "New theology" when every FSSP priest swears the Oath Against Modernism. Explain how the FSSP accepts a "New Mass" when the FSSP refuses to celebrate "the New Mass".

."I will, going forward, delete ALL of your comments on my channel because...." --- that's what Modernists do when they're wrong and they know it.

But I'm glad things are out in the open now and you're not even pretending.

" I refute all of your comments because they are simple as you have no doctrine to back it up."

Deleting a comment is not refuting it. You're terrified people will realize the comment isn't "wrong" and you are.
Ultraviolet
"Ultraviolent would be more appropriate" -said the Jew-hater whose Final Solution to Judaism is "convert or perish" (your exact phrase from those "few rounds")

"I know exactly what you're saying and agree."

I'm sure you do since both of you share many of the same errors. @Steve D (charity prevents me from speculating what the "D" stands for). :D

Nice of you to demonstrate a classic …More
"Ultraviolent would be more appropriate" -said the Jew-hater whose Final Solution to Judaism is "convert or perish" (your exact phrase from those "few rounds")

"I know exactly what you're saying and agree."

I'm sure you do since both of you share many of the same errors. @Steve D (charity prevents me from speculating what the "D" stands for). :D

Nice of you to demonstrate a classic Band Wagon Fallacy. Leave it to one moron to fail at reasoning even while lending moral support to another moron

When two mentally retarded students agree that 2+2=22 that doesn't prove they're correct. It doesn't prove their teacher is "sick" either. Pic related. ;-)
7 more comments from Ultraviolet
Ultraviolet
"I wrote all must convert or perish." @Steve D -Quoted For Truth- and that includes the Jews. So my quote remains true, you just said as much, especially in the context you originally made it. :D

"And that includes YOU."

Wrong-O, Steve-O.. I'm moar of a Catholic than you are which is why I keep smacking you with Catholic teachings and you can't quote The Church for the ones youMore
"I wrote all must convert or perish." @Steve D -Quoted For Truth- and that includes the Jews. So my quote remains true, you just said as much, especially in the context you originally made it. :D

"And that includes YOU."

Wrong-O, Steve-O.. I'm moar of a Catholic than you are which is why I keep smacking you with Catholic teachings and you can't quote The Church for the ones you made up. Catholic truth doesn't become "not" Catholic just because it's post Vatican Council II. Of course, Piux XI was also teaching Catholic truth before Vatican Council II. It's truth you Jew-haters would pretend doesn't exist.
Ultraviolet
You just tacitly conceded my correction on your quote and, instead, criticized me. Textbook Ad Hominem Fallacy, Steve. pic related. Gotcha again. :D

Your accusation still fails, btw. Stating a fact doesn't automatically presuppose pride in the telling of it. Particularly in your case. Being "moar" Catholic than an outright embarrasment to the Catholic Faith is no source of pride for me …More
You just tacitly conceded my correction on your quote and, instead, criticized me. Textbook Ad Hominem Fallacy, Steve. pic related. Gotcha again. :D

Your accusation still fails, btw. Stating a fact doesn't automatically presuppose pride in the telling of it. Particularly in your case. Being "moar" Catholic than an outright embarrasment to the Catholic Faith is no source of pride for me at all.

"And what is moar"? lol"
"Moar" has been widely used online since the late 1990s. Is this your first week with internet access? :D That might explain why you didn't look it up for yourself. There are, of course, other possibilities besides ignorance... like intellectual laziness for example. That would explain a great deal why you are the way you are.. Welcome to the internet... ..."bro". ;-)
Ultraviolet
Y'think? Bro? ;-) In its simplest and perhaps purest form, pride is just an acknowledgement of being better. If it's a sin, and The Church teaches this is so, pride is unique in that it must be earned, rather than simply indulged.

Given your general world-view, you'd best tend your own garden before pointing out anything growing in mine. Seriously, Steve D... I say that with no rancor.

...…More
Y'think? Bro? ;-) In its simplest and perhaps purest form, pride is just an acknowledgement of being better. If it's a sin, and The Church teaches this is so, pride is unique in that it must be earned, rather than simply indulged.

Given your general world-view, you'd best tend your own garden before pointing out anything growing in mine. Seriously, Steve D... I say that with no rancor.

...at least when He judges me for my pride (entire fields of glorious blossoms worth), it won't be a personal issue for Him.

"And no, I don't spend a lot of time on the internet learning useless jargon like "moar".

...and yet somehow you've already managed to learn "lol", eh? ;-)

GTV is a diversion for me, usually while I'm at work (which, for me, is usually 14-16 hours a day, six days a week). .

I also have a WPM that rivals some (older) Russian automatic rifles. Alright, that's a minor exaggeration, but I can and do type very VERY quickly. It's easy to rack up 11k comments -especially when most of them aren't in acrimonious debates.
Ultraviolet
Implying I don't already, which is why I brought it up in the first place. You can skip the Pharisaical "doubt" over my Catholic faith. After all, I cite The Church to disprove your nonsense ...and you can't quote The Church where it ever wrote your fabricated "Church teaching for centuries"

I'm still waiting... bro. ;-)
Ultraviolet
"Do not necessarily" does not mean "does not ever." You're implying the latter applies here by raising the former as a theory. But you still can't quote any Church source at all... not for your "Church teaching for centuries"

"Again, you would know this if you were Catholic."

...said the guy whose own bigoted nonsense is directly contradicted by both the Popes and at least one Pontifica…More
"Do not necessarily" does not mean "does not ever." You're implying the latter applies here by raising the former as a theory. But you still can't quote any Church source at all... not for your "Church teaching for centuries"

"Again, you would know this if you were Catholic."

...said the guy whose own bigoted nonsense is directly contradicted by both the Popes and at least one Pontifical Commission.

When it comes to authentic Church teaching, they all outrank you, individually and collectively. "Again, you would know this if you were Catholic" Try again, bro. :D
Ultraviolet
A simple search of "Sicut Juadaeis" shows your quoted "teaching" is not present anywhere in the text.. Try again, bro. :D.

Like most bigots, you've made a science out of dishonesty. Mentioning a document doesn't show YOUR quote exists therein.

"with the Jewish Question..."

LOL... What kind of wax keeps that little mustache so straight, Mein Herr? :D Even the vocabulary you've adopted betrays…More
A simple search of "Sicut Juadaeis" shows your quoted "teaching" is not present anywhere in the text.. Try again, bro. :D.

Like most bigots, you've made a science out of dishonesty. Mentioning a document doesn't show YOUR quote exists therein.

"with the Jewish Question..."

LOL... What kind of wax keeps that little mustache so straight, Mein Herr? :D Even the vocabulary you've adopted betrays your ideology. For the people who popularized the term, and those who still use it in that context, "the Jewish Question" has only one "Final Solution".

Seventy five years ago, people like me were hiding Jews from people like you. The Jews might not be Catholics or even Christians, but neither are you. It doesn't matter if you call youself one or not. As I said before in a slightly different contesxt, "saying it and showing it are two different things."

...and your solution to "the Jewish Question" is neither a Catholic one a or Christian.one.

"Would any Catholic think it just if a he moved to Israel, and began subverting the Jewish culture there? Of course not..."

Just beause YOU define the hypothetical Catholic's actions as "subverting Jewish culture" does not make it such.

Another Catholic, and indeed The Church, might well consider those actions valid missionary activity as mentioned in The Church's Decree on Mission Actvity "Ad Gentes".

"Missions" is the term usually given to those particular undertakings by which the heralds of the Gospel, sent out by the Church and going forth into the whole world, carry out the task of preaching the Gospel and planting the Church among peoples or groups who do not yet believe in Christ.--

That includes "joos", mohammedans, buddhists, hindoos, and every other pagan faith and... (wait for it)....

"Again, you would know this if you were Catholic.".

How fitting you have to eat your own words, eh? Bon Apetit... ;-)

Here's a piquant sauce for your meal. Not only is your example contrary to the teachings of The Church, your argument fails as well..

You've made a Fallacy of Circular Reasoning. Your conclusion about the Catholic's action is contained in the premise.

Fallacy Ref calls a penalty against the bigot. :D
Ultraviolet
"that's why the Church justly taught for centuries they had no right to subvert our culture either."

Saying it and showing it aren't the same. You keep ducking my challenge: Quote "Sicut Judaeis (non)" or ANY Catholic documents that says, "No harm should come to them, but they don't have the right to subvert our Christian culture" That IS what you claimed was (quoting you)"Church teachings for …More
"that's why the Church justly taught for centuries they had no right to subvert our culture either."

Saying it and showing it aren't the same. You keep ducking my challenge: Quote "Sicut Judaeis (non)" or ANY Catholic documents that says, "No harm should come to them, but they don't have the right to subvert our Christian culture" That IS what you claimed was (quoting you)"Church teachings for centuries, bro!" Screen-caps exist of your orignal comment, btw. ;-)

"Read Hillaire Belloc's book The Jews, where he is warning them as early as the 1920s, that they are again headed for destruction. And that's exactly what happened..."

History shows just the opposite, 28 years later that race "headed for destruction" had survived the largest organized extermination in history at the hand of people like you, and created the State of Israel which has also survived more invasions than any other modern 20th century nation.

Because that's how "headed for destruction" works in Bigot Land. Those headed for destruction survive and prosper. . History disproved Belloc's fantasies. You should have noticed that by now.

"I reiterate, the opinion of a pope does not necessarily constitute Church teaching, especially if it contradicts previous Church teaching or Tradition. "


Argumentum Ad Nauseam Fallacy. Also, Begging the Question. You're not quoting the Popes, or the Church, all you're doing is cribbing E. Michael Jones.

Likewise, like so many crack-pots who've been repudiated by The Church on multiple occasions you cherry-pick only those writers in history support your bias and ignore the overwhelming majority who do not. Then you presume to call that "Tradition". The fallacies... so many fallacies. :D
DrMaria
Very well said, Fr. Zimmer! Thank you!
Advocata