I don't think it's fair to lump the SSPX together with an LGBT group. The SSPX have been passing on the Catholic faith as if has been practised by our forefathers. This cannot be said about LGBT groups. Imagine you could bring people from the past to 2025 via time travel. Let's say you bring a Catholic from 1925, one from 1825, one from 1725, etc. Which form of our time's worship would these people recognise as Catholic: a) a traditional Latin Mass (TLM) celebrated by the SSPX, b) a Novus Ordo-Mass (NO), c) the kind of worship (to whomever) that the LGBT group is engaging in? If you ask yourself this question, you can see that it is not right to accuse the SSPX of divisiveness. The SSPX have simply carried on being Catholic. As Pope Benedict XVI said: What has been holy to all generations before us and formed the Saints (the TLM) cannot suddenly be declared anathema. Of course, the TLM is not an exact replica of the Holy Mass as celebrated by the Apostles. But the TLM is rooted in the Holy Mass as celebrated by the Apostles and has organically developed from there. For example, Pope Leo XIII, after a scary locution of Lucifer conversing with Our Lord, ordered a prayer to St Michael the Archangel to be said after each low Mass. This has been largely ignored by NO-celebrants. The fact that the TLM is based on the Mass of the Apostles has been shown by a video about St Justin Martyr. This video had already been posted on this forum by Mario. For example, St. Justin Martyr made it clear that the Holy Eucharist should not be handed out by laypersons. In a TLM, the Eucharist is only distributed by a Priest, whereas in the NO, "Eucharistic Ministers" which are laypersons distribute Our Lord. For a Mass to be valid, in addition to the points you mentioned, the intention of the priest to transform bread into the Sacred Heart of Our Lord is needed. This is another argument to attend a TLM rather than a NO, since many NO-priests do not seem to believe in transubstantiation, as evidenced by their lack of reverence. Of course, one can always seek a reverent and mostly traditional NO, which I have sometimes done. You say that you experienced TLMs which are only 15 minutes long. I have never experienced that. In my 15 years of experience, weekday Low Masses last over half an hour. A Missa Cantata (Solemn Mass) on Sundays and high feast days lasts over an hour. Anna Katharina Emmerich had visions about the NO already in the 1800s. She said it goes hand in hand with what she called the false "After-Church". Blesssed A.K. Emmerich said the new Mass is "short, and in the end, the Holy Gospel of St. John is no longer read". This vision is remarkable, because indeed, in the NO the final Gospel is always omitted, whereas in the TLM, John 1 is always read from at the end Mass. About disobedience, yes, obedience to the hierarchy of the Holy Catholic Church is generally owed, but there are exceptions. For example, Pope Francis claimed all Catholics had a moral obligation to take the abortion-tainted Covid-vaccines, even though they turned out to be lethal. In such cases, disobedience is required. The SSPX saw a state of emergency when the consecration of their Bishops was stalled by the Vatican, as the SSPX understood that the TLM must be preserved. This has shown to be providential. Today, we have many thriving TLM parishes with young people, whereas NO attendees tend to be more ageing and some parishes are declining in numbers. Even Pope Francis, arguably an enemy of tradition with a questionable status as Pope, has declared the validity of SSPX-sacraments. This should give the faithful reassurance about attending SSPX-chapels. Regarding your other statements, I am not aware that any LGBT-people's excommunication was revoked by any Pope. I think what you are implying here is perhaps simply not true. In contrast, the declaration of excommunication issued against the SSPX-Bishops by Pope JP II was later explicitly revoked by Pope Benedict. This shows that the excommunications have always been invalid, or at least are invalid now. In any case, it clarifies that the SSPX is Catholic. God bless you and all here!
Just saw that Pope Leo made his first major appointment of Dicestry for Bishops From what i can gather, its a surprise. Bishop selected is a canonist originally elevated by JP II . As a canonist, I will assume he has appreciation for Church law and traditions but I am sure we will learn more in coming days/weeks. https://www.americamagazine.org/vat...6/pope-leo-filippo-iannone-dicastery-bishops/
I pray to God this is a result of the action of the Holy Spirit and is not a political act. A human thought of picking people , 'From both sides of the aisle ', in a political human spirit of keeping everyone happy in an abominable, diabolical false spirit of maintaining a false, 'Unity'. It would take quite a lot to convince me otherwise. The Church is not a political entity or an NGO. Some kind of do good orgainsation. It is a mystical reality. The Bride of Christ. Fixes won't fix it.
For what it is worth I believe Papa Leo is making the very same grave mistake Papa Frankie did in constantly appearing in videos as Papa Frankie did in airplane press conferences. This shows a self appraisal of himself as some human ruler, a President or King who needs to be constantly inserting himself into the human conversation to set things right. He should have if he were in fact true to his vocation like Mary have kept a disciplined silence and only spoke at the occasional prompting of the Spirit. Instead of which I see we are going to get a constant chatter. As the urge prompts him. A kind of Vatican, Left wing Trump. To set us all straight in the right political/religious path, a constant moan. Sigh. Buckle up. Buckle in. Every day a new one. Maybe every minute. A constant urge to set things right. The Nanny from the Vatican placing our erring feet on the right path. Sigh. Sigh. Sigh
The SSPX are contesting a law of man; the perverts are contesting the Laws of God. Fundamental difference. One can stop there, as far as comparing the two is concerned. Our Lord did not Incarnate to oppose His own Laws of Moses, but He certainly did contest the legalistic, scrupilism-inducing multiplicity of the Talmud-assembling Pharisees; and we know what they did to Him. Our present times are an increasingly uncanny replica of the times when He walked the Earth. The divorced can receive the Eucharist, but by hell, they'd better not kneel! That's where we are, God help us. The last time God helped us concluded in the destruction of Israel. Will the next time He helps us imply the destruction of the New Israel?
We has the SSPX Mass every Sunday in our home as I grew up. It never killed us. I reckon the same thing could not have been said if we had had a Sodomite accompniment mass every week.
No wonder his eyes look so sad. I reckon he knows this somewhere deep inside. As Churchill said, no one under the age of thirty who is not a Socialist has a heart. No one older than thirty who is a Socialist has a head. Leo is much older then thirty. No wonder he looks so sad. \Being a leftist is hard work.
In fairness, that was one of the less unorthodox statements of Bergoglio (maybe he was getting a little nervous). As the Fatima prayer instructs us, it is licit, indeed commendable, to pray that we might 'all be saved from the fires of Hell, especially those most in need of (God's) mercy'; this is in the area of Hope and does not necessarily parallel with reality. At least, in this statement Bergoglio 's 'hope' logically implied the possibility of its being dashed. It was in the Truth taught by The Church (and not to be confused with the heresy of Universalism which asserts there is no need for Hope, but that one can presume salvation, and therefore do as you will). Tragically, Bergoglio rarely so approached the truths of The Church in his 'pronouncements'. As for Saint Pius X, his wisdom and Truth is brought out more clearly every passing day. St Pius X, pray for us.
I am sorry , the Fatima prayer does not ask that , 'All', be saved from the fires of hell. It is that , 'Save us'. Check it out. There are loads of folks burning away down there. Screaming their guts out .
In fairness, it does say "Lead ALL souls to Heaven," which is the same thing as asking for no one to go to Hell.
No it is not the same thing. It is the pious wish that all who have YET to appear before the Judgement Seat might not be damned. You are very much in error.
I actually do believe there are plenty of people in Hell. I was just pointing out that Mary has asked us to pray that ALL people go to Heaven, and not Hell. She of course showed the Fatima children people falling into Hell like snowflakes. She wants us to pray enough to save everyone if we can.
Sorry, my interpretation has always been that this was its implication, if only that it is the Catholic view that one ought not call upon God to damn anyone-that must be left to Himself. If one takes an exclusivist view of who should be damned, one would place oneself in peril of His statement that one ought not '...judge, lest one be judged'. So, I'll stick with my interpretation, unless I am presented with Magisterial teaching to the contrary, while fully aware that it is a Hope that is most unlikely indeed, not to be fulfilled. Fatima Prayer (according to EWTN): "Oh Jesus, save us from the fires of Hell, and lead all souls to Heaven, especially those most in need of Thy mercy". According to 'google', any other Catholic site presented in the first of its pages provides the same quotation.
I guess my point in chiming in is that it is sanctioned by Mary that we can and should at least hope that all from this point can be saved. It is not the Will of the Father that even one soul be lost. And if Mary has asked us to pray for this, then it can't be a foolish, merely pious hope, but it must be a real hope!
Yes. That those who have not yet been judged. An important distinction, one that the modernist heretics who will soon be tasting the fires of hell themselves do jot make
