/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>Jerusalem crossed out

If that doesn't answer your questions about Roman Catholicism, nothing else will.

>>716212

All 4 fell while in communion with Rome(barring Alexandria)

>>716220

Acacian Schism

Rome committed apostasy, as an honest Roman Catholic you have two options: Sedevacantism or Orthodoxy

The latter makes sense of a lot more, and is overall a healthier path spiritually. The Vatican II church is the fruits of error going back much further than the last century

Why did majority of Catholic countries in Europe and beyond legalized faggot """marriage"""?

>>716230

Because Roman Catholicism is essentially dead

>>716212

Rome fell in 476 to Germanic barbarians my friend

>>716227

kek

>become a heretic/schismatic

>get conquered by Muslims

>the one non-apostate Church still stands and is the largest Church on earth

how can anyone even compete

>>716238

At least the germanic tribes converted. Can you say the same about the others? Also, these places are still, after centuries, in the hands of heathens.

>>716248

>become a heretic/schismatic

<excommunicate the heretics

God the Father takes away the branch that does not bear fruit. (John 15:2)

>get conquered by Muslims

<in all temptations be victorious over the devil

God the Father prunes the branch that bears fruit so that it may bear more fruit (martyrs). (John 15:2)

>how can anyone even compete

Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom. (Luke 12:32)

>>716260

>Vatican has been independent for it's entire 2,000 year history

>the east has more or less been subservient to foreign and domestic governments for it's entire less than 1,000 year history

the fact that their leader does exactly what the Turkish government wants is nothing new or surprising. Cucking on religious unity is a common theme for them

>>716260

Christ didn't promised many military victories neither much money to his followers though, but i guess this is what a western mind trying to understand Christianity does to theology (other than rampant atheism)

>>716226

Yeah. That was in the late 400's.

How is that relevant?

>>716248

See

>>716220

It makes literally no sense to hold the Catholic hierarchy in such low regard and still identify as Catholic. What's the point, you're schismatic spiritually.

>>716271

484 to 519

>>716268

Tbh what popes and higher up clergy do is of literally no consequence to any practicing Christians. I guess larpers like to cause some /int/ tier drama but in the real world it has no effect. And you're right about keeping bishops accountable. Most people see their bishop as some far off clergy, when in reality he is 100% involved in the running of your local diocese.

>>716275

My point exactly.

It got solved in the early 500's, so therefor everyone outside of eastern North Africa fell while in communion with Rome.

>>716273

>people sin

>the Catholic church must then be false

Wew

>>716280

>strawman

WEW

>>716268

>I'm a tradcath in a position where we don't give much crap anymore about the pope whatsoever

>Catholic

>doesn't care about the pope

>>>/prot/

>>716268

What is the difference between you and a Conciliarist/Gallican if you're de facto independent from the pope?

>>716278

Are you winnie the pooh retarded? The Bishops and the pope are our sheppards. They are supposed to guide the people of God.

To claim their actions have no influence on practicing catholics is saying everyone is the sheppard of himself which is what the stupid prots believe about their religion. Jesus told Peter for example to take care of His sheep, meaning that's the job of any pope or Bishop.

Why do you need the clergy? To consecrate the Hoist only?

Just be honest with yourself and say you are a protestant who likes some parts of the Catholic theology.

>Italian supremacy thread

Pizza!

>>716228

Sorry friend, only the Pope can judge himself not you. It is the sin of usurpation to condemn the Pope as an apostate unless the Pope himself says I am an apostate. Funnily though, ever since the Pope said I am the Devil, I think an investigation needs to be made for him to repent that comment because it is a use of his ordinary magisterium to say he is the devil. Strange times…

>>716273

>condemns someone who professes to be Catholic and obedient not schismatic as a schismatic

>does not realise this is an act of schism as you are excommunicating yourself from Catholics

Anon… I… Judge not lest you be judged

>>716364

He didn't say he was independent. He still professes to be subject to the Pope he just doesn't care what the Pope is doing right now which is prudent to avoid being scandalised.

>>716440

Did he or did he not say it? Or are you one of those people who bury their head in the sand and pretend nothing bad is happening?

Roma delenda est

>>716278

>>716268

Congratulations, you're Protestant.

>>716449

You just committed the mortal sin of usurpation, unless you are a Priest

>>716452

I'm a prot myself, actually.

>>716443

>He still professes to be subject to the Pope

>he just doesn't care what the Pope is doing

So, Catholics now believe the Pope is a ceremonial monarch like the English royalty, rather than having actual power to command them?

>>716446

Not him but he said "I'm the devil compared to him [John Paul II]"

I'm the devil as well compared to any Saint too.

But that comment shows imo that his conscience is heavy for some reason cough mccarrick gay mafia cough. Let's pray for him though.

>>716454

>So, Catholics now believe the Pope is a ceremonial monarch like the English royalty, rather than having actual power to command them?

No only Traditional™ Catholics (aka protestants in the closet) believe that.

They should go fully schismatic instead of pretending. winnie the pooh American teenagers winnie the pooh up everything they find.

>>716454

It's still usurpation as you have no authority to condemn a professed Catholic as a protestant.

Catholics naturally look up to the Pope as they would to a father, however with the amount of scandal, lies and erroneous statements coming from our spiritual fathers it is prudent to ignore these errors lest we stumble. A Catholic must at least be subject to the Pope but he does not need to cling onto his every word, he just has to believe dogma.

It sounds like your understanding of Catholicism is misinterpreted as ultramontanism, however you might find actual catholicism is closer to your views

>>716462

Only the Devil is the Devil when compared to anything, even a Saint. Don't call yourself the devil, led orendi led credendi, either you are the devil or you are possessed and deluding yourself into thinking you are the devil. A man compared to a saint cannot ever be the devil. A man compared to God is still just a man. The implications of what he said are huge because Catholics in charity have to take him for telling the truth…

>>716464

All Catholics are Traditional. You can't be Catholic and not be traditional as sacred tradition is an equal part of divine revelation. Saying traditional catholic is a useless tautology that only seeks to divide. It is a grave sin of usurpation to condemn a professed Catholic as a protestant also gravely sinful to encourage someone to schism

>>716447

Technically, Mormons believe Jackson county in Missouri is sacred, since that is where Jesus Christ of the Earth will make his Second Coming

>>716620

Of course every Catholic is traditional.

Which is why I don't understand why some people like to call the self trad caths. Is there something as liberal catholics? Or is there just catholics and heretics? They are trying to divide people and first step is stop giving a shit about the pope and then going full sedevacant until they become cultists and reach the ultimate state of madness and start saying pope Michael is the rightful pope.

>>716655

I attend an SSPX chapel and I have never witnessed anyone trying to divide people, and people seem to just ignore the Pope's abuse of the ordinary magisterium. However I see plenty of attempts from people like yourself to divide Catholics, condemning people who show piety as protestants, heretics or schismatics

>>716702

>attends quasi schismatic Church

>no one is trying to divide what is already divided

Really? I just don't understand how can you people claim to be catholics and like you say ignore the ordinary magisterium. To disagree and try to tell him why he is wrong its one thing. To ignore is another. If everyone decided to ignore the pope everytime they disagreed with him we would have seen the protestant reformation 1000 years earlier.

If the next pope makes Vatican III and reestablishes Latin Mass and all the other stuff we are going to see the opposite and so on.

The church survived this far partially because it requires submission to God and his appointed sheppards.

Trying to play the "I don't are about the pope" card is a sign of neo protestantism in the church, played by the "traditional" wing and the heretical liberal one.

>>716702

seconding this. I go to a traditional Catholic parish in full communion with the Pope, and I've never heard anyone defining themselves as anything other than Catholic or implying that they're anything different from "regular Catholics". I have however heard a lot of shittalk from charismatics about the traditionalists.

>>716708

What is "quasi schismatic"? Either an individual is schismatic or he isn't (also only individuals can be schismatic not Churches as the body of Christ cannot be divided). SSPX professes to be Catholic and subject and in communion with the Pope. The Popes have agreed with this and say that SSPX is part of the Church. You have committed the sin of usurpation again by taking on the power of the Pope to condemn the SSPX as a separate quasi schismatic Church,contrary to the judgment of the Pope. If you claim to honour the Pope so much why do you keep usurping his position and appointing yourself Pope?

Also it is the duty of the clergy not lay people to hold the Pope to account. Hence the dubia from the cardinals. Lay people must try their best within their state in life to navigate this crisis which means ignoring the Pope rendering his ordinary magisterium fallible due to it contradicting divine revelation. It is when lay people like you who erroneously believe that they will hold the Pope to account that you end up with so much usurpation as you keep demonstrating. Judge not lest ye be judged.

Quasi schismatic in the sense that Rome has not give them full power yet.

I think they only can perform confessions or something.

>"Only if there is objectively no alternative should one attend the Mass celebrated by a priest from the Society of St. Pius X. If one has to do so, then I would say that one may go in good conscience."

https://zenit.org/articles/mass-with-the-society-of-st-pius-x/

Pope Francis is doing efforts to get them in full communion and being able to do what every other Catholic organisation can do. Let's pray for it then.

What made the SSPX "deviate" a bit from the church because they fell for the Vatican II memes. Guys like the FSSP and other still perform the Tridentine Mass and had no problems with the Church. It started wrong already when Bishop Lefevre decided to order Bishops without the Pope's permission and in that casa the excommunication was deserved.

I hope they get their situation fixed because we're short on people who celebrate Latin Mass and I'd like to have more options to go to one in my country.

>>716464

Lol. If you think Pope can change doctrine then you're not catholic. LEt me translate: There are no traditional catholics, those people are just catholic.

If a pope comes along and changes the doctrine given by God, he puts himself above God then you do not need to "care" for it in a sense that you do not respect his lead. That is a quite different thing from being a protestant/orthodox. Just as you do not reject monarchy because of "muh corrupted king" you do not renounce papacy because of "muh francis". Catholics seriously not caring at all about the current state of affairs are not exactly good catholics but I suppose it is not what this guy meant.

He probably meant something like "you cannot convert me just by holding up this corrupt pope before me because catholicism cannot change"

It's always such a cringe when people start talking about "you're protestant" without thinking. You may criticize the pope without being protestant. If you criticize the papacy, that's completely other thing. Refer to criticism of king vs criticism of monarchy as a system.

It's not the same thing and people should not mix it up

>>717172

>He probably meant something like "you cannot convert me just by holding up this corrupt pope before me because catholicism cannot change"

In that case it's a very fair point. But I've seen to many people who go a step further and schism from the pope.l because they say the pope became an heretic and follow the sedevacantist argument.

In any case if a Pope wanted to change Catholic doctrine he'd be hit by a thunderbolt or get an heart attack or something. Even if that didn't happen it would be the Swiss Guard duty to lock him up in his bedroom completely cut from the outside world until either he died or repented.

>>716885

Quasi schismatic makes no sense. They can't help if their superiors oppress them and refuse to give them canonical status. SSPX want canonical status but Rome refuse to answer them or offer insane offers that would be violating sacred tradition to accept.

My SSPX priests homily today was about how the Pope is the supreme authority on earth and that we show pray that he wields that authority. Do you pray for the Pope?

Archbishop Lefebvre was not even excommunicated. The automatic excommunications are invalid when someone is acting in what they believe to be grave necessity and Archbishop Lefebvre believed it was gravely necessary for him to consecrate the bishops in order to pass on tradition that had been passed to him. It literally says in canon law that this invalidates the excommunication. Obedience does not compel you to sin. In fact you are obliged to be disobedient if you are ordered to sin. The new rite is illicit as it denies sacred tradition and does not hold fast to what we have taught you either by word of mouth or epistle but is a new and different gospel to be rejected. No priest can be compelled to sin by offering such an illicit mass.

>>717173

If a Pope solumnly proclaimed with the full extraordinary magisterium that a heresy was dogma, it would be invalid. A pope cannot use any magisterium to contradict previous doctrine. V1 spells this out. So no God probably wouldn't kill the Pope.

>>716885

Also about "excommunication" and "disobedience", St Athanasiua was excommunicated by Pope Liberius and operated in the dioceses of other bishops without their permission because the Arian crisis like today's crisis granted supplied jurisdiction which SSPX use. Pope liverius was the first Pope to not be canonised as a Saint whereas Athanasius is one of the most venerated of Saints. St Joan of arc died whilst " excommunicated". However in the 20th century the excommunication was discovered to be invalid and she is now a saint. I'm sure that +Lefebvre is a Saint. +Lefebvre ora pro nobis.

>>717179

Wait the new roman rite is illicit? I know its worse than TLM and prone to abuses but it is still valid and licit.

And when was tradition broke? The faith of the Catholic Church in 2018 it is still the same as in 33AD.

>St Athanasiua was excommunicated by Pope Liberius and operated in the dioceses of other bishops without their permission because the Arian crisis like today's crisis granted supplied jurisdiction which SSPX use.

In that case the pope was being threatened and it wasn't an act of free will by the pope. He should have preferred to die instead of excommunicating Athanasius ofc.

And Joanne d'Arc was "excommunicated" by a Bishop who did it because she was against his interests. It is already invalid and then the pope lifted it and excommunicated the Bishop instead. And it wasn't found out it was invalid in the 20th century. It was lifted in the 15th century and she was beatified a couple years later.

And even if an excommunication is valid it can be lifted at any time as far as I know.

The excommunication on Lefebvre can still be lifted, and I think there a legitimate point for that because imo he genuinely feared that Tradition was being attack and took a stance to defend it.

>+Lefebvre ora pro nobis

I wouldn't say that at least not before excommunication was lifted.

It's dangerous to say this to a person that is not even Blessed let alone excommunicated.

>>717220

Yes it is illicit. No one not even a Pope can licitly promulgate a new rite. And it is a new rite because the canon of the mass is substantially different to the old rite, which is what defines separate rites. It is not the Roman rite for there is only one roman rite wwhich is the old rite of st Peter. Each rite was founded by an apostle, which is what defines rites and thus a rite cannot licitly be created. It can validly be done but it is not pleasing to God because it is a creation of man and not of God, especially when it includes antichristian Talmud things in it. God said do not add or take away anything from my word. St Paul said hold fast to the traditions we have brought down to you. Liturgy is a part of sacred tradition and cannot be changed or abolished.

Also + Lefebrce was not validly excommunicated so there is no excommunication to lift, only to say they were mistaken. Code of canon law says excommunications are invalid if someone believes they are acting out of necessity which Lefebvre professed he was

>>717220

Yes you are right that the faith of the Catholic Church is the same. But the new rite is of man and not if the Catholic Church

>>717316

Latin Mass is illicit then. Is St. Pius V an heretic?

And what about every other rite that wasnt even made by a pope like the Braga rite, the mozarabic rite, the byzantine one, the syro malabar rite and I could go on indefinitely

>Each rite was founded by an apostle, which is what defines rites and thus a rite cannot licitly be created.

LOL what are you kidding me?

>especially when it includes antichristian Talmud things in it.

Source?

>>717336

St Pius V did not promulgate the old rite. The old rite is the unchanged rite that was given to us by St Peter. Pius V merely removed corruption's that had occurred.

As I said each rite came from an Apostle. These are Fr Rippergers' words not mine if you want to research it. Byzantine rite came from an apostle so it is licit. Mozarabic, gallican, ambrosian and other rites are actually the byzantine rite mixed with latin. They are not their own rites. The only rite to not be promulgated by an apostle was the new rite. The eucharistic canon blessed are you God of all creation is literally from the Talmud. You can search the talmud for it. It exists nowhere else. Then the fruit of the earth bit comes from Genesis from Cain who offered the fruit of the earth which was a contemptuous sacrifice. Work of human hands comes frkm the psalm that says the idols of the gentiles are not living but dead and the work of human hands. Basically whoever wrote that canon is invoking the anti christ talmud to curse Christians, offering the sacrifice of Cain mocking the offertory for being unworthy and then sayjng that the eucharist is a dead idol the work of human hands.

I promise you this is the case, according to Catholic historians, liturgists and scholars. I got this from Fr Ripperger.

>>716248

>largest Church on earth

Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

Yes All Jews should die

>>723202

Spoiler Alert! Everyone dies.

>>716278

>Tbh what popes and higher up clergy do is of literally no consequence to any practicing Christians

Not completely without consequence but close enough.

>>716286

If the pope or the bishop cared about me and hundreds of thousands of other tradcaths like me he'd be more serious about the mass, and bishops would be more strictly commanded to provide support for Tridentine parishes.

>>716364

Me and dozens of others just want to lead a sacramental life, get closer to Christ, work on our salvation and become holy.

Church politics right now consist out of boycotted traditionalists, a literal gay-liberal mafia and a pope supported by them (with or without him realizing this).

>>716443

We're de facto living loose from the diocese, but de jure under the bishop's jurisdiction.

In fact we got the worst from both sides, I remember last year the parents wanted to get their kids christened in the Tridentine rite but I give you two euros he would not allow another bishop doing tradcath stuff in his diocese.

>>716449

I don't think protestantism works this way.

I'm jokingly calling myself and my parish "Western Orthodox" these days because that's what we de facto are.

We acknowledge the position of pope and we respect the person in it and his decisions IF and only IF these are orthodox in doctrine.

The current pope proceeds to show the opposite and has almost excommunicated himself twice already, so we try to ignore the whole situation altogether.

>>716454

>So, Catholics now believe the Pope is a ceremonial monarch like the English royalty, rather than having actual power to command them?

The pope, and any other clergy in high authority, are our shepherds and leaders.

This does not mean that we need to follow then into the ravine called heresy if they wish to jump in it.

>>716702

>I attend an SSPX chapel and I have never witnessed anyone trying to divide people, and people seem to just ignore the Pope's abuse of the ordinary magisterium.

This is the True™️ Breadpill every catholic has to swallow.

Live sacramental, obey orthodoxy, ignore heresy.

>>718263

>For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is great among the nations, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering; for my name is great among the nations, says the Lord of hosts.

>>723468

post the rest of the scripture, satan

"But you profane it when you say that the LORD's table is polluted, and the food for it* may be despised. 13 'What a weariness this is,' you say, and you sniff at me, * says the LORD of hosts. You bring what has been taken by violence or is lame or sick, and this you bring as your offering! Shall I accept that from your hand? says the LORD. 14 Cursed be the cheat who has a male in his flock, and vows it, and yet sacrifices to the Lord what is blemished; for I am a great King, says the LORD of hosts, and my name is feared among the nations."

deny the Holy Eucharist at your own risk

>>723556

[-]

Man I haven't seen this thread in a while

>>716212

>implying

>Dude Christianity strong lmoa

>gets btfo by anglicans

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HA HA HA HA HA AH