Recent Featured Videos and Articles | Eastern “Orthodoxy” Refuted | How To Avoid Sin | The Antichrist Identified! | What Fake Christians Get Wrong About Ephesians | Why So Many Can't Believe | “Magicians” Prove A Spiritual World Exists | Amazing Evidence For God | News Links |
Vatican II “Catholic” Church Exposed | Steps To Convert | Outside The Church There Is No Salvation | E-Exchanges | The Holy Rosary | Padre Pio | Traditional Catholic Issues And Groups | Help Save Souls: Donate | ![]() |
This section of our website (which is updated daily) contains some less formal – and short – e-mail exchanges that we’ve had which we feel may be of value to our readers. We will include those portions of the exchanges we deem relevant and valuable. We often add bolding and underlining which are not necessarily that of the other party. This section also frequently includes, not only e-exchanges we have, but also our notes, updates and comments. Section containing some important recent posts. E-Exchange Archives.
Dear MHFM:
I understand that it is a mortal sin to support heretics. I also understand that the SSPX provide valid sacraments, and that some consider the SSPX to be heretics. I have a few questions related to this:
1. How can a heretic provide valid sacraments?
2. If you need the sacraments for salvation, and the SSPX will give you those sacraments, is it a mortal sin to rent a room for the SSPX to say mass? Or is it a mortal sin to give them gas money to come and say mass? Or pay for their plane ticket? What if I pay $50 to rent the room for the SSPX, but my brother just gives the SSPX a cheque for $50; does he commit a mortal sin and not I?
If no one gives the SSPX a penny, they will have no means to deliver the sacraments to the faithful. Is there a distinction between a) giving money for the sake of getting the sacraments and b) supporting a heretic?
Thank you;
John G.
Pope Leo XIII, Apostolicae Curae, Sept. 13, 1896: “When anyone has rightly and seriously made use of the due form and the matter requisite for effecting or conferring the sacrament he is considered by that very fact to do what the Church does. On this principle rests the doctrine that a sacrament is truly conferred by the ministry of one who is a heretic or unbaptized, provided the Catholic rite be employed. On the other hand, if the rite be changed, with the manifest intention of introducing another rite not approved by the Church, and of rejecting what the Church does, and what by the institution of Christ belongs to the nature of the sacrament, then it is clear that not only is the necessary intention wanting to the sacrament, but that the intention is adverse to and destructive of the sacrament.”The above assertion has always been the teaching of the Church. It is why the Eastern Schismatics (the Eastern "Orthodox") have valid sacraments, valid priests, valid bishops, and valid Masses, even though they have been separated from the Church for about 1000 years. Heretical priests sin when they say Mass and it doesn't profit them unto salvation, but they do confect the Sacrament of the Eucharist validly if they observe valid matter and form (the traditional rite of the Church). You say, "some consider the SSPX to be heretics" as if you are not convinced? Do you know why they are heretics? If not, then you need to get a copy of our book Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation and read the section on the SSPX. The SSPX is heretical because it holds that souls can be saved in false religions without the Catholic Faith. It is mortal sin to obstinately (i.e., after being aware of this information) donate anything to them. They also are in union with John Paul II. They are also schismatic in their positions. Read the short article “The Heresies of the SSPX” on our website. You ask whether one can give them enough money just to pay for a room or gas? No, one should not give them any money whatsoever for any reason, although giving them money solely for gas or a room is somewhat different from giving them free-willed donations. But neither should be done, because one cannot facilitate priests in heresy to say Mass.
Greetings,
I am a recent convert from Protestantism who has since rejected the Novus Ordo and the "Newchurch" sect. I have been studying sedevacantism for a few months, and am leaning towards it. I hold to the doctrine of no salvation outside the Catholic Church, and have been debating with some associates of totally heretical defenders of Vatican II, namely Shawn M. and Dave A. Reading through M.’s awful writings, he presents a quote from the Catechism of Saint Pius X as follows:
29 Q: But if a man through no fault of his own is outside the Church, can he be saved?
A: If he is outside the Church through no fault of his, that is, if he is in good faith, and if he has received Baptism, or at least has the implicit desire of Baptism; and if, moreover, he sincerely seeks the truth and does God's will as best he can such a man is indeed separated from the body of the Church, but is united to the soul of the Church and consequently is on the way of salvation.
How should this be understood? Also-I have enjoyed your articles very much: you should write refutations of Shawn M. and Dave A.: not that they are particularly good writers, but they are apparently very influential in convincing "conservatives." If I want to order the DVD's and "No Salvation..." book, do I just send $15 to the monastery?
Sincerely,
Jay D.
I’m not very familiar with the specifics of the writings of the two men you mentioned, but I am familiar with their general positions. They give an all-out defense of the Vatican II apostasy, including defending the Assisi abomination, all the Vatican II documents, etc. People such as this are extremely evil and utterly blinded spiritually; in fact, words cannot describe how evil they are. They defend the rejection of Christ and the most evil thing in the world – the Vatican II apostasy – and they try to convince people that it is fine. If a person cannot even see that the Assisi abomination/John Paul II’s ecumenism is apostasy, then he is totally of bad will and I don’t know what one could say to convince him of the truth. We have focused more of our attention on the group of people who at least can see that the ecumenism, Assisi, etc. is contrary to the teaching of the Church. People should really not read writings by people like Shawn M. unless it is to expose him. Reading his garbage is truly like listening to Lucifer speak. I know one person who was a sedevacantist who continually read the “defenses” of ecumenism, etc. by Shawn M. and others. After listening to Shawn M.’s evil garbage for long enough, the devil moved in and the Sedevacantist began to imbibe the garbage and his whole Faith was destroyed. Now, this person actually has no problem with Assisi and is a full-fledged defender of the Vatican II apostasy. It was all because, in his bad will, he opened his mind up to Satan through entertaining the responses of Satan’s useful idiots, the apostate Shawn M. and others. One other lady who was a traditionalist and home-schooled her children began to read Shawn M.’s writings. She is now back in the Novus Ordo, and her children go to public school. Lucifer can thank his dupe, Shawn M., for that one. But, if we get time, it may be something we will address more in detail in the future. (more…)
Heretical Feenyite:
I didn't know degrees in theology were available from Cracker Jack! Just where and when did you get yours? Your website is an insult to the intelligence of a gnat. Quit masquerading as a Catholic and leading souls to hell.
Dear Apostate who claims to be Catholic but doesn't even believe that the Catholic Faith is necessary for salvation: You are just upset that we are exposing your heresy. Why don't you just be a little bit honest and admit that you don't accept the defined dogma that all who die without the Catholic Faith are lost? Stop pretending that you are a Catholic when we both know that you don't accept the Catholic Faith. Also, you are a despicable coward because you cannot even put you name. [Note: If people write us e-mails asking us questions and want to abbreviate their names that’s fine with us, but if they are going to send an attack they should have the courage to put their names.] -Bro. Peter Dimond To MHFM: HERETIC PETER DIMOND: My name is as listed below. Sorry it wasn't in my original e-mail as it was an oversight. By the way, I am the principal of St. Gertrude the Great School, West Chester, Ohio. Now you can add me to your slanderous list! I'm not upset, just sick of DIRT like you claiming the Catholic name and leading ignorant laymen astray. You're no more a religious than I am the pope. Why don't YOU stop pretending to be Catholic! Mark A. Lotarski MHFM: Do you reject the following as heretical? If not, you show yourself to be a heretic.
Bishop Donald Sanborn, Sacerdotium V, p. 24: “Wojtyla’s ecclesiology goes a step beyond Vatican II, a little step for man, but a great step for apostasy. While the Council seems to draw the line of the Mystical Body around those ‘who in faith look towards Jesus’ – whatever that means – Wojtyla [John Paul II] is ready to sign up the entire human race in the Mystical Body by the fact, as he says, that all are united to Christ by means of the Incarnation. With this principle, the Novus Ordites are in ‘communion’ not only with the Anglicans and the Orthodox, but with everything: Moslems, Buddhists, Hindus, spiritists, Jews, Great Thumb worshippers. You name it; they are in communion with it. Vatican II’s idea of the Church is heretical, since it identifies organized religions of pagans and idolaters with the Mystical Body of Christ. The truth is that in no way are pagans and idolaters, as pagans and idolaters, united to the Mystical Body of Christ. If, by some mystery of Providence and Predestination, they [pagans and idolaters] are united to the soul of the Church, and by desire to its body, it is in spite of their paganism and idolatry. It is due to an invincible ignorance of their error.”-Bro. Peter Dimond Lotarski To MHFM: According to whom? MHFM: Do you understand English? I asked if it is heretical or not? Yes or no? (more…)
What an excellent article on Michael Davies! I once went to breakfast with him when I was connected to a Catholic publishing company, and I found him to have quite a casual attitude about problems in the Church, which really aren't problems in the Church at all -- they are a counter-Church. Anyway, God bless you!
Sincerely,
Bruce---------
Brothers, Thank you for the wonderful investigation on Michael Davies. My first instinct at the passing of Michael Davies was to think of the help he has given to the traditional movement. But alas although I have to fight it every day, my novus ordo programming has not entirely been erased. After reading your article there is no doubt that Mr. Davies misled countless traditionalists from the true faith. I thank God that He has provided you with the wisdom to see through the deceits of so many wolves in sheeps clothing. I continually pray for the strength and wisdom to defend the True Faith…Keep up the good work with your website and may God continually bless your apostolate.
God Bless, Robert
------------------
Good coverage of the teachings of M. Davies. Except that I would add his notion of situational infallibility to the popes' published teachings on the faith and morals to the list. St. John sums it up perfectly: "If we say that we have fellowship with Him and walk in darkness, we lie and do not the truth." (First Epistle of St. John, 1,6). Vatican Council I infallibly laid down the first condition of salvation which is to maintain the rule of the true apostolic faith. These people in the publishing business need to start learning the
faith. What incredible ignorance!---------------
Brother Michael and Brother Peter,
I read the Heresy of the Week about Michael Davies. It is really too bad he died faithless considering the work he did. But it really has to be said that he did all this research on the liturgy and Vatican II's novel idea of religious liberty, for ABSOLUTELY
NOTHING! He still held the new mass as valid and all the Vatican II hierarchy as valid as well! He would lead you to the door of sedevacantism, then block it saying that we can't go there!
Well, did you read his last "Letter from London" in the September 30th Remnant? It appears he was obsessed with Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" movie! He writes,
"The third in the series left me totally devastated. I could not stand up for at least five to ten minutes, a catharsis in the true Aristotelian manner. Seeing these constitutes, in my opinion, a literary and almost RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE (emphasis mine) which I
trust that no reader will miss the experience of undergoing."
Think about this! Here is a guy with terminal cancer, staring eternity in the face, and he's getting euphoric from a FANTASY movie! We're not talking about "The Passion of the Christ" movie. We're talking about a movie with wizards, dwarfs, elves, and hobbits!
It's no wonder that this guy died suddenly of a massive heart attack! I guess his life was fulfilled after seeing such a "brilliant masterpiece". If only St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Robert Bellarmine could have been so fortunate as to live on earth at the
present time!
And you know, it hit me that way too. After watching the movie it took me a while to get up from my seat as well. But at the time, I thought it was because I ate too much popcorn and drank too much soda...that was a LONG movie.
Michael Davies was also of the opinion that parents of children over 10 have an ABSOLUTE DUTY (emphasis mine) to ensure that they read these literary masterpieces!
Now there's the real key to great knowledge: reading Lord of the Rings and the Chronicles of Narnia. I always wondered how I got so smart. Thanks, Michael!
Bridget
I must agree with your comment here. I don’t know much at all about the Lord of the Rings movie, but Davies’ insistence that all children over 10 have an absolute duty to view it strikes one as ridiculous.
I have found your site and enjoy it very much. I am a Frenchmen who lives in Cincinnati and I attend the true Mass. I did not see any mention of Bishop Dolan and his large following here. I also did not see any condemnation of the Feenyites although I am not all the way through reading your site.
Sir, glad that you found the site. But you won’t find any condemnation of “Feeneyism” on our site, which I’m sure you define as a person who believes that only baptized Catholics can be saved. You won’t find a condemnation of that because that is the teaching of Jesus Christ and the Catholic Church, and we have a 300-page book on the topic. (see our website for more details).
Pope Eugene IV, The Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” Nov. 22, 1439, ex cathedra: “Holy baptism, which is the gateway to the spiritual life, holds the first place among all the sacraments; through it we are made members of Christ and of the body of the Church. And since death entered the universe through the first man, ‘unless we are born again of water and the Spirit, we cannot,’ as the Truth says, ‘enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5]. The matter of this sacrament is real and natural water.”Further, you also should be made aware that Bishop Dolan does not accept the Catholic dogma that all people who die as non-Catholics are lost. He is affiliated with Bishop Sanborn and would share his position on the matter. Bishop Sanborn on Dominus Iesus writes: “Does Outside the Church There is No Salvation mean that anyone who is visibly outside the Roman Catholic Church is going to hell? No. It means that those who culpably remain outside of it are going to hell …” This is clear-cut heresy. This is what Bishop Dolan believes. Do you accept the dogma that all who die as Jews, pagans and heretics are lost?
Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra: “The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only those who abide in it do the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia productive of eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”[No response given to this question; but it is not a surprise.]
In Matthew 2:16 we read how Herod ordered the murder of all the baby boys in Bethlehem and nearby who were two years old or under , because of the birth of Jesus. Since you hold that all who do not receive water Baptism and believe in the Trinity will go to Hell, what do you suppose is the fate of these Holy Innocents who died because Jesus was born of Mary?
If you will permit me one more question, in Romans 9:14-16 we read of God's free choice in that He "will have mercy on whom I will have mercy." Does not your insistence on an absolutely inflexible condition of water Baptism attempt to limit the freedom of choice of Almighty God?
I ask these questions respectfully, not to try to trap you with words, or to burden you, but because I find the matter of water Baptism so ultimately important and the Scripture references I give above so challenging to your position.
Sincerely,
Dr. M.
MHFM: Dr. M.: There is a section in our book (Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No Salvation) which deals specifically with this objection. I will copy the section for you below. The short answer to your question is that the Holy Innocents and the Good Thief died under the Old Law, not the New Law - that is, before the law of baptism became obligatory on all. Regarding your section question: no, we are not limiting the free choice of God. God has revealed to man what He will do and what we must believe. He has told us via divine revelation that no one will be saved without the Catholic Faith. If that is not what He does, then He would not have revealed it.
Romans 8:29-30- “For whom He foreknew, he also predestinated to be made conformable to the image of his Son: that he might be the first-born amongst many brethren. And whom he predestinated, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.” Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra:“The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only those who abide in it do the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia productive of eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”
I hope you aren't giving me the "silent treatment" because I had made a donation to Bob Sungenis. I don't agree with his support of Vatican II or JPII, I merely supported his work on Geocentrism more than anything else. And since I sent him my email telling him that I was a sedevacantist, he hasn't responded to any contact from me anymore either.
That's like saying, "I just made a donation to John Kerry's campaign because I support his economic policy"; or "I just made a donation to the Greek Orthodox Church because I support their work and study of the early Church Fathers"; or "I just made a donation to the Lutheran ‘Church’ because I support their creation science". You cannot support heretics, and Bob Sungenis is definitely a heretic - one of the worst in the traditionalist movement.
Where does it mention the rosary in the Bible?
Thank you.
Donna H.
Besides the meditations on the mysteries of Christ and Our Lady (all of which are indicated in Scripture), the Rosary is comprised essentially of two prayers, the Our Father and the Hail Mary. Both come from the Bible. The Our Father is given to us by Our Lord in Scripture (Matthew 6; Luke 11), and the main part of the Hail Mary is found in Luke Chapter 1. The Hail Mary is as follows: HAIL MARY FULL OF GRACE, THE LORD IS WITH THEE, BLESSED ART THOU AMONG WOMEN AND BLESSED IS THE FRUIT OF THY WOMB JESUS, HOLY MARY MOTHER OF GOD PRAY FOR US SINNERS NOW AND AT THE HOUR OF OUR DEATH.
“Hail [Mary], full of grace, the Lord is with thee, Blessed art thou among women” comes directly from Luke 1:28. “Blessed art thou among women and Blessed is the fruit of thy womb [Jesus]” comes directly from Luke 1:42. “Holy Mary Mother of God pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death” is not found in Scripture, but completes the above prayer with a sublime petition to the Mother of God.Protestants fail to understand the significance of Mary because they don’t understand Jesus. They fail to understand the significance of the following truth about Jesus.
Pope St. Leo the Great, Council of Chalcedon, 451, ex cathedra: “… our Lord Jesus Christ… indeed born of the Father before all ages according to His Divinity, but in the last days born of the Virgin Mary, Mother of God, according to His humanity; for us and for our salvation, one and the same Christ…”One may say, what is Mary doing in a discussion of this magnitude? Therein lies her dignity, her power with God, and why God wishes us to have devotion to her. Catholics perceive and say “wow” at Mary’s role in the above, while Protestants remain blind to it and often attack it. They fail to understand how her soul “doth magnify the Lord” (Luke 1:47) because they don’t understand who she is who gives birth to the Son of God in His humanity. They fail to perceive the ramifications of this inscrutable truth. The Hail Mary, which begins in Luke 1:28 (the Angelic Salutation), is so significant precisely because it represents the Incarnation – the act by which the Son of God became man. As St. Louis De Montfort puts it, the Angelic Salutation (the Hail Mary) “has saved the world,” because by it (God becoming man in Mary’s womb) man had a chance to be saved.
“Blessed Alan De la Roche who was so deeply devoted to the Blessed Virgin had many revelations from her and we know that he confirmed the truth of these revelations by a solemn oath. Three of them stand out with special emphasis: the first, that if people fail to say the Hail Mary (the Angelic Salutation which has saved the world) out of carelessness, or because they are lukewarm, or because they hate it, this is a sign that they will probably and indeed shortly be condemned to eternal punishment. The second truth is that those who love this divine salutation bear the very special stamp of predestination. The third is that those to whom God has given the signal grace of loving Our Lady and of serving her out of love must take very great care to continue to love and serve her until the time when she shall have had them placed in heaven by her divine Son in the degree of glory which they have earned.” (The Secret of the Rosary, p. 45.)The Hail Mary, and Catholics’ petitions throughout history to the Mother of God, are prophesied by Our Lady herself in Luke 1:48: “…for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.” The Catholic commentary on this verse puts it well:
“These words [Luke 1:48] are a prediction of that honor which the Church in all ages should pay to the Blessed Virgin. Let Protestants examine whether they are in any way concerned in this prophecy.” (Challoner)
Dear Brothers,
There is a Benedictine traditional monastery in New Mexico… Do you know what their belief is on Outside the Church there is no salvation and John Paul II? There is that prophecy that says that those Benedictines faithful to the rule will be saved and something about remaining until the end of the world. Thank you so much.
To Jesus Through Mary, T. S.
Yes, we are familiar with them. Unfortunately, they do not hold the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation, but agree with the SSPX that souls can be saved without baptism and in false religions. They also hold that John Paul II is the Pope. They are basically an SSPX Monastery. Certain SSPX priests go from the SSPX into the Monastery and then back into the SSPX, although they would “officially” claim that the Monastery is not strictly affiliated with the SSPX. I also believe that Bishop Williamson has gone there to perform ordinations, although I’m not 100% certain about this. Thus, their positions would be in line with the SSPX.
Dear Brothers Dimond,
FYI, hindu worship permitted in Fatima Church May 2004 . Any info on this abomination? I do not see it in your website.
God bless.
Celso V.
Celso, We addressed that issue in the Heresy of the Week from 5/28/04. You will find it in the Heresy of the Week Archive on our website.
Greetings MHFM......Do you know anything of Fr. Andrew Wingate, he claims he's traditional, biolocates, and Mary let him hold the baby Jesu, he also claims to have visions during his mass and has lots to say about future events and has had past predictions as well… he claims many saints have appeared to him as well, he thinks Lord Matreyia is the Anti-christ mentioned alot about the Garenbandahl prophecies & mentioned LaSallete as well.....Just wondering if you have heard of him before & your thoughts about him...........Pat
Pat: I looked at his website. Fr. Wingate is a complete heretic who believes that Catholics should unite with the schismatic "orthodox" sects. Thus, he promotes schism and the denial of the Catholic Faith. He even promotes that these schismatics have true visionaries. He also believes that John Paul II is the Pope and that John Paul II is on the side of God. This alone proves that Wingate and his “messages” are not of God, but of the devil; for he denies the defined Catholic Faith. He also promotes the totally false and wicked "revelations" of Fr. Gobbi, who thinks that John Paul II is "Mary's Pope." Nothing could be further from the truth or more clearly from Satan - as one look at the photo galleries on our website shows. Thus, Fr. Wingate gives himself away as a tool of Satan. Wingate is probably having visions and, who knows, maybe he does bilocate, but these visions, bilocations and false miracles are given to him by Satan in order to promote him as a false prophet to deceive people and keep them inside the phony Vatican II sect. These are the false signs and wonders spoken of in 2 Thess. 2 that accompany the reign of Antichrist. In various places in the world today there are things happening with other Novus Ordo false prophets which are similar to the things that Fr. Wingate claims are happening to him.
I've been reading your new book, I've read every book I could find on the subject (anti-desire theory books), and as time goes by, the desire theorists (really universal salvation for "nice people" theorists) always come up with another excuse/angle, which should be answered. Well, your book answers them all (up to date). Lets see what they come up with now…
I have a question for you- Have you had any correspondence on the matter with SSPX's Bishop Williamson? He's an Anglican convert, and appears to be a reasonable man . I wonder what his reaction would be to reading your new book? Keep up the good work of bringing light upon error. Yours in Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, P. V.
Yes, we’ve sent Williamson materials in the past, which he rejected. He is adamantly opposed to the true meaning of Outside the Church There is No Salvation. He is not reasonable, especially when one considers what he believes on the core issues of the day. His declaration that he rejects John Paul II’s “Canonizations” even though he regards him as the Pope (a declaration which is quoted in our article “the Heresies of the SSPX”) reveals him to possess absolutely no Faith in the Papacy whatsoever.
I agree that outside the Church there is no salvation, but I have a question:
Do you deny that it is possible for a person who is not a "visible" member of Catholic Church to be saved? What I mean is this: do you deny it is possible for a person who has never stepped foot into a Catholic Church, but who has been baptised, to be saved? I understand it would be an exception, but do you deny any possibility for such an exception? Surely you do not deny that. Thanks…
It is possible for a person who has been baptized, and believes in the essential mysteries of the Catholic Faith, to be saved without having set foot in a Catholic church. For instance, some of the heathen whom St. Isaac Jogues converted were instructed in the essential mysteries of the Catholic Faith (the Trinity and the Incarnation) and were baptized just before they were tortured and killed. They were Catholics even though they never set foot in a Catholic church. In order to be a Catholic and a member of the Church, one must at least be baptized and, if above reason, know at least the essential mysteries of the Catholic Faith (the Trinity and the Incarnation) – and not reject any teaching of the Church. Persons such as those described above (baptized just before death by St. Isaac Jogues) are also subject to the Roman Pontiff, just like infants, by virtue of their baptism. Such persons would not be exceptions to the dogma at all, since those persons are Catholics and are within the bosom and unity of the Church; they are also part of the visible Church, by virtue of their baptism and acceptance of the essential mysteries of Catholicism.
Dear bro Dimond , Grace and blessing of the Lord be upon you for the work you are doing for souls. Since I discovered your website I have been challenged to seek the truth of the catholic faith. As a result of this I visit many traditional catholic sites .i understand that you maintain that the see of peter is vacant. I wish to seek for your opinion on the issue of antipope and the various claimants to the chair of Peter apart from JP11.who is the pope? I recently got a publication titled WHERE IS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. In the publication it is argued that pope Michael is the true pope of the catholic church.What is your advice on this. Does he have credibility? Does he have canonical status?pls dont be offended if I ask too many questions. I will appreciate a prompt reply to this. Pls find attached for WHERE IS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
Frank
Frank, “Pope” Michael has no credibility, nor does any person who claims to be Pope today. One cannot just elect himself Pope, as he has done. If I recall correctly, “Pope” Michael was “elected” by a conclave consisting of his mother and two of his relatives! The true Catholic Church still exists with that remnant of Catholics which maintains the deposit of Faith whole and inviolate, just like it did during the Arian crisis, although today’s crisis is even worse because it is the Great Apostasy.
I think you're right on target about Malachi Martin. He had a lot of people fooled. With regards to Fr. Wickens...his chapel has not been turned over to the SSPX. Apparently the SSPX could not provide a full time priest which was Fr. Wickens request. There is a search for a full time traditional priest for the Chapel.
With regards to Sr. Lucia....have you ever considered the possibility that she may be on "drugs" that would account for her personality change. I too caught a glimpse of the canonization service, and watched Sr. Lucia being escorted to receive "communion" from JPII and immediately after she turned and waved with a big smile on her face. She seemed to be rather confused.
If you've ever read any books about Opus Dei, it's a well known fact that they rely heavily upon "drugs" to soothe their subjects, especially the ones who begin to have qualms of conscience. Who knows...they may have JPII "medicated" too! Antipsychotic drugs have the side effects that resemble the "symptoms" of Parkinson's Disease. Remember when JPII first started showing signs of the "disease", it was denied that he had Parkinson's. Maybe it wasn't Parkinson's at the time, but since the side effects are irreversible, why not just say it is Parkinson's. T.T.
No, this “Sister” Lucia is not on drugs. We saw the “beatification” ceremony as well, and “Sister” Lucia was so enthusiastic about meeting John Paul II that she grabbed John Paul II’s hand and kissed it immediately after receiving the Novus Ordo cookie. Supposing that John Paul II were a Pope and the Novus Ordo Mass valid (neither of which is true), the real Sister Lucia would never do this; she wouldn’t interrupt her concentration immediately after receiving Our Lord to grab the hand of the Pope. She would wait until after Mass to pay her respects. But the fake “Lucia” was so intent on showing everyone her devotion to Antipope John Paul II that she couldn’t even wait until the end of the Novus Ordo and the consummation of the cookie to kiss his hand.
Do you have a list of places in the USA where one can go to mass with a valid/no BOD/JPII no pope priest, and maybe a school? If attending an SAP chapel, like Davie, FL, with Fr. Carl Pulvermacher, I find it difficult not to give some money in the collection so the priest/building can survive, or stipends for masses (spelling?) for the souls in Purgatory, is this a mortal sin? Let's say I move to St. Mary's, Kansas and send my children to school there, would it be a sin to pay tuition or to donate money for the school?
I try to do what I see as correct in the eyes of God, and so, I naturally understand your correct analysis of "Outside the Church No Salvation, period", it's an open and shut case. I don't see it open and shut for your conclusion that the SSPX is heretical for it's response to VATII and JPII, however, I do see your position regarding JPII as a more consistent conclusion than the SSPX's.
The sad fact of the matter is that there are only a few priests in the country that are fully Catholic. To answer your question about donating to the SSPX after one has been made aware of their heresies, the answer is yes it is a mortal sin for one to obstinately contribute to the SSPX, and by doing so one is showing Jesus Christ that he endorses the idea that Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims and Jews can be saved without the Catholic Faith, which they promote in their books.
Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215: "Moreover, we determine to subject to excommunication believers who receive, defend, or support heretics."Actions speak louder than words. Thus, one can say that he disagrees with the SSPX, but if he still contributes to this group, then his actions prove that he doesn't stand against their heresy but endorses it. If you were to move to St. Mary's you could pay tuition only (since this is required) but you could not give any donations to the school or a penny of financial support. You could only pay the tuition fee, just like if you buy a book from them: you can pay the cost of the book, but you cannot supplement that with any additional money as a donation. The SSPX is, unfortunately, heretical and schismatical for its union with John Paul II. It is heretical because it holds that heretics are Catholics (which is heresy) and that people can be Catholic and completely reject the necessity of Christ and the Church. It is also heretical for holding that the Catholic Church is apostate (namely, that the Vatican II sect is the Catholic Church). The SSPX is schismatical because it holds that one can reject the solemn Canonizations of the man it believes to be the Pope.
Dear Brothers, I would like to know if it is ok to sing in a recreational choir where some of the pieces are from the Gloria in Latin by Mozart and the Huron Carol by St. Jean deBreuf. This is for a Christmas concert for the general public, although the location is a United Church but only for its sound. This is a non-religious affiliated choir. I would appreciate your opinion. Thank you and God bless. -Barbara
Barbara, no, a Catholic should not sing in the Choir if the concert is going to be held in the heretical Protestant "church," even if the choir is non-religious.
Dear Rev. Brother: I have just read a newsletter of a Traditional priest…This priest was also impressed by the great veneration showed to Our Lady by thousands of people in the [Orthodox] churches of Moscow and St Petersburg. It is a mystery that despite this great love for Our Lady, the hearts of the Orthodox have never been inclined to seek unity with Rome over the centuries. Can you throw some light on this? One has to be obedient to the (true) Roman Pontiff to be saved. God bless, NC
That’s a good question. If they were truly devoted to Our Lady they would become Catholic; but, in my opinion, the answer as to why they don’t is, in most cases, due to intellectual pride.
Pope Innocent III, Fourth Lateran Council, 1215, on Heretics: “We condemn all heretics, whatever names they may go under. They have different faces indeed but their tails are tied together inasmuch as they are alike in their pride.”I’ve spoken at length about the Catholic Faith with the Eastern “Orthodox,” and almost invariably you discover that they suffer from obvious pride which causes them to refuse to submit in humility to the Church Christ established. Many of them get hung up on complex theological issues, such as the nature of the Trinity and the meaning of grace, and they use their own ideas about these topics as reasons to find fault with the Catholic Church.
Good morning,
I have received the material I ordered and I wanted to say thank you, incredible stuff. I wanted to ask what might seem an incredibly stupid question. When you pray all 15 mysteries at one time can you move from one right to the other? In other words after you finish the joyful mysteries and after you recite the Hail Holy Queen, can you start right away with the next Our Father and meditation on the first sorrowful mystery? Thank you againGene
Gene, I'm glad that you received the material. The answer to your question is yes, you can go straight to the next Our Father for the first Sorrowful Mystery. And, actually, you don't have to say the Hail Holy Queen, etc. until you are finished with the Glorious Mysteries (i.e., if you are going to say all 15 mysteries).
Dear Brother, My wife and I find great interest in the articles you send, & also in your magazines we have here at home. Wouldn't it be better to pray for our Pope rather then keep bashing him? How can you be sure it isn't the Masons doing most of the damage and not him? For all you know, he could even have a double who is being seen & doing things he shouldn't. Anything is possible, but being our Pope, he deserves more respect rather then being called names. That kind of talk & articles can only make matter worse. Let's pray instead! Thank you, J. & C.
First of all, John Paul II is not a Pope because he is not a Catholic. He does not believe in the Council of Trent, but holds that Justification by faith alone is acceptable; he does not believe in Vatican I, but holds that Eastern Schismatics should not be converted to a belief in the Papacy; he does not believe in Jesus Christ, but holds that Jews can reject Him and be saved because their covenant with God is still valid. He holds that Islam and Animism are good religions; and he holds that all men are saved. Why is it necessary to expose him? One really shouldn’t have to answer this question, but the answer is that there are countless reasons. He is the head of the phony Vatican II sect which is deceiving millions of those who profess to be Catholic; he is the main enemy of Jesus Christ and Our Lady in the world by far. Since he claims to be the Pope, people are following his program of apostasy and accepting it because they think he is the official teacher in the Church. Further, basically all of the abominations, sacrileges, scandals and heresies of the Novus Ordo sect with which one is bound to battle ultimately emanate from, or have their origin in, his activity or that of his phony predecessors, Paul VI and John XXIII. One good example is the recent Hindu abomination at Fatima. How was this able to occur? It was able to occur because they were just following John Paul II’s lead in Assisi. He did the same thing at Assisi: he turned the sacred convent over to false religions for them to worship the devil. Thus, to attempt to expose the Hindu outrage at Fatima without exposing Antipope John Paul II is foolish and futile. That is why those who think they are opposing the evil of the Vatican II revolution by simply exposing the Bishops or the radical theologians without getting to the heart of the problem (John Paul II) are swatting gnats when there is a big bird right in their faces, Antipope John Paul II. Those who fail to understand what Antipope John Paul II is or what he is all about are deceived and will be deceived about what is happening to the Catholic Church in the last days.
I was wondering what your thoughts were on racism in Catholic teaching?
Racism is a sin, which is a result of pride and hatred of neighbor. Racists are infatuated with themselves; they think that they are so great that they despise those of a different race or nationality. But while they are filled with how great they think they are, they are a disgrace in God’s sight. God doesn’t care what race or nationality you are; He cares if you love Him and hold the true Faith. The Catholic Church is universal, i.e., it embraces equally all men of whatever race or nationality.
Pope Pius XI, Rerum Ecclesia (#26), Feb. 28, 1926: “Anyone who looks upon these natives as members of an inferior race or as men of low mentality makes a grievous mistake.”The truth is that there is really only one race, the human race, as we all come from Adam and Eve. And while there is no sin to note distinctions in your nationality or your family heritage or to be aware of this, of course, or even to talk about it, it should also be noted that when this emphasis or focus on one’s nationality becomes inordinate, even in those who are not racists (e.g., people who constantly talk about how “Irish they are” or how “Italian they are”), it is a sign that a person is infected with pride and is infatuated with himself. Some also use nationality to justify sins; for instance, those drunks who say, “well, I’m Irish, what do you expect.” Sorry, but being Irish has nothing to do with the sin of getting drunk, but people dishonestly attempt to justify this sin in this way.
A few questions…The… question is about God's hatred, his abhorrence of the wicked. What exactly does this term mean? In Deuteronomy 28, God says He will rejoice in destroying the people that forsakes His ways. In other places, he talks about laughing at the wicked as their plans come to naught (I suppose as He precipitates them down to Hell). The Old Testament treats often of the destruction promised evil-doers. The Psalmist sometimes asks for the destruction of his enemies. How am I supposed to reconcile all of this with a loving God? I know Jesus suffered and died for us all, good and wicked, but I am beginning to rethink how I see his teachings, His Passion, and his death.
My understanding of the matter is that God hardens hearts. In one passage, He says you have before you fire and water, whichever you choose shall be given you. In other words, if I forcefully and constantly choose to be a hedonist, God won't spend my whole life preventing me from being a hedonist; he will abandon me to those false pleasures which have become my god. St. Alphonsus, in "Preparation for Death," talks of the way God withdraws His grace from the impenitent and leaves them almost completely unable to repent, easy prey for demons at the hour of death. These to me are examples of God's hatred: if you resolutely choose to contradict Him, He will largely abandon you to your way… How would you have me understand God's hatred? Also I would like to hear your interpretation of the words toward the end of Psalm 138: Have I not hated them who hated thee, O Lord? With a perfect hatred I have hated them and they have become an enemy to me. Is this the passage Jesus was talking about when he taught you have heard it said that you shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy, but amen, I say to you, love your enemies and do good to those who hate you? What does this passage (about perfect hatred) mean?
Why does God seem to change His teaching in this matter?... As always, thanks for the materials; they are eye-opening and educational. Thanks also for the counsel. Jason B.
Jason, thank you for your question. God’s mercy is for those who fear Him (Luke 1:50). When His mercy is mentioned in Scripture, it is given to those who fear, obey and cooperate with His grace. Those who begin by fearing Him and obeying Him then come to see His love. That is why Scripture teaches that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom (Psalm 110:10). But those who spurn Him, deny Him and disobey Him get His wrath. And it is an awful thing to fall into the hands of the living God, as St. Paul says (Heb. 10:31). What I think is important to take from your e-mail is that God’s truth is a serious thing. He casts the wicked into Hell for all eternity; and He tortures them day and night for ever and ever, as the Apocalypse says. This is important for us to understand because there are many people we hear from all the time, especially among the “traditionalists,” who reject the truth because they are too liberal. They refuse to believe that this many people could be condemned by God and could be going to Hell. They need to re-read the words of Jacinta of Fatima: “Lucia found Jacinta sitting alone, still and very pensive, gazing at nothing. ‘What are you thinking of, Jacinta?’ ‘Of the war that is going to come, and of so many people who are going to die and go to Hell.’” (William Thomas Walsh, Our Lady of Fatima, p. 94) And it must be repeated that God is not unreasonable, of course. The people who go to Hell deserve it because they obstinately refuse to see the truth. God’s yoke is sweet and His burden is light (Mt. 11:30) for those who believe the truth, as people should – and for those who want to do the right thing with a pure intention. But for those who deny the truth or refuse to see things God’s way or refuse to obey Him, it is an awful thing.
I very much agree with most all your commentary. However, one is left with very disconcerting conflicts concerning just about everything in life. For example: my daughter, who has Asperger's Syndrome, has been home-schooled since first grade. Soon she will be in high school and she very much wishes to attend an actual school. The only school with a program to work with special needs children is a Catholic high school under the auspices of Vatican II Church officials... She mentioned that she could simply not go to Communion and act like the other children of other religions instead of actively participating in the religious activities there. What do you think? Would I be committing a sin by sending her there for the academic and social advantages?
Also, on another topic that is unrelated, but presents a similar problem: I am a trained classical singer, a soprano, with university degrees in performance. As a singer, the only opportunities to sing for profit are to sing for church services, be they Protestant or Catholic, or do concerts, which would be done in various churches, both Vatican II Catholic churches and Protestant, as well as concert halls… My singing job would be as a cantor, section leader, and soloist at Vatican II Masses, or for concert organizations who perform under many different venues including many different churches.
If I insist on being a purist, I cannot sing, and therefore, I will not be able to use my talent or make money as a singer. As you probably know, female solo voices are not allowed at the Traditional Latin Rite Mass, except as part of a choir -- and there is no choir position available in this area, except in the Vatican II churches. Again, what do you think? Am I committing a sin by singing at heretical churches, when I regard those positions as merely job opportunities?... Thank you very much for your time and attention, as I know you are extremely busy. I am about to make the decision about the church job any day now.
Most sincerely, S. P.
S. P., thanks for the questions. To answer your questions,
Dear Brothers Dimond, Please comment; now that a true pope is not sitting in office, how can a traditional Catholic be absolutely sure that a dogma is a dogma or not a dogma of the Faith, eg. baptism of blood and desire? What is your take on the restoration of the true Catholic Church, and the papacy? Will this be the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of the Blessed Virgin Mary? If the Great Apostasy has been fulfilled and the Anti-christ revealed, is it not that the second coming of our Lord Jesus Christ will immediately follow? Where does the triumph of the Immaculate Heart fit in?
God bless you, C. V.
C. V., a Catholic has sure Faith in the dogmas because they were proclaimed from the Chair of Peter, whose teaching God will not allow to err. The fact that a Pope is not currently reigning has no bearing on the certainty of those dogmas. Also, the Church does not need restoration. It still exists, but has simply been reduced to a remnant.
Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos (# 10), Aug. 15, 1832:“Therefore, it is obviously absurd and injurious to propose a certain ‘restoration and regeneration’ for her (the Church) as though necessary for her safety and growth, as if she could be considered subject to defect or obscuration or other misfortune.”We are in the last days before the Coming of Christ; there is no doubt about this.
I am enjoying reading your book THERE IS NO SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH, but I think it is addressed to those who are already essentially committed to Roman Catholicism (of some variety) and not to potential converts thereto. For that, I presume, there are other publishers that you recommend. Is Tan Books the best? Sincerely yours, Davy C.
Davy, there are many good books, but the one I would recommend off the top of my head for a potential convert from Protestantism is The Catholic Controversy by St. Francis De Sales (available from TAN Books). 21 Reasons to Reject Sola Scriptura (also available from TAN) is also very good.
Dear MHFM: A relative of mine attends the novus ordo every Sunday and goes to "confession" only to a priest who was ordained in the traditional rite back in the early 1950s. He wants to know is his confession valid? If not why? Thanks!!!
A Confession to a validly ordained Novus Ordo priest (i.e., a priest ordained in the Old Rite) would be valid if the Novus Ordo priest says "I absolve you from you sins in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost." But the person you mentioned persists in going to the invalid Novus Ordo "Mass," and therefore that person is sinning gravely. Thus, he does not approach Confession with the proper resolution to avoid this grave sin and therefore his Confession is sacrilegious.
You often call John Paul II, his Bishops and other heretics apostates. An apostate is one who gives up the Christian completely, so you are misusing the term. They are heretics, not apostates.
J.M.
No, we are not misusing the term apostate. It is perfectly accurate to label Antipope John Paul II and his Bishops apostates. Pope Pius IX labels the “Old Catholics,” who merely denied Papal Infallibility (one dogma), as apostate priests in Graves ac diuturnae.
Pope Pius IX, Graves ac diuturnae (# 2), On the “Old Catholics”: “Having violently occupied parishes and churches with apostate priests, they have not neglected any deception or cunning to lead the children of the Catholic Church into wretched schism… Because it has always been the especially characteristic of heretics and schismatics to use lies and deception, these sons of darkness… [the ‘Old Catholics’] repeatedly state openly that they do not in the least reject the Catholic Church and its visible head but rather that they are zealous for the purity of Catholic doctrine… But in fact they refuse to acknowledge all the divine prerogatives of the vicar of Christ on earth and do not submit to His supreme Magisterium.”In his book The Liturgical Year, Abbot Guérangerrefers to Martin Luther as an apostate:
“Luther would have the world believe Him (God) to be the direct author of sin and damnation… Calvin followed; he took up the blasphemous doctrines of the German apostate…” (Vol. 10, Feast of the Sacred Heart, p.428.)In the absolutely strict sense used by canonists, the word apostate applies only to those who abandon all profession of the Christian faith entirely. In other senses, it is applied by Popes and Saints to heretics who give up the Christian Faith by virtue of their rejection of one or more dogmas; for, as Pope Leo XIII teaches, those who repudiate one article of the Faith reject in one act the whole of Christian teaching.
Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 9), June 29, 1896: “… can it be lawful for anyone to reject any one of those truths without by that very fact falling into heresy? – without separating himself from the Church? – without repudiating in one sweeping act the whole of Christian teaching? For such is the nature of faith that nothing can be more absurd than to accept some things and reject others. Faith, as the Church teaches, is that supernatural virtue by which… we believe what He has revealed to be true, not on account of the intrinsic truth perceived by the natural light of human reason [author: that is, not because it seems correct to us], but because of the authority of God Himself, the Revealer, who can neither deceive nor be deceived… But he who dissents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all faith, since he thereby refuses to honor God as the supreme truth and the formal motive of faith.”So Antipope John Paul II and his Bishops are certainly apostates, especially when we consider that many of their heresies involve not only a denial of one or more dogmas of the Faith, but a denial of the author of our Faith Himself, Our Lord Jesus Christ.
Dear Brother Peter,
I also wanted to let you know that Father Gonzales of SSPX at St. Jude's this past Sunday also asked us to pray for Father Wickens. Do you think that that is ok?
Scott K.
We are sorry to hear about the death of Fr. Wickens, but the sad fact is that Catholics cannot pray for him, because there is no evidence that he died a faithful Catholic, and there is much evidence to indicate that he died adhering to and accepting various heresies. Without question he will be praised as a hero by many of the false traditionalists. Any time any priest dies who celebrated the Latin Mass they honor him as if he were a Saint, no matter what he believed. All that matters to them is that he said the Latin Mass – and he’s going straight to heaven. Whereas Martin Luther cried “Faith Alone,” the false traditionalist heretics hold to Salvation by the Latin “Mass Alone.” They could care less what the priest actually believed. (more…)
Dear Bro. Diamond,
What do you make of the so-called "material/formal sedevacantism" proposed by some traditional priests? I look forward to your response. Thank you and God bless!
Pax Tecum,
Steven K.
THE ABOVE VIDEO IS VERY IMPORTANT AND REFUTES THE CASSICIACUM THESIS
Steven, you are referring to the Cassiciacum Thesis or the “material/formal pope” idea. It is not actual sedevacantism. It's the theory that the Vatican II claimants to the Papacy have valid elections, but not jurisdiction over the Church. Adherents of this idea also hold that the Vatican II Sect is not an entity different from the true Church and that all members of the Novus Ordo (who have not been declared heretics) are Catholics! They make many anti-sedevacantist arguments to defend their false position.
The thesis also holds that the Vatican II antipopes receive jurisdiction to appoint cardinals, and that the apostate 'cardinals' of the Vatican II Sect are true cardinals. The thesis is false, and amounts to a position half-way between the position of the SSPX and actual sedevacantism. If a man is a pope, he has full and supreme jurisdiction over the Church. If not, then he lacks jurisdiction proper to the office. Also, heretics cannot be validly elected pope.
Pope Pius IX, Vatican I, 1870, Sess. 4, Chap. 3, ex cathedra: “If anyone thus speaks, that the Roman Pontiff has only the office of inspection or direction, but not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the universal Church… let him be anathema.” (Denz. 1831)
The proposition anathematized above, especially the bolded portion, is what many 'recognize and resist' false traditionalists have fallen into. A true pope cannot be separated from his authority. But if a man is not a true pope, then he does not have jurisdiction proper to the papal office. The Vatican II claimants to the Papacy are heretics. Since they are outside the Church, they have no jurisdiction. The Cassiciacum Thesis must be rejected. The main adherents of the Cassiciacum Thesis in our day are the members of Bishop Donald Sanborn's group, who also deny the Catholic faith by professing that members of false religions can be saved without the Catholic faith.
DEAR BRO. MICHAEL AND PETER-----
I AM A GENTELMAN IN MY 50s AND I AM NOT ABLE TO GET TO A LATIN MASS OR A BYZANTINE LITURGY----ALL WE HAVE IS NOVUS ORDO---AND I CANT TRAVEL LONG DISTANCES TO ATTEND TRADITIONAL SERVICES. AM I DOOMED TO HELL FOR THIS???
CAN MY SOUL STILL BE SAVED???
PLEASE, RESPOND.
IN CHRIST
WAYNE
Yes, Wayne, in charity we must tell you that if you continue to go to the invalid Novus Ordo you will be doomed to Hell. You are not receiving Our Lord Jesus Christ, but a piece of bread. You are not going to a Catholic Mass, but a Protestant service. You can still save your soul, but not if you continue to go to the Novus Ordo. If you cannot get to a traditional Mass that is acceptable, you must stay home on Sunday. The third Commandment of God is to keep holy the Sabbath. It is a Church law to attend Mass on Sunday. This only obliges if there is a true Mass available, with a true Catholic priest celebrating it. The English Martyrs in the 16th century were tortured horribly simply because they would not countenance or participate in a service just like the Novus Ordo, which had been imposed upon them.
^