Thanks Father Cekada, I really needed this shot in the arm to fortify me. Sedevacantism is a lonely exercise of the faith without an occasional inspirational boost like this .
I attend an SSPX chapel here in Florida, and our priest is helping an Sedavacontist chapel in Tampa area since the lost their Priest who passed. Our priest said that despite their differences, we are all Catholic and need to support each other. Many of our parishioners also make the journey to attend mass in Tampa in support. I don't think that most devout Catholics fear tribal loyalties, but fear doing the wrong thing in God's eyes. Dominus vobiscum!
You can't have your cake and eat it too...the FSSPX/SSP cling on to an ecclesiastical status/money pipeline rather than the true faith which simply doesn't hold to accept ANY of these Antipopes as true popes. So in my opinion and I was "stuck" with the FSSPX & SSP for a while too, they will need to prove firstly to themselves if they are true to the Catholic magisterium (thus get rid of the watered down 1962 missale) and church or just the money pipeline of "acceptance on the lowest level" by the heretic antipope currently running the Novus Ordo counter church!
When I was R&R I was both afraid to study sedevacantism because of what I had been told about it, and was also blinded by human respect, as I respected my then leaders. That said, now I’m about to join a Sedevacantist seminary if I’m approved and accepted. I’m still baffled that I didn’t see the truth, that the See is vacant, before.
I think R&R leads naturally leads from NO to sedevacantism. I think those that stay in R&R are dishonest. I don’t see how they can’t make the next logical step. I think a lot of it has to do with $, followers and pride, but I could be wrong. I just know that’s how my path went. Thank God I found holy priests in driving distance.
There is no greater choice in life with respect to the love of God to commit oneself to God‘s work. The world needs you, God needs you to do His will. Don’t worry or be concerned that you are missing something in life by giving your self to God. On the contrary, those of us who did not make the choice of Priesthood are the ones who are missing out. You are needed more than ever to do the ACTUAL work of Christ. Don’t delay listen to him, his love will guide you. His flock needs tending.
I have been listening to Father Cekada, Bishop Daniel Dolan, Bishop Donald Sanborn for several years. There is a shock when told, that Catholic Church down the street isn't Catholic to be sure! But these 3, part of Lefebvre 9, will be counted heroes by future Catholic generations
All I need to know about Vatican II is, as a Child my Mother saying after she attend the first "Modern Man" mockery they tried calling the NEW Mass. She Said"The Holy Mass is no longer the Same Holy Mass". That was in the late 60s and It still hold TRUE Today. She was in her late 50s,she knew something was STINKING in Rome.
I just became catholic a year ago, Easter 2017 and I guess I knew something was up right away with the 60's and Vatican 2. I do question a lot, thank God for that! If we don't question and want to learn, you become mindless robots. I don't want to be that. I just wanted to thank you so much for having TH-cam videos to listen to, they are SO helpful! I've recently started to study Sedevacantism (Lent 2018). At first I was terrified to study them, because I always heard of the "most extreme, most violent people called..." So, I was lied to right off the bat and not knowing any better I believed them until I started to question if Catholicism was the actual way. The only thing that I deeply miss is my friends/community to talk about church things with others and going to actual church, with confession, Eucharist, Adoration, etc. I need all that, so I don't know what I'm going to end up doing. But just wanted again to thank you so much Father and whom else put these videos together that we all might listen and learn from them. They are quite a treasure for new Catholics and old ones alike to know that that really old Catholic church is still around.
I AGREE 100% BRAVO! TRUTH IS TRUTH...THANK YOU FOR YOUR ZEAL FOR THE TRUE CATHOLIC CHURCH...AFTER LISTENING TO BOTH BISHOP SANBORN & YOU FATHER, THIS JUST MAKES SENSE..GOD BLESS YOU!!💝
@Janette Davis That's just not true. Have you never heard of any of the other Catholic bishops who kept the true faith like Bishop Guerard Des Laurier and Bishops Carmona and Zamora, Bishop Robert McKenna, etc? I know that the SSPX will not tell anyone about them. They keep lying and saying that Abp Lefebvre was the "only traditional bishop". What nonsense - and more reason to beware of them.
We sedevacantists are, as the name makes clear, without a leader. This is a terrible situation, but a situation we are not able to change, as far as we can see. However, the one thing worse than being without a leader is accepting a false one. We have no choice.
John 10 :27-30 " My sheep listen to my voice; I know them and they follow me....". Jesus Christ is Shepherd and is Leader for those who have ears to hear and follow God's holy will. There is nothing Catholic nor holy in the Vatican 2 sect.
Sedevacantism has brough to me the Catholic church and it warms me to see the wisdom of the video and the people posting in the comments. Now if only there was a sedevacantist Priest in my area of Vancouver BC
My husband & I are strongly considering sedevacantism (we’re basically already there). Anyway, we live in Houston and there are no sede priests here, but we learned that one in Austin (and even in other states) would be happily to travel and visit for Mass, etc. I can probably put you in touch with someone who can help you.
@@SamanthaGluck The mission is on hold because of the spike protein jab border restrictions so I will pray you get this non una cum valid Mass and we will try to move to the US too; we also don't want Sede Priests to even consider receiving the product to cross the border so best of luck and hopefully things will open up a bit. Thank you for thinking of us. At least we have the SSPX here.
Lefebvre saved the Church He was the true Pope back then. Where does Scripture say the Pope must reside in Rome. ? Simple really The Pope is the One that holds the Jewish Passover Prayers said in the Temple in Jerusalem that Jesus attended with His Apostles on the night He was betrayed.
This makes perfect sense to me. Although making the step will be hard because of my family. Pleasing Our Lord is my first priority. Any priests near Baton Rouge, LA?
I am almost 77, and loved the Latin Mass of my chilhood. VII changed it to N.O. which did not seem reverent in many parishes. It took the prayers of the liturgy from vertical to horizontal. But i attended, because it was the only Mass i could attend. As time passed, many Catholics changed to other faiths. Now we have a leader who speaks heresy and approves sinful behavior Thank you for preserving the true Catholic faith and the true liturgy.
Excellent video, Father. I am relatively new to all this (since Bergolio) and now consider myself sedevacanist - Roman Catholic. What else can explain the last 50 years? I do not understand the fear and hatred directed at sedevacanism by the traditionalists (whom I have read the last 3 years), considering what is going on - it seems a perfectly legitimate viewpoint, at least worth considering. Why do they refuse to acknowledge it? I saw a video once where Archbishop Lefebvre at least acknowledged that someday we might have to consider sedevacanism - I think we are definitely there.
+sarah wood Thank you for your comments. Abp. Lefebvre did indeed say that, and on more than one occasion. John Daly did a compilation of the archbishop's pro-sede quotes, and you can find it here: www.fathercekada.com/2012/09/04/pro-sedevacantism-quotes-from-abp-lefebvre/ He made some particularly strong pro-sede statements in the period before the 1988 consecrations but backpedaled when he got blowback in France, alas.
+Rev. Anthony Cekada This is a lot to read but I certainly will do so carefully. It is sad the archbishop backpedaled but it is such a disturbing and confusing situation I would hope he did the best he could with said situation. I am grateful for what he did - all of you. I am ashamed to say even though I was raised a Catholic I left the Church in the sixties and only returned in 1980. I had no idea what was really going on. I can't help but wonder what the archbishop would have to say about Bergoglio Thanks again..
I just wanna know, if they Faith isn't supposed to change, why is the Mass so obviously, drastically different? Something to ponder on if you're a Modernist. I am considering the Sedevacantist position, I plan on looking into it.
Look into it but vacate the Novus Ordo Sheeples who are appeasing the gay way see the McCarrick cover-up the idol Pachamama worship the comment, “God wills many religions.” These are heretics that are ecotheology preachers but not Catholics!
Simple. The Novus Ordo is not a Catholic Mass, according to true popes such as St Pius V and Plus XII. This website will satisfy all your questions. Modernist heretics created the foundation of the man made new Church from inside. So the word Catholic has been stolen by a new and false church that contradicts the doctrine of the True Church, making mass and sacraments invalid. At the time nobody could imagine such a thing could happen. But the fruits of the new "Catholicism" became obvious. Unbelieving pervert "priests." Loss of Faith among the laity. God is waiting for Catholics to use the brains He gave them, and to study the never changing Magisterium that was non-contradictory until the death of Plus XII, the last known Catholic Pope. Because of the confusion among "goog" people, we each have to do our homework now, since authentic catechesis ended by 1970. So unless you were educated in what Catholicism is before then, you will have to teach yourself. Read pre-1958 encyclical and catechism and rely on websites like this one. Remember it is infallible teaching that a Catholic must suppress their intellect and accept all a pope teaches. If he teaches against the 1958 Church, he is not guided by the Holy Spirit, has ipso facto excommunicated himself, and is to be ignored as an antipope by the faithful. You are not obligated to attend the "mass" of the heretical Novus Ordo sect he leads. We living now have been chosen by God to resist the false church and its false popes. It is His plan to purify and refine His True Church as gold in a fire. Unlike our fortunate ancestors, we cannot be assured we are Catholics just by obedience to the man in Rome claiming to be pope. The World loves Francis, but the World has never loved the True Church of 1958 to the start
@@TheCleanTech not changes in substance and intention. Plus IX said he had no authority to add St Joseph's name to the Canon or to change a single word of the Canon of Mass. So how can Pope Montini impose an entirely new Mass? He in fact had no authority to do so, thus the Novus Ordo is invalid, the service of the Vatican II heretical sect, to which you ignorantly belong. Study the pre 1958 Magisterium and you will see.
@@charlesburns3946 your mistaken, the Pope does have the authority over the cannon. One simple fact. “The mystery of Faith”. That was an addition, as well as the Saints that were named prior to St Joseph , I would be interested to see the Pius 12 quote that you referenced? And the novus order is not a new mass , it is a new form of the mass , Your ideas are not based on your study of the magisterium, they are based on sedevacantist misconceptions , half truths, and exaggerations that you probably read on some website
As a sedevacantist Catholic, I recommend you view the video by the sedevacantist Catholic Dimond Brothers, Vaticancatholic. Com, exposing the heresies of SSPX.
GloryTo TheHolyTrinity! The Dimond brothers are so very wrong, even coming from a sedevacantist view. If you want to lend any credence to sedevacantism, don’t use those guys.
Hello to everyone. I appreciate anyone interested in this subject, which concerns the fate of the world, though few seem to notice. I have known Fr. Cekada for decades, recognize his ongoing important research, and have often passed parts of it on to others. What I want to introduce into this conversation is that proving how the available evidence seems to demand the conclusion of the Vacant Chair (sede vacante) since 1958 or 1965, and then leaving it there may tend to cause some to lose the Faith, or be weakened in the Faith subconsciously. Why? Because the question arises immediately: how did this happen? How is this possible? This is why many stay with EWTN or "Recognize and Resist." The most avoided subject about the current crisis, it seems to me, is Mr. Gary Giuffre's research on the hi-jacking of the 1958 conclave. This research is based on a number of facts and a lot of circumstantial evidence -- which is often the case when a very clever crime has been committed. The late Fr. Villa's paper based in Italy, "Chiesa Viva" recently published "Grave Reasons of State" by Mr. Giuffre. And WhiteSmoke1958.com presents an avalanche of information on this thesis, usually called the Siri Thesis, i.e., that Cardinal Siri was the one elected Pope on October 26, 1958. I also did three 1 hr interviews with Judith Sharpe of ISOC.ws on this thesis. The idea is that a true Pope was elected, was shoved aside under the cloud of nuclear threats, and replaced two days later by John XXIII, hailed wildly immediately and worldwide by the Masonic mainstream media. Then began the nightmare within the structures of the Church, led by these antipopes who did not have the special assistance of the Holy Ghost. This would explain everything, and how the Chair of Peter has been occupied by Masonic antipopes since 1958; thus, Sede Vacante. --- Thus would have been the Eclipse of the Church prophesied by Our Lady of LaSalette, which will end when God Himself lifts the veil on exactly what happened, and restores a true Pope to the Vatican, as many prophecies say will happen. While this is admittedly still a thesis, why the blackout on research that has so many indisputable facts and impressive circumstantial evidence to uphold it? Since no Pope in history up until 1958 has ever fallen into formal heresy, what are the chances that we've now had six in a row fall into formal heresy? The Siri Thesis is a much clearer explanation of how we got here, which even a child can understand. I'm betting that the coming Robert Siscoe/John Salsa book will avoid mentioning it altogether, or gloss over it. Someone told me that Fr. Cedada himself may do a "tin foil hat" Catholicism segment on the Siri Thesis, which I look forward to. As I said, I've known Fr. Cekada since the 1970s, been at conferences with Robert Siscoe a few times, and met John Salza once when he was speaking at a conference. I hope my tone conveys that I have no animosity towards anyone discussing this earth-shaking subject, which should command our attention and prayers. Best wishes to all - Jim Condit Jr.
+Jim Condit Jr. I wonder why Cardinal Siri would say he was bound by the secret? Could a true Pope really be bound by the Devil's henchmen? I believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was elected, that he was forced to resign, and that consequently, the resignation was null and void. But I puzzle over the 'bound by the secret' part.
I have contemplated that question many times myself. It dawned on me not so long ago that the Cardinal never says by what secret he is bound. Can we perhaps imagine that after accepting the Papacy and being bullied into refusing to take the chair, one of the conspirators requested reconciliation and then divulged the entire plan under the seal of the confessional? In that case, his lips are indeed tied by the secret. Interesting twist ay? Not the secret of the conclave but the secret of the confessional.
I'm so edified but Fr Cekada's calm, patient and confident teaching! I look forward to meeting him face to face someday! Perseverance in this cross 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻❤️
The question has to be asked , at what point do you give up on a heretical Pope. The answer is as soon as he has become heretical . Many Vatican 11 adherents are afraid of giving up the social aspects of belonging to a group. In the same way their Protestant brethren stays with a denomination even when it's clearly anti Biblical . it come down to the same old choice Do we follow God's will or Man's desires.
One problem, traditional Catholics are not on the "right" or "left", they are simply catholic, whereas the Vatican II sect are modernists. I don't think falling into a false left/right paradigm is helpful.
The Vatican II sect is not modernism. You appear not to know what modernism is. Please, with all the muster of perpetuity, look up what you are talking about before you blabber on line about something.
Father with all my respect an sympathy for you. I was sedevacantist for a week. And this was by hearing you and bishop Sanborn (excuse my english, I'm spanish). then I learned that I had to elude the "cum pope" Masses, and I did so. Instead of attend mass I heared your mass by internet. But that was a very bad week for me, it was like God leaved me. Like if I had commited sin. Troubled like I was and with nobody to ask, I asked to God by opening the Bible by azar. And I recibed an answer. It was a passage from the ancient testament about a reform of the priests and the trive of Levi, and there was a trive that hasn't be instituted for being priest but they instituted themself againts the will of God. I didn't understand very well, and some days later I asked again by the same method, opening the Bible by azar, and the answer was very much clear. It was a passage whith Salomon and the temple. The passage began: "I have hear your question and your troubleness, and I'm going to answer you. I have told you that I have founded this temple for all the eternity, and I Will be in this temple for ever". So the next day a went to confess and returned to assist Mass. Now I don't have any doubt that even thought pope Francis is an heretical worst than Luther, God remains being in the Church and YOU and I and All must be with HIM.
I am writing this on 4/5/2020. I cannot believe father Cekada had a stroke. Please everyone pray for him. He should be the pope. He should definitely have been made a Bishiop by now. I can only think that he turned it down. He has saved more souls than any other person in the history of the planet. By bringing people to the Sedevacantist true Holy Catholic Church. Please God save your most holy, courageous, Godly servant. If father Cekada dies. Sedevacantism will receive a massive loss. May God bless him.
Who ever heard of sedevacantism? There is an old saying that says Protestants have a 1000 popes, while Catholics only one. I know this to be true through long experiences. Thanks Rev. Anthony Cekada for the explanation.
They say 7 generations but we believe that Fatima is a Squel to La Salette Secret. When we know we strive to hold fast to our childhood faith. The daily Rosary made me see this coming and the Fatima Message. Thank you and May God bless you all for taking a Stance. Allan.
Since Rite of Holy Orders and the consecration bishops were changed after Vatican II, have we been left without Jesus Christ’s physical Presence in the Eucharist, and without the spiritual nourishment of His Body and a Blood? How could that be? He said He would be with us always, would not leave us orphans, yes, spiritually but I believe He meant physically, as well, unless I err in this regard. But He did say unless we eat his Flesh and drink His Blood we have no life in us. So how could He leave us without them? Could someone shed some light on these questions.
You rightly question the implications of Sedevacantism: The defection of the Church. The See of Peter cannot remain vacant for long before the Church begins to break down due to an inability to ordain bishops without schism. If Sedevacantism is true, Christ is a liar who left us orphans.
When it comes to SSPX, at least Bp. Williamson had enough foresight to consecrate more bishops. Because the mainline SSPX aren't going to get any from the current hierarchy.
@Rincon Ovalle Luis Fernando very true. Even Williamson himself admitted in private that he was unable to refute Father Cekada who wrote a response to his mentevacantist error. Bishop Williamson had tried to argue that the post V2 Pope's weren't culpable because they were unable to understand that what they were doing was heretical...
@@jimmyhun91 thanks , Fr Cekada may have been right on Williamson being in error on that specific point, (I don’t even know what “metavacanrism is). but that doesn’t mean Fr Cekada is without error on other points pertaining to sedevacantism , etc..
@@TheCleanTech you should read the article in that case. It's not about being in error on a small single point. The whole of Bishop Williamson's central premise, namely that the post Vatican II claimaints can't he true heretics because their minds have been poisoned by modernism (what Fr Cekada coins mentevacantism) is absurd and Father Cekada explains this rather carefully
I have another comment on here from several years ago claiming sedevacantists are not Catholics. I have since repented and become a sedevacantist myself. Deo Gratias.
Dear Father, firstly I'd like to say that I enjoy your video's and have found them to be very informative. It seems an ongoing game of tennis is being played between the R&R's and the Seds to which I've been watching with some interest. Every time one makes a pronouncement the other argues it to which the other counter-argues and the rally continues. I would personally consider myself R&R but have been poking my nose into other camps just to see what's going on. I'm in a heck of a rut as I still altar serve at a somewhat conservative Novus Ordo (which I know questions my R&Rness) as well as the low mass according to the 62 missal (same parish but by visiting priest) while at the same time exploring the positions of Sedevacantism. Yes I know, sounds like I'm having fun.
+Julius Gorzkowski: One point I originally intended to add to the video (but somehow got lost in the process) might be of interest to you. Sedevacantists share a lot more common theological ground with "conservatives" than they do with R&R, because both sedes and conservatives usually adhere to the traditional ecclesiology when it comes to understanding the Catholic's obligations to submit to the Roman pontiff (when there is one).
@@christinamiller1323 It means "Recoginze & Resist". That is: Recognizing the "popes" in Rome as true successors of Peter, but at the same time resisting their teachings and their rule over the Church.
It says 5 years back that would be 2016 so why wait so long. Sisco and Salza be forgotten they are from the Father of all lies. Thank you and God bless you. In the third world we also have catholic souls. Infiltration has been on even in Saint Athanasius days. Allan.
As with most traditionalist disagreements, each group adheres to their own while barely touching upon the others. I find this highly disengenuous.(?) Why not repeat their argument as they themselves would? They are convinced that to split with the Pope will convict them of being schismatic. There are strong arguments to support the idea that wayward Pope's in history we're still Pope's regardless of their heresies. Their position is perhaps not cowardice as much as mortifying and painful to accept when given the systematic nature of the destruction being done. Both positions have reasonable arguments. For myself, there is no way I am open to being influenced by this counterfeit church, therefore I will stay away and close my heart and mind to it's diabolical misdirections. This is truly what fits me as a Sedevacantist. They who give unlawful orders cannot be obeyed.
Please forget sedevacantism in the Catholic Church worry about the Hierarchy of the Catholic Church loaded with homosexuals as well as the priesthood. Seminaries are loaded with gays so we are living in times so horrendous to the Church it's really pathetic.Sedevacantism is the least of our worries.
The Dogma that all heretics and apostates are outside - and consequently have absolutely no Power or Office whatsoever in - the Church is the very basis of "Sedevacantism". "Sedevacantism" is a Dogmatic Fact. "Vatican 2" sect's adherents and heresiarchs (especially the Antipopes) alike, all ipso facto automatically excommunicated from Christianity for schism, heresy, and apostasy, as non-Christians, have absolutely no Office or Power in the Church. The "seminaries" are propagandization centers. To accept "Vatican 2" or Novus Inordinatio or any of the Antipopes or heresiarchs behind it is to attack God's Promises (Matthew 16:18; 28:20). They constantly praise other Antichristians. Vatican has the apostate Martin Luther's ugly fat face on their "official" stamp.
Unlike Bergoglio and Vatican II, With it's Bastard Child ' Novus Ordo Mass ', Our Faith in Jesus The Christ is Stronger Than EVER !!!!! Truth Be WELL KNOWN, The Real Catholic Church of Jesus The Christ, Is No Longer In Rome !!! Rome EXCOMMUNICATED Itself, Formerly With VATICAN II, How Dumb Do You Think Us ? Our Blessed Immaculate Mother and Queen Mary Told Us .... ' La Sallet and Fatima ', Got it Bergoglio ?
When I first started going to a Sedevacantist traditional Roman Catholic Church in Spokane, Washington those of the Vatican II Church tried to tell me all sorts of bad things about the church. They even tried telling me, and others, that it was a satanic church! I was 19 years old at the time, and unfortunately what was said about Mount Saint Michael’s by those who went to the Vatican II Church stuck in my mind and left me with questions for quite some time. I can’t see myself going to a V-2 service (I can’t call it a Mass) because the majority of the priest don’t make sense to me. I feel that the FSSP are heretics and I stay clear of the SSPX because from my understanding they’ve gone with Vatican.
With all my respect I have it very clear, the FSSP is the one that is with the Vatican II; And the FSSPX isnt’ heretic, That is why the Vatican CAN NOT stand them.
Then you willfully reject Christ's Church and place yourself in a state of schism. Like all schismatics, you justify yourself by accusing the Church of heresy and speak blasphemies against the Church and Her rites.
So then how will we ever get a new Pope? In what universe will the Sedevicantists accept a new Pope that all would agree on? Because I agree with your assessment of Burgoglio as a heretic and I speak it freely with the many Novus Ordo Catholics I know, a few Priests as well. What does one do?
Interesting that my politics and my sede vacantism are consistent and sound. I am a secessionist and a Sede Vacantist. The 2 are necessary conclusion to the current crises. That of Rome and that of Washington. Secessionists are erroneously dismissed as racists and anti Semites. Sede Vacantist are dismissed as nut jobs. I am in prayer about writing a book that will touch on both subjects and how they are intertwined. One cannot be a Sede Vacantist and a Neo Con and be intellectually honest. Perhaps the later has not been given any thought.
I actually have a book published called Americans are Asleep. It is philosophical and discusses sovereignty in a political light. In it I submit to the only Sovereign the God and Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Thank you for asking. I forgot I even made this comment, but the book needs to be edited to include Sede Vacantism and it's lonely road.
Well I know for sure that Gregory Hesse is quite different to Rev Anthony Cekada. Hesse has no respect for papal authority and his words on Pope SAINT Pius V are utterly shameful. Beware of him and stay with Rev Cekada instead.
@@ecopley9013 ; Fr.Paul Kramer stated on Coast To Coast, "Call me Sedevacantist (now)". I heard what I heard, and not taken out of context in any sense, it was the context. If I heard wrongly, please let me know.
@@Johnnycdrums Thanks Johnny. You will find the comments I mentioned about fr Kramer in his video on Cum Ex. : ( Make sure you read Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio yourself and see that it is the Church's teaching which shows that a heretic can never be a valid pope.) You probably know that Fr Kramer was ordained in St Peter's by Modernists.
@@ecopley9013 ; I'll look it over. Not crazy about this infighting amongst traditionalists. Although a "revert", I'm old enough to remember the Church. Noticed a big change in about 67' when I was twelve.
In 1969, the Metropolitan of Krakow wrote a book entitled "The Acting Person". This book is no ordinary book but one of the most significant treaties of the phenomenological current of philosphy. Experts regard its author John Paul II, as being the second most important promoter of this phenomenological current. The most important one being Husserl, an Austrian free thinker. In this book, Pope John Paul explains that the New Testament deserves a symbolic interpretation. He also mentions that God does not act directly but exists only as long as people interact. When I read Francis' offensive statement about the fish and the bread among other... I immediately identified that most of his words are nothing else but an "inclusive language" (or street language) versions of what Pope John Paul II taught in that treaty. John Paul was an educated and enlightened man, unlike Francis' whose known to have no writing skills and an IQ much lower than that of President Maduro of Venezuela. From what I know, Wojtyla wrote this treaty before he became a Metropolitan. At that time he was a very liberal priest and intellectual. Fr. Cekada.
Amen Fr, from my humble opinion, "from their fruits you shall know them, as wolves in sheep's clothing" Bergolio is nothing but a forerunner of the false prophet to come... May the Immaculate Heart of Mary Triumph over the smoke of satan and evil that has pervaded Holy Mother Church and mankind..
The ramifications of this are mind-blowing. Does this mean that I have never been baptized, never received absolution, and have never received Holy Communion? I am deeply troubled about all of this.
The baptism you received was valid. As regards other sacraments, there are a lot of other factors to consider that would take more space than we have here.
A few important things to know about Catholicism before leaving the Church for the Sedevcantist Movement: 1. Recognise and Resist is a long practiced Catholic Tradition ( www.trueorfalsepope.com/ ); Take a look at Dr Roberto de Mattei's book - "Love for the Papacy and Filial Resistance to the Pope in the History of the Church" - a selection of easy to read articles from the passed few years. 2. The Catholic Church (the very visible Church with churches and priests everywhere) has a valid priesthood ( www.trueorfalsepope.com/p/sedevacantistwatch-peter-dimond.html ); Cardinal Ottaviani, no less, never had any concerns over the validity of the new rites, even though he expressed concern to Pope Paul VI over the legitimacy of Novus Ordo Mass. 3. Exactly who are these men who started the Sedevacantist ant-Catholic sect and what are their aims? ( www.trueorfalsepope.com/p/sedevacantist-watch.html ). Another article refuting the rubbish shouted on N.O.W. ( www.acatholicthinker.net/a-response-to-novus-ordo-watch/ ); Scroll down to Traditionalist Issues for the article if the link won't take you straight there. Also give this refutation a read, if you are serious about being Catholic ( matt1618.freeyellow.com/sedevacantism.html )
@@soniamartin2007 1. recognize and resist was never catholic teaching and in fact goes against several dogmas. all of dr de matteis examples of history are a misrepresantation of the actual facts and draws conclusions from false analogys. such as: paul refutet peter in the bible. while it is correct that paul refutet peter, it is also correct that it never was a refutation about peter spreading heresy! but instead paul refutet peter because peter didnt act according to his own preaching and the preaching of the church.
The one problem I have with sedevacantism(not that there aren't issues with RnR) is that it doesn't offer a way out. What do we do if it's true? To me, that's the final roadblock. And even the late, great Father Cekada, did not have an answer for that. May he rest in peace. If someone has an answer I'd like to know
The one thing that confuses me about sedevacantism is, if they consider the current priesthood invalidly ordained, then how do we gain access to God's divine mercy? Our sins can only be forgiven through a valid priest in the sacrament of confession, and if there's no validly ordained priests to be found anywhere, then we are doomed forever.
@@grupoaranzamusic that's a huge issue however their answer would be that anyone who was ordained through the old rite would be validly so long as bishop was consecrated thru same. So SSPX, and sedes(excepting those stemming from the Thuc line as their orders appear to be in doubt)and even some still in the Novus Ordo still have valid orders. So the Church can carry on it's business there, by having us seek out non Novus Ordo clergy to ensure validity of Sacraments. I was talking to someone else about the issue I was wondering about how we get out of the mess, which goes into your concern too, but with regards to if no pope then no Cardinals and no new pope. He said that we don't need an answer for everything. man was sinful and deserving of Hell owing an eternal debt to God. There was no answer on how to pay that debt. Then came Christ. So we don't know what God has in store for us. I like watching What Catholics Believe with Father Jenkins on TH-cam because he is very balanced and reasoned on this. He says that in his opinion, based on the evidence Francis is an obvious heretic, never had the faith and does not now therefore cannot he the pope. However, this is simply an opinion and he could be wrong. It is not necessary for salvation we get this question right. It may make it easier so we aren't following a false pope though. Personally, I no longer feel Francis is the pope. One must be Catholic to he the pope and Francis is not Catholic.
There is the Cassciacum thesis as a potential solution. In short, it proposes that the V2 Popes hold the office materially, but do not formally possess the authority of the papacy because of heresy. They are basically "pope-elect" until they renounce their errors and heresies and reject V2. This means their pronouncements and appointments made as "pope-elect" are invalid because they do not possess petrine authority. It is because of this distinction that there leaves open the possibility of their being a valid Pope in the future. For example, if Ratzinger came out and renounced all of his heresies and rescinded Vatican II, he would formally become the Pope. If you look at what has come out of the Vatican and these "Popes" since V2, it becomes apparent that this may be the case.
@@DigitalLogos Utter nonsense. A man who is not the Pope cannot appoint Cardinals or authorize the ordination of bishops. Since all the bishops and Cardinals from before Vatican II are dead, the Cassciacum thesis posits the total defection of the Church, which both Scripture and Tradition hold to be impossible. The truth is that Sedevacantism is untenable.
Cardinal Siri was elected pope in the 1958 conclave but was threatened not to accept and Vatican Guard Scortesco who revealed that outside interference in the Conclave was there was later found Cheese Wired in his room. White smoke and then Black and again White. Roncalli or John 23rd attended the Paris Workshops. Allan. AVE MARIA.
+Chopin euler Fatima, even though it received approval from the Church, is a private revelation, so its content is not, properly speaking, a datum that can be used in a theological argument.
Sedevantism never adds, does not circumvents any dogmas or traditions whatsoever only adhering to tbe original church that the Lord has founded that there's nothing to be contended with. True faith is and must always be constant.
Many sedevacantist theories deny in practice the visibility of the Catholic Church even the theories that don't do so are problematic Catholic doctrines are not just theories, they have a practical beneift for the Faithul (especially the indefectibility of the Church) Under sedevacantism, there is no difference between an defected Church and a Sedevacantist one with a false Pope sitting on the throne and 99.999% of Catholics submitting to him The doctrine of the indefectibility of the Church is rendered as an abstract theory that is useless in practice.
time 18:40 and following > this is undeniable. But I must add; The Chair is hardly vacant, It is totally occupied: But by whom is it occupied; that is in fact, the question we face.
Correction, the only thing needed to recognize formal heresy is in ones words or deeds, discovered knowledge that they know they are contradicting in part or whole the declared faith.
This is such an interesting topic, and a lot of things make more sense when I consider it. Not sure what the truth is yet, but it’s mind blowing this topic is so hidden unless you are Catholic and invested in it. Had never in my life hear of it until I became interested in Catholicism and started digging into the topics of the faith. Regarding, The contention/apologetic of “what will people think???” Uhhh, people will think it’s interesting and explains a lot...it’s weirder and harder to to imagine that Francis is legit. Again, not fully sure and settled on which position is true.
The Church has a legally elected leader who is not the Vicar of Christ, or even a Catholic. That's the problem. The seat isn't empty, it's occupied by an imposter.
Father, I have not done reading or research into the papal condemnation of Acion Francaise and Marraus. Do you think such a study could lead to drawing paralleled between what was done then (and subsequently condemned in France) and what is now done at CFN, Remnant, and other R&R enterprises? It’s my understanding that it was condemned as a magisterium unto itself which is what you are saying R&R is...
Before we talk about something vacant or unoccupied, it is logical to talk first about something occupied. Something, not in the order of creation, is prior to nothing. Applied to the Pope or the issue of sedevacantism, the question is: how did a Pope come to be or how did a Pope come to be constituted? The story is too well known that Jesus changed the name of Simon to Peter (Cephas). This changing of name, oftentimes initiated by the Lord God, has a history in the Bible. Thus, Abram to Abraham, Jacob to Israel, and Saul to Paul, to name a few. Such a change had a purpose. In the philosophy of St. Thomas on essence, purpose is that cause by which an essence comes to exist. The existence of a being therefor presumes the presence of an essence. What Jesus constituted therefore at the act of changing the name of SImon to Peter is to constitute the essence of the Pope in Peter. St. Thomas further says that act of essence is different from essence, with the former issuing forth from the latter. It goes without saying that an act of essence does not make or unmake an essence. In other words, what a Pope says and does does not make or unmake him a Pope. As corollary: 1) Pope John XXIII was never a Pope is he was a Freemason at the time of his election as alleged; same as Pope Paul VI; 2) the election of Pope John Paul I came from a duly constituted electoral college of cardinals; 3) the election of Pope John Paul II came from a duly constituted electoral college of cardinals and is not valid if the allegation that he was a Freemason at the time of his election is true and correct; 4) an essence cannot be resigned; only acts of essence may not be discharged and can be resigned from thus Benedict XVI is still pope; 5) Pope Francis discharges the act of essence of Benedict XVI. Therefore, the Seat of Peter is not vacant.
SoRE and Feeney have some similar ideas? Feeneyism was very confusing to me as new sede. Thankfully I read about UOM. Believe me, Bugnini's ccd didn't expose me to UOM.!!
Thinking of Sedevecantism, however, in Australia their isn't a sedevecantist parish i am aware of, so if I do go down that road, where can i receive sacraments?
It is not a matter of fearing sedevacantism. It is a matter of Catholic doctrine as to how we are to act in accordance with the faith in such a confusing time within the Church. Vatican I, is extraordinary infallible doctrine which forbids accepting in principle a sedevacantist position with the exception of a normal death of a pontiff and gap between a death and re-election of a successor. Today's issue has to do with heresy of pontiff or succession of pontiffs who can be recognized based off the Catholic faith to be in formal heresy. Vatican I was clear on perpetual successors to the chair of Peter: "...with the approbation of the sacred council, and for the protection, defense and growth of the catholic flock, to propound the doctrine concerning the institution, PERMANENCE and nature of the sacred and apostolic primacy, upon which the strength and coherence of the whole church depends" (Vatican I, Sess. 4 #6).
The only objection I've heard is who's going to pick the next Pope? Well, at Fatima, Our Lady said she would return a seventh time. Who better to pick the next Pope!
2 Thessalonians 2-15 hold your Traditions handed down by the Apostles don't change a thing. Vatican 2 went from being Catholic to Protestant church teaching. Creating a false faith which is apostacy and invalid in the eyes of God. A counterfeit religion away from Lord Jesus Christ teaching.
Fr. could it be that once our Queen Mother picks a cardinal to be pope through st peter & st. paul as a prophecy points out. Could this be the answer? Thanks for your time.
I'm feeling lost and confused. I thought I could always trust the Church ... what do I do... there is so much digging/research to do (and I'm working on something currently with a tight window this summer) ... I suppose I'll continue going to the latin mass I go to here in the UK (started going last year), when in Poland I go to the NO masses as they're closer and my babcia needs to go too, and that's what I was raised in and in Poland they're not as bad as in the west ...yet, although they're getting there, I've lost count of sermons of "God loves you" "the faith is love" "love love love" ...I've started rolling my eyes during such sermons, if priests would spend their time teaching the faith or things that are actually affecting young people e.g. LGBT etc. we'd see an increase in attendance -_- ...if they're scared, at least teach the faith re. canon law or history or life of the saints or why we do certain things or certain traditions ... but no, they choose "do you know... God loves you" .... and then are surprised no one knows anything, you can go to Catholic school, attend mass weekly and know hardly anything. I'm lucky with my family and growing up was okay, but also I started digging in online... ironically it was Islam that made me dig more into our faith. Anyway my point is... I'm feeling lost recently after looking into what happened after Pius XII ... what does that mean for he church, how do we fix this, did my baptism as a baby count? my Holy Communion? all the sacraments? ...what about when I go for adoration... what about the Eucharistic miracles... So much confusion ...what do we do, how do we have a strong Church ...I'm lost and on the more devout side, what of just the normal members? :(
Anyone can perform a valid baptism, even pagans and heretics. That's a defined dogma from the Council of Florence. You should read An Open Letter to Confused Catholics by Marcel Lefebvre and The Catechism of the Crisis in the Church by Mathias Gaudron. I can give you copies if you like.
The rite (or fraternity or diocese or brotherhood, etc) spoken of here, or the SSPV, SSPX, CRMI, etc are ALL valid so long as they continue to adhere to the traditional catechism, traditional sacraments, etc as described by Father Gregory Hesse Canon lawyer, etc etc. and they were consecrated by valid bishops in valid sacraments. I’m still trying to figure out why they are/were fighting amongst themselves! The New Order is the one to stay away from.
All I know is the Novus Ordo is a new Protestant Church the Anglican Communion was installed in 1987 it is not the mass of PaulVI. The Pope is a Bishop of Rome on a daily basis He is Peter at Counsel but if He and the Bishops have abandoned the true faith then watch out!
Matthew 16:17 Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. 18 And I tell you that you are Peter,[b] and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades[c] will not overcome it.
What is so hard to understand about the gates of hell will not prevail quote. Novus Ordites say that if there is no pope then hell has prevailed. Does that really nullify all licit and properly ordained priests and bishops who celebrate Mass? They're effectively saying that the Pope is the Church. Which is objectively false.
Ordaining a bishop without the consent of the Pope is an act of schism, incurring latae sententiae excommunication. It follows then, that if the Papacy were vacant for long enough that all the bishops ordained prior to the vacancy die, Apostolic Succession would fail, as there would be bishops except those who had been ordained in schism, and there would be no way to reconcile the schismatic bishops to the Church because the excommunication can only be lifted by the Pope. That would mean that the Gates of Hell had prevailed against the Church.
@@dawidtrybula Perplexing for many, but he wasn't a free agent. He was under duress, threatened and probably killed in 1989. That God gave us a pope on 26 Oct 1958, is the best explanation for events. Sedevacantism is less likely. The evil is the money power acting on the world and Church. It goes back, I think, to 1515, Pope Leo X, a Medici with his position on usury and to around the time of William the Conquer in 1066. The Church hasn't contained usury. William granted London it's first Royal Charter to be,in effect, a special economic zone, which it has retained since. The Church has to fix the bad effects of Leo X 's bull of 1515 on usury and shut usury down. Because it hasn't, usurers own the world and finance evil events.
@@dawidtrybula He was under duress, was not a free agent, like David in the Old Testament after he was anointed king by Samuel. Arguably, he was king in exile from about 22 years old to about 30 years old, when he was recognised as king and reigned. Siri was in exile from 26 October 1958 till May 1989,when he died, likely murdered by poisoning.
I suppose you have been told that sedevacantists have abandoned the Church *sigh*. How silly. If sedevacantists believe all of the doctrines of the Church, including that heretics are not a part of the Church, how have they abandoned Her? It's just false. ; ) We are Catholic.
@@ecopley9013 They have abandoned the Church. They refuse to submit themselves to the Pope and use all kinds of high-sounding nonsense to argue that the Pope is not the Pope. They hold to a teaching that implies the defection of the Church, contrary to both Scripture and Tradition. They can't even agree with each other, which is a mark of heresy.
Try novusordowatch.org/now-what/ . Not all parishes or priests are online, so contact one of those priests... I hope you will find one nearby. God bless!
I wish Fr. Cekada would have addressed the matter of jurisdiction. It may be that there have been popes that are material heretics, regardless, I have no jurisdiction to make a formal judgment. It is not a matter of cowardice, rather, it is a matter of humility. I simply do not have the authority. Imagine, I see my neighbor unjustly kill a man with a gun. I may objectively say, he is materially a murderer. However, I am not the local magistrate and have no authority to publicly pronounce guilt and or sentence my neighbor. I must rely on the proper authority to pronounce his judgment. I do not know who the proper authority is for a "Pope". Perhaps a future Pope? Or a council of Bishops?
Sedevacantism is a novelty, not found in tradition. The Church has never taught it, nor was it ever believed by the faithful always and everywhere. It is mere speculation of a few of the Fathers. Catholics have always and everywhere believed there are two ways for a pope to lose his office; 1) His death and 2) His resignation. Beyond that, We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man.
But doesn't the qualification for a man to be the Vicar of Christ in the office and chair of Peter at least in a similar way effect the office and authority of all the Apostles (i.e. V-II bishops)? How then is this issue of sedevacantism resolved? How would we come to know if the man elected by the cardinalate is truly in the person of Peter?! From such a brood of mistaken men at best, would that even be possible? How long would it take? No doubt if this plague fell Peter himself, it's infected the whole world and the world then must be purged. What are the first steps needed to make resolution?
"This doctrine is to be believed and held by all the faithful in accordance with the ancient and unchanging faith of the whole church" (Vatican I, Sess. 4 #7). "That which our Lord Jesus Christ, the prince of the shepherds and great shepherd of the sheep, established in the blessed Peter, for the continual salvation and permanent benefit of the church, MUST OF NECESSITY REMAIN FOR EVER, BY CHRIST'S AUTHORITY, in the church which, founded as it is upon a rock, will stand firm until the end of time" (Vatican I, Sess. 4 Chapt. 2 #1). Here is more on the institution and PERMANENCE: "if anyone says that it is not by the institution of Christ the Lord Himself (that is to say, by divine law) that blessed Peter should have PERPETUAL SUCCESSORS IN THE PRIMACY over the whole church; or that the Roman Pontiff is not the successor of the blessed Peter in the primacy: let him be anathema" (Vatican I, Sess. 4 Chapt. 2 #5).
If SSPX and FFSP use the 1962 Roman Missal, then what's wrong with them? What's the problem? What Roman Missal do you use? What's the right one? Please tell me if you dare....
You might want to view videos 2 & 3 in the series based on chapters of Work of Human Hands. They will explain why priests like me don't use the 62 Missal.
Rev. Anthony Cekada I now understand why many Sedevacantists do not use the 62 Missal. However, the question of "what Missal is the correct one to use?" is left unanswered. Is it the 1958 edition? Is it Lefebvre's 1952 edition? Is it Lasance's 1945 edition? Is it Lasance's 1937 edition? How far back should we go?
LoL "if you dare". "dun dun duuuuuuuuun" You can't even follow proper procedure. Everybody knows in times of serious matters only a "triple dog dare" is appropriate.
TheRindy84 Since Sedevacantists only use pre-1962 Roman Missals, there's the big question of "WHAT" pre-1962 Roman Missal to use? Every pre-1962 Roman Missal has different liturgical calendars. If Sedevacantists can't agree on which one to use, then everyone of them are following a different liturgical calendar, pre-1960.That isn't uniformity, all it is is using whatever Missal you feel like using so long as it's pre-1962 (i.e. a Protestant way of thinking). Say what you will about the Novus Ordo Church and the SSPX, at least they all use the same Missal with the same Liturgical Calendars.
You do understand that the "uniformity" that you speak of is supposed to be the faith right? I couldn't actually tell you what year of missal I have but I can say that I've never had a problem following along (regardless of if I went to CMRI, SSPX or independents) unless, of course, I'd forgotten to move the marker and didn't catch or remember what sunday it was but anyway that's beside the point. The point is I was assisting in the real Sacrifice of the mass, the uniformity is in being one with the priest as the mass is said. Holding the same faith. With the Novus Ordo, you're trading uniformity of certainty (to say the least) and faith. I have 2 Novus Ordo Catholic friends, brothers that went to the same church who both still go to church and have differing ideas on both morality and even whether the Eucharist is the true body and blood of Christ but you seem to be telling me that "hey, at least they have the same calendar"? Are you kidding me? The novus ordo has a 50/50 chance (and I'm probably being generous) of actually practicing idolatry. If the priest hasn't been validly consecrated then his mass and the sacrament is also invalid. Hence you might as well worship the protestant crackers and grape juice as your God. I don't lump the SSPX with the novus ordo since I don't agree that they've completely given in and gone along with the Novus Ordo but I do find it odd that as much as they practice and act like there is no pope (Resist) they seem to be incredibly intolerant to an opposing view one that does not directly affect any pertinent matter of faith. If you have to resist and disobey the person believed to be the current pope and you don't trust him to lead you as the spiritual head and Christ's appointed vicar, who the *bleep* cares if he's sitting in the chair or not? He's useless to you, he can't help you, he doesn't give a crap. I've heard the bad dad argument and I get where they're coming from but the analogy doesn't work at all. Taking an occupation is not the same as a biological fact. If you help create or birth a child you are (biologically) that child's parent and nothing you do will ever negate that fact. However, you can choose to be mum or dad (in action) to that child or you can abandon it and let someone else raise it. In that case you have chosen not to raise or even look after that child. Being pope and taking on the responsibility of tending Christ's flock is strictly a choice and it is by your actions whether you are or not. Even in the case of a validly ordained pope who decided to fly to Jamaica and forget his flock, he's still pope but he's still useless to anybody because he doesn't care to do his duty. Go ask children who have been adopted or had to rely on themselves for the majority of their upbringing and even they will tell you that they don't really have a parent and that they don't consider them their parents because they opted out. Sedevacanists basically are that child. We were abandoned by our parent a long time ago and nobody has wanted to step up to the plate by conforming to Christ's teachings. The SSPX has no real reason to be such bullies when it comes to sede's since (at least in action) they do the same thing.
So, who WAS the last valid pope for you fr. Cekada? Have you declared yourself about that? Or are you afraid to say? If i were to accept sedecavantism, can i pick my own last valid pope?, or do i have to accept yours?
You have to accept Pope Pius as the last valid Pope, but all the Vatican II "popes" were not popes but antipopes. I have some doubts about the man above, so I recommend to you: Vaticancatholic. Com That website I can verify is the truth.
Was John XXIII validly elected pope? I understand that he lost his "Power or Authority" because of his role in VII and other beliefs, but did his papacy start out legit?
+Steven Osterhaus No it did not, John XXIII was a heretic since the 1920's and was also a Freemason, he was the one that called the Masonic council V2 that brought the end times counterfeit "Catholic" sect. A one world religion. Pope Pius XII was the last Pope Catholics had. Yves Marsaudon, 33rd degree Scottish Rite Freemason said: "The sense of universalism that is rampant in Rome these days is very close to our purpose for existence... with all our hearts we support the revolution of John XXIII." You can find all his heresies here: www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/catholicchurch/anti-pope-john-xxiii/#.VocKbhUrLIU scroll down once you're on the page
John XXIII was a public heretic. According to canon 188 of the CIC 1917 (church law at that time) he lost his office by doing the deed ("Any office becomes vacant upon the fact and without any declaration by tacit resignation recognized by the law itself if a cleric: 4) publicly defects from the catholic faith." canon 2314 makes it even more clear: "All apostates from the Christian faith and each and every heretic or schismatic: 1) incurs by that fact excommunication 2) unless they respect warnings they are deprived of benefice, dignity, pension, office, or other duty that they have in the Church, they are declared infamous, and [if] clerics, with the warning being repeated, [they] are deposed; 3) if they give their names to non-Catholic sects or publicly adhere [to them], they are by that fact infamous, and with due regard for the prescription of Canon 188n. 4, clerics, the previous warnings have been useless, are degraded." So you see. As John XXIII has publicly spoken heresy and never denounced it, he is outside the church by the fact itself and never received the papcy validly!
After reading some of the commits - I just had too. I have no doubt Father will unmask them! The Sedes I know are very devout to St. Michael the Archangel. This is going to be a fun one. Can’t wait for the action to begin. The R & R authors are innovators, popularizing the use of legalize, using their position as reigning experts and authority and trying their power moves to win over audiences, by introducing this book as a maneuver to squash the Sedes with their Doomsday Device. LOL Hurry up with the book - 700 hundred pages! Complications - say no more; say no more. Thank you Jesus. Ezeckiel 18:29 And the children of Israel say: The way of the Lord is not right. Are not my ways right, O house of Israel, and are not rather your ways perverse? Isaiah 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts: nor your ways my ways, saith the Lord. Have to give it to them - they took a page out of “Macho Man Randy Savage’s” PR play book.
I very much appreciate Fr Cekada's critique of the mass of Paul VI. It is very eye opening as to the hidden and not so hidden heresies embedded within the liturgy. I believe Fr Cekada is a very sincere and holy priest but just like any one of us, he too is prone to error. I believe his belief in sedevanctism is gravely wrong and here is why: Jesus Christ gave us a Church and he placed at the head of the Church a very flawed man, Peter. If the Church did not need a head, or if Christ did not intend for it to have a head, he would not have established the office. If the Church required a perfect man to be the head, he would not have chosen Peter. The Church is the living body of Christ. When you cut off the head of any living being, man or beast, it dies immediately. So too, with the Church. Without a head, the Church dies. A man may go insane, become overun with dementia, but it does not kill him. Cutting off his demented head will kill him. We have had popes much worse than the post Vatican II popes, why do we not go back further and say the seat has been empty since Peter himself.? This arbitrary cut off seems very suspicious to me. For good or bad, for better or worse, we are stuck with a bad Pope, Francis. But he is the head and as long there is a head the Church has life. This evil will pass, for sure, but just as surely new evil will replace it. Satan will never rest until God, in the fullness of time, says "it is finished". We don't know the day or the hour, we must trust in Jesus and know that he will never abandon us. I pray for the return of good and holy priests and a good and holy Pope, until then we must suffer with the Church. Adopting false beliefs, like sedevacantisim, is not a solution, it compounds the problem.
@Kevin Faler Feeney was excommunicated by Pius XII. He preached heresy, because he denied baptism of desire / blood. Just saying no doesnt prove anything. You have to show some kind of proof. It is common knowledge that Feeney was excommunicated!
@@skabedab Father Feeney was never excommunicated for heresy but for alleged disobedience. His position on Baptism of desire (that it contradicted the absolute necessity of water baptism) was not even formulated at the time of his so called excommunication. The misinformation abroad was that he was excommunicated for his stance on the dogma EENS. This was a diabolically clever ruse as this happened to be the very dogma standing in the way of the modernist ecumenical heresy. Very timely, I must say. The heretic Rahner was the one who translated the infamously ambiguous protocol letter to the Bishop of Boston (which never appeared in the Acts of the Holy see) into Latin and made sure it was inserted into Denzinger when he was editor of that publication (talk about a wolf being in charge of a sheepfold!) in order to give it an authority it did not have and to set the stage for the infamous Council of apostasy.
We must see the aparition as what it was: an aparation of Our Lady, approved by the Catholic Church and have deep respect for it and its vidents, but nothing else. Personally, i'm just tired of all those "messages" atributed to Our Lady in Fátima, Lasallete and Lourdes, they are so confusing and contradictorious that i am even starting to think all those "messages" didn't even took place. The same goes to those that talk about "3 days of darkness" (and i was REALLY obsessed with that). The only private prophecies i believe (and i admit its just for personal interests) are those that talk about a Great Catholic Monarch and an intercession of Heaven to elect a new Pope. But again, i know we are not meant to believe in private revelations so if people don't believe them there Is no problem at all (though i hope they could happen).
As a former Mormon now Protestant, I don't see the appeal of disagreeing with your pope and staying Catholic. It could just be because the papacy is just one of many modern Catholic dogmas that is unbiblical. If you're throwing away the pope, why hold on so dearly to veneration of saints, immaculate conception and bodily assumption of Mary, transubstantiation, a sacerdotal priesthood (claiming the blasphemous title "altar Christus", i.e. "another Christ"), etc.? Read your Bibles and you'll abandon these false traditions.
Rev. Anthony Cekada It's not the only rule of faith. But it is the sole infallible rule of faith. If anything contradicts the word of God, it must be abandoned. This is the position held by Protestants (at least those in the reformed tradition who hold to the 5 solae (sola scriptura, sola fide, solus Christus, sola gratia, soli Deo gloria) and have a high view of scripture. The Bible is not merely a "part of sacred tradition" (how a Catholic friend described it). It is inspired by God (literally God-breathed, 2 Tim. 3:16-17) and is sufficient to prepare the man of God for any good work. No other tradition, earthly preacher or idea can do the same.
Thanks Father Cekada, I really needed this shot in the arm to fortify me. Sedevacantism is a lonely exercise of the faith without an occasional inspirational boost like this .
A priest ahead of his Time.
I attend an SSPX chapel here in Florida, and our priest is helping an Sedavacontist chapel in Tampa area since the lost their Priest who passed. Our priest said that despite their differences, we are all Catholic and need to support each other. Many of our parishioners also make the journey to attend mass in Tampa in support. I don't think that most devout Catholics fear tribal loyalties, but fear doing the wrong thing in God's eyes. Dominus vobiscum!
The Religious Society Saint Louis King Of France?
You can't have your cake and eat it too...the FSSPX/SSP cling on to an ecclesiastical status/money pipeline rather than the true faith which simply doesn't hold to accept ANY of these Antipopes as true popes. So in my opinion and I was "stuck" with the FSSPX & SSP for a while too, they will need to prove firstly to themselves if they are true to the Catholic magisterium (thus get rid of the watered down 1962 missale) and church or just the money pipeline of "acceptance on the lowest level" by the heretic antipope currently running the Novus Ordo counter church!
Where in florida do you attend ?
When I was R&R I was both afraid to study sedevacantism because of what I had been told about it, and was also blinded by human respect, as I respected my then leaders. That said, now I’m about to join a Sedevacantist seminary if I’m approved and accepted. I’m still baffled that I didn’t see the truth, that the See is vacant, before.
I think R&R leads naturally leads from NO to sedevacantism. I think those that stay in R&R are dishonest. I don’t see how they can’t make the next logical step. I think a lot of it has to do with $, followers and pride, but I could be wrong. I just know that’s how my path went. Thank God I found holy priests in driving distance.
@@DeAnneRidge True, I was in the R&R myself before I became a Sedevacantist, and most Sedevacantists I know were R&R at some point too.
There is no greater choice in life with respect to the love of God to commit oneself to God‘s work. The world needs you, God needs you to do His will. Don’t worry or be concerned that you are missing something in life by giving your self to God. On the contrary, those of us who did not make the choice of Priesthood are the ones who are missing out. You are needed more than ever to do the ACTUAL work of Christ. Don’t delay listen to him, his love will guide you. His flock needs tending.
@@chucklangworthy4118 I’ve joined the seminary a year ago. Pray for my vocation.
Our Lady of La Salette for told these events. You are right where you are supposed to be!!!
I have been listening to Father Cekada, Bishop Daniel Dolan, Bishop Donald Sanborn for several years. There is a shock when told, that Catholic Church down the street isn't Catholic to be sure!
But these 3, part of Lefebvre 9, will be counted heroes by future Catholic generations
BE BRAVE FOR YOUR LORD!!!!!! It sucks when your entire family thinks your wrong but pales when you think of disappointing our precious CHRIST!!!!!!
In the same boat. Whole family are traditionalists but still recognize Francis. And there's me. Sedevacantist. 😭
You’ll always be missed Rev. Cekada!
What happened?
@@wgdetective7034 Rev. Cekada unfortunately passed away a while ago.
@@Agrippa31BC Oh I'm so sad to hear that as I have just come across his work here on YT.
All I need to know about Vatican II is, as a Child my Mother saying after she attend the first "Modern Man" mockery they tried calling the NEW Mass. She Said"The Holy Mass is no longer the Same Holy Mass".
That was in the late 60s and It still hold TRUE Today. She was in her late 50s,she knew something was STINKING in Rome.
Your Mother was right. May God Bless her for her faith.
We need the three days of darkness to bring back the Truth. Human beings can't fix this. Only the Hand of GOD.
I just became catholic a year ago, Easter 2017 and I guess I knew something was up right away with the 60's and Vatican 2. I do question a lot, thank God for that! If we don't question and want to learn, you become mindless robots. I don't want to be that. I just wanted to thank you so much for having TH-cam videos to listen to, they are SO helpful! I've recently started to study Sedevacantism (Lent 2018). At first I was terrified to study them, because I always heard of the "most extreme, most violent people called..." So, I was lied to right off the bat and not knowing any better I believed them until I started to question if Catholicism was the actual way. The only thing that I deeply miss is my friends/community to talk about church things with others and going to actual church, with confession, Eucharist, Adoration, etc. I need all that, so I don't know what I'm going to end up doing. But just wanted again to thank you so much Father and whom else put these videos together that we all might listen and learn from them. They are quite a treasure for new Catholics and old ones alike to know that that really old Catholic church is still around.
I’ve already embraced sedevacantism thanks to you and Father William Jenkins.
I could listen to you all day Father. I love Francis Watch and all the marvelous humour and insight. Thank you for being Faithful.
I AGREE 100% BRAVO! TRUTH IS TRUTH...THANK YOU FOR YOUR ZEAL FOR THE TRUE CATHOLIC CHURCH...AFTER LISTENING TO BOTH BISHOP SANBORN & YOU FATHER, THIS JUST MAKES SENSE..GOD BLESS YOU!!💝
@Janette Davis That's just not true. Have you never heard of any of the other Catholic bishops who kept the true faith like Bishop Guerard Des Laurier and Bishops Carmona and Zamora, Bishop Robert McKenna, etc? I know that the SSPX will not tell anyone about them. They keep lying and saying that Abp Lefebvre was the "only traditional bishop". What nonsense - and more reason to beware of them.
This video is more true today than ever!!
Finally someone strong enough to speak the truth! Very refreshing! Thank you and God bless you
We sedevacantists are, as the name makes clear, without a leader. This is a terrible situation, but a situation we are not able to change, as far as we can see. However, the one thing worse than being without a leader is accepting a false one. We have no choice.
John 10 :27-30 " My sheep listen to my voice; I know them and they follow me....".
Jesus Christ is Shepherd and is Leader for those who have ears to hear and follow God's holy will.
There is nothing Catholic nor holy in the Vatican 2 sect.
Revelation 18
@@kujosinclair7939 Amen!!!
Sedevacantism has brough to me the Catholic church and it warms me to see the wisdom of the video and the people posting in the comments. Now if only there was a sedevacantist Priest in my area of Vancouver BC
My husband & I are strongly considering sedevacantism (we’re basically already there). Anyway, we live in Houston and there are no sede priests here, but we learned that one in Austin (and even in other states) would be happily to travel and visit for Mass, etc. I can probably put you in touch with someone who can help you.
@@SamanthaGluck The mission is on hold because of the spike protein jab border restrictions so I will pray you get this non una cum valid Mass and we will try to move to the US too; we also don't want Sede Priests to even consider receiving the product to cross the border so best of luck and hopefully things will open up a bit. Thank you for thinking of us. At least we have the SSPX here.
Lefebvre saved the Church He was the true Pope back then.
Where does Scripture say the Pope must reside in Rome. ? Simple really The Pope is the One that holds the Jewish Passover Prayers said in the Temple in Jerusalem that Jesus attended with His Apostles on the night He was betrayed.
This makes perfect sense to me.
Although making the step will be hard because of my family.
Pleasing Our Lord is my first priority.
Any priests near Baton Rouge, LA?
In deed, "he is the vicar of the devil" . What a clear description of the current Pontiff is! Thank you for sharing this informative video Fr. Cekada.
So was JP11 he was just as bad. The Novus Ordo is a Counterfeit and the Abomination of Desolation.
I am almost 77, and loved the Latin Mass of my chilhood. VII changed it to N.O. which did not seem reverent in many parishes. It took the prayers of the liturgy from vertical to horizontal.
But i attended, because it was the only Mass i could attend. As time passed, many Catholics changed to other faiths. Now we have a leader who speaks heresy and approves sinful behavior
Thank you for preserving the true Catholic faith
and the true liturgy.
Excellent video, Father. I am relatively new to all this (since Bergolio) and now consider myself sedevacanist - Roman Catholic. What else can explain the last 50 years? I do not understand the fear and hatred directed at sedevacanism by the traditionalists (whom I have read the last 3 years), considering what is going on - it seems a perfectly legitimate viewpoint, at least worth considering. Why do they refuse to acknowledge it? I saw a video once where Archbishop Lefebvre at least acknowledged that someday we might have to consider sedevacanism - I think we are definitely there.
+sarah wood Thank you for your comments.
Abp. Lefebvre did indeed say that, and on more than one occasion. John Daly did a compilation of the archbishop's pro-sede quotes, and you can find it here: www.fathercekada.com/2012/09/04/pro-sedevacantism-quotes-from-abp-lefebvre/ He made some particularly strong pro-sede statements in the period before the 1988 consecrations but backpedaled when he got blowback in France, alas.
+Rev. Anthony Cekada Thank you, Father, I just found this.
+Rev. Anthony Cekada This is a lot to read but I certainly will do so carefully. It is sad the archbishop backpedaled but it is such a disturbing and confusing situation I would hope he did the best he could with said situation. I am grateful for what he did - all of you. I am ashamed to say even though I was raised a Catholic I left the Church in the sixties and only returned in 1980. I had no idea what was really going on. I can't help but wonder what the archbishop would have to say about Bergoglio Thanks again..
Çoloidal silver
@Carthago Delenda Est Jealousy... the tribute mediocrity pays to genius.
This is now my new favorite channel
I just wanna know, if they Faith isn't supposed to change, why is the Mass so obviously, drastically different? Something to ponder on if you're a Modernist. I am considering the Sedevacantist position, I plan on looking into it.
Look into it but vacate the Novus Ordo Sheeples who are appeasing the gay way see the McCarrick cover-up the idol Pachamama worship the comment, “God wills many religions.” These are heretics that are ecotheology preachers but not Catholics!
The mass isn’t different , the liturgy is what was changed and the Church has the authority to make changes to the liturgy
Simple. The Novus Ordo is not a Catholic Mass, according to true popes such as St Pius V and Plus XII. This website will satisfy all your questions. Modernist heretics created the foundation of the man made new Church from inside. So the word Catholic has been stolen by a new and false church that contradicts the doctrine of the True Church, making mass and sacraments invalid. At the time nobody could imagine such a thing could happen. But the fruits of the new "Catholicism" became obvious. Unbelieving pervert "priests." Loss of Faith among the laity. God is waiting for Catholics to use the brains He gave them, and to study the never changing Magisterium that was non-contradictory until the death of Plus XII, the last known Catholic Pope. Because of the confusion among "goog" people, we each have to do our homework now, since authentic catechesis ended by 1970. So unless you were educated in what Catholicism is before then, you will have to teach yourself. Read pre-1958 encyclical and catechism and rely on websites like this one. Remember it is infallible teaching that a Catholic must suppress their intellect and accept all a pope teaches. If he teaches against the 1958 Church, he is not guided by the Holy Spirit, has ipso facto excommunicated himself, and is to be ignored as an antipope by the faithful. You are not obligated to attend the "mass" of the heretical Novus Ordo sect he leads. We living now have been chosen by God to resist the false church and its false popes. It is His plan to purify and refine His True Church as gold in a fire. Unlike our fortunate ancestors, we cannot be assured we are Catholics just by obedience to the man in Rome claiming to be pope. The World loves Francis, but the World has never loved the True Church of 1958 to the start
@@TheCleanTech not changes in substance and intention. Plus IX said he had no authority to add St Joseph's name to the Canon or to change a single word of the Canon of Mass. So how can Pope Montini impose an entirely new Mass? He in fact had no authority to do so, thus the Novus Ordo is invalid, the service of the Vatican II heretical sect, to which you ignorantly belong. Study the pre 1958 Magisterium and you will see.
@@charlesburns3946 your mistaken, the Pope does have the authority over the cannon. One simple fact. “The mystery of Faith”. That was an addition, as well as the Saints that were named prior to St Joseph , I would be interested to see the Pius 12 quote that you referenced? And the novus order is not a new mass , it is a new form of the mass , Your ideas are not based on your study of the magisterium, they are based on sedevacantist misconceptions , half truths, and exaggerations that you probably read on some website
God bless you, may God grant us many holy priests with courage for these times
Thank you for the explanation, Father. I am a conclavist but I admire the work of SSPX very much. God bless you and help you to upkeep the truth.
As a sedevacantist Catholic, I recommend you view the video by the sedevacantist Catholic Dimond Brothers, Vaticancatholic. Com, exposing the heresies of SSPX.
GloryTo TheHolyTrinity! The Dimond brothers are so very wrong, even coming from a sedevacantist view. If you want to lend any credence to sedevacantism, don’t use those guys.
Hello to everyone. I appreciate anyone interested in this subject, which concerns the fate of the world, though few seem to notice. I have known Fr. Cekada for decades, recognize his ongoing important research, and have often passed parts of it on to others.
What I want to introduce into this conversation is that proving how the available evidence seems to demand the conclusion of the Vacant Chair (sede vacante) since 1958 or 1965, and then leaving it there may tend to cause some to lose the Faith, or be weakened in the Faith subconsciously. Why? Because the question arises immediately: how did this happen? How is this possible?
This is why many stay with EWTN or "Recognize and Resist."
The most avoided subject about the current crisis, it seems to me, is Mr. Gary Giuffre's research on the hi-jacking of the 1958 conclave. This research is based on a number of facts and a lot of circumstantial evidence -- which is often the case when a very clever crime has been committed. The late Fr. Villa's paper based in Italy, "Chiesa Viva" recently published "Grave Reasons of State" by Mr. Giuffre. And WhiteSmoke1958.com presents an avalanche of information on this thesis, usually called the Siri Thesis, i.e., that Cardinal Siri was the one elected Pope on October 26, 1958. I also did three 1 hr interviews with Judith Sharpe of ISOC.ws on this thesis. The idea is that a true Pope was elected, was shoved aside under the cloud of nuclear threats, and replaced two days later by John XXIII, hailed wildly immediately and worldwide by the Masonic mainstream media. Then began the nightmare within the structures of the Church, led by these antipopes who did not have the special assistance of the Holy Ghost.
This would explain everything, and how the Chair of Peter has been occupied by Masonic antipopes since 1958; thus, Sede Vacante. --- Thus would have been the Eclipse of the Church prophesied by Our Lady of LaSalette, which will end when God Himself lifts the veil on exactly what happened, and restores a true Pope to the Vatican, as many prophecies say will happen.
While this is admittedly still a thesis, why the blackout on research that has so many indisputable facts and impressive circumstantial evidence to uphold it? Since no Pope in history up until 1958 has ever fallen into formal heresy, what are the chances that we've now had six in a row fall into formal heresy? The Siri Thesis is a much clearer explanation of how we got here, which even a child can understand.
I'm betting that the coming Robert Siscoe/John Salsa book will avoid mentioning it altogether, or gloss over it. Someone told me that Fr. Cedada himself may do a "tin foil hat" Catholicism segment on the Siri Thesis, which I look forward to.
As I said, I've known Fr. Cekada since the 1970s, been at conferences with Robert Siscoe a few times, and met John Salza once when he was speaking at a conference. I hope my tone conveys that I have no animosity towards anyone discussing this earth-shaking subject, which should command our attention and prayers. Best wishes to all - Jim Condit Jr.
+Jim Condit Jr. I wonder why Cardinal Siri would say he was bound by the secret? Could a true Pope really be bound by the Devil's henchmen? I believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was elected, that he was forced to resign, and that consequently, the resignation was null and void. But I puzzle over the 'bound by the secret' part.
I have contemplated that question many times myself. It dawned on me not so long ago that the Cardinal never says by what secret he is bound. Can we perhaps imagine that after accepting the Papacy and being bullied into refusing to take the chair, one of the conspirators requested reconciliation and then divulged the entire plan under the seal of the confessional? In that case, his lips are indeed tied by the secret. Interesting twist ay? Not the secret of the conclave but the secret of the confessional.
How does it feel to be a schismatic?
I'm so edified but Fr Cekada's calm, patient and confident teaching!
I look forward to meeting him face to face someday! Perseverance in this cross 🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻❤️
I hope you know father Cekada passed away!
The question has to be asked , at what point do you give up on a heretical Pope. The answer is as soon as he has become heretical . Many Vatican 11 adherents are afraid of giving up the social aspects of belonging to a group. In the same way their Protestant brethren stays with a denomination even when it's clearly anti Biblical . it come down to the same old choice Do we follow God's will or Man's desires.
+Ed
berGOGlio is a HERETIC
Yes, Vatican II adherents need to give up being part of a group and join a bunch of schismatics who have invented their own church.
@@tomthx5804 Vatican ii have already joined a bunch of schismatics that created their own church, so...
@@tomthx5804 "Sedevacantists" are not schismatic, that is another silly myth/lie being spread. "Sedevacantists" are the true Catholic Church.
@@ecopley9013 how do I convert from Baptist to... Sedevancantist?
One problem, traditional Catholics are not on the "right" or "left", they are simply catholic, whereas the Vatican II sect are modernists.
I don't think falling into a false left/right paradigm is helpful.
Thank you. It's not political spectrum. Bishop Fulton Sheen feared a politization of theology and the Church.
The Vatican II sect is not modernism. You appear not to know what modernism is. Please, with all the muster of perpetuity, look up what you are talking about before you blabber on line about something.
Tom thx wow really!?
Tom thx Try attending a Traditional Latin Mass and read all older teachings.
Tom thx you are the one that needs to do some research and FYI VATICAN 2 is extremely modern
Father with all my respect an sympathy for you.
I was sedevacantist for a week. And this was by hearing you and bishop Sanborn (excuse my english, I'm spanish). then I learned that I had to elude the "cum pope" Masses, and I did so. Instead of attend mass I heared your mass by internet. But that was a very bad week for me, it was like God leaved me. Like if I had commited sin. Troubled like I was and with nobody to ask, I asked to God by opening the Bible by azar. And I recibed an answer. It was a passage from the ancient testament about a reform of the priests and the trive of Levi, and there was a trive that hasn't be instituted for being priest but they instituted themself againts the will of God. I didn't understand very well, and some days later I asked again by the same method, opening the Bible by azar, and the answer was very much clear. It was a passage whith Salomon and the temple. The passage began: "I have hear your question and your troubleness, and I'm going to answer you. I have told you that I have founded this temple for all the eternity, and I Will be in this temple for ever". So the next day a went to confess and returned to assist Mass.
Now I don't have any doubt that even thought pope Francis is an heretical worst than Luther, God remains being in the Church and YOU and I and All must be with HIM.
Carthago Delenda Est other than indifference, co-habitation, civil marriage, sodomy, and sacrilege.
God does remain in the Church, but Francis is not part of the Church
@Carthago Delenda Est How utterly blind can you be.
I am writing this on 4/5/2020. I cannot believe father Cekada had a stroke. Please everyone pray for him. He should be the pope. He should definitely have been made a Bishiop by now. I can only think that he turned it down. He has saved more souls than any other person in the history of the planet. By bringing people to the Sedevacantist true Holy Catholic Church. Please God save your most holy, courageous, Godly servant. If father Cekada dies. Sedevacantism will receive a massive loss. May God bless him.
I thought he was offered to be made a Bishop by a few Thuc line Bishops (Zamora) years ago, but turned it down.
Who ever heard of sedevacantism? There is an old saying that says Protestants have a 1000 popes, while Catholics only one. I know this to be true through long experiences. Thanks Rev. Anthony Cekada for the explanation.
They say 7 generations but we believe that Fatima is a Squel to La Salette Secret.
When we know we strive to hold fast to our childhood faith.
The daily Rosary made me see this coming and the Fatima Message.
Thank you and May God bless you all for taking a Stance.
Allan.
Since Rite of Holy Orders and the consecration bishops were changed after Vatican II, have we been left without Jesus Christ’s physical Presence in the Eucharist, and without the spiritual nourishment of His Body and a Blood? How could that be? He said He would be with us always, would not leave us orphans, yes, spiritually but I believe He meant physically, as well, unless I err in this regard. But He did say unless we eat his Flesh and drink His Blood we have no life in us. So how could He leave us without them? Could someone shed some light on these questions.
You rightly question the implications of Sedevacantism: The defection of the Church. The See of Peter cannot remain vacant for long before the Church begins to break down due to an inability to ordain bishops without schism. If Sedevacantism is true, Christ is a liar who left us orphans.
When it comes to SSPX, at least Bp. Williamson had enough foresight to consecrate more bishops. Because the mainline SSPX aren't going to get any from the current hierarchy.
@Rincon Ovalle Luis Fernando very true. Even Williamson himself admitted in private that he was unable to refute Father Cekada who wrote a response to his mentevacantist error. Bishop Williamson had tried to argue that the post V2 Pope's weren't culpable because they were unable to understand that what they were doing was heretical...
@@jimmyhun91 if he admired it in privet how do you know about it ?
@@TheCleanTech it was from Stephen Heiner, the creator of Tru Restoration" who is in close correspondence with the Bishop ever since his SSPX days.
@@jimmyhun91 thanks , Fr Cekada may have been right on Williamson being in error on that specific point, (I don’t even know what “metavacanrism is). but that doesn’t mean Fr Cekada is without error on other points pertaining to sedevacantism , etc..
@@TheCleanTech you should read the article in that case. It's not about being in error on a small single point. The whole of Bishop Williamson's central premise, namely that the post Vatican II claimaints can't he true heretics because their minds have been poisoned by modernism (what Fr Cekada coins mentevacantism) is absurd and Father Cekada explains this rather carefully
I have another comment on here from several years ago claiming sedevacantists are not Catholics. I have since repented and become a sedevacantist myself. Deo Gratias.
Praise God! Welcome to the truth!
Dear Father, firstly I'd like to say that I enjoy your video's and have found them to be very informative. It seems an ongoing game of tennis is being played between the R&R's and the Seds to which I've been watching with some interest. Every time one makes a pronouncement the other argues it to which the other counter-argues and the rally continues. I would personally consider myself R&R but have been poking my nose into other camps just to see what's going on. I'm in a heck of a rut as I still altar serve at a somewhat conservative Novus Ordo (which I know questions my R&Rness) as well as the low mass according to the 62 missal (same parish but by visiting priest) while at the same time exploring the positions of Sedevacantism. Yes I know, sounds like I'm having fun.
+Julius Gorzkowski: One point I originally intended to add to the video (but somehow got lost in the process) might be of interest to you. Sedevacantists share a lot more common theological ground with "conservatives" than they do with R&R, because both sedes and conservatives usually adhere to the traditional ecclesiology when it comes to understanding the Catholic's obligations to submit to the Roman pontiff (when there is one).
Rev. Anthony Cekada ....
In your comments you refer to R&R; what do these initials stand for?
Recognize and Resist...
@@christinamiller1323 It means "Recoginze & Resist". That is: Recognizing the "popes" in Rome as true successors of Peter, but at the same time resisting their teachings and their rule over the Church.
Thank you Father Anthony Cekeda.
Allan.
It says 5 years back that would be 2016 so why wait so long.
Sisco and Salza be forgotten they are from the Father of all lies.
Thank you and God bless you.
In the third world we also have catholic souls.
Infiltration has been on even in Saint Athanasius days.
Allan.
Why is the line drawn at Paul VI, and not John XXIII or Pius XII?
I believe it's because he changed the Mass.
As with most traditionalist disagreements, each group adheres to their own while barely touching upon the others. I find this highly disengenuous.(?)
Why not repeat their argument as they themselves would?
They are convinced that to split with the Pope will convict them of being schismatic.
There are strong arguments to support the idea that wayward Pope's in history we're still Pope's regardless of their heresies. Their position is perhaps not cowardice as much as mortifying and painful to accept when given the systematic nature of the destruction being done.
Both positions have reasonable arguments. For myself, there is no way I am open to being influenced by this counterfeit church, therefore I will stay away and close my heart and mind to it's diabolical misdirections. This is truly what fits me as a Sedevacantist. They who give unlawful orders cannot be obeyed.
Please forget sedevacantism in the Catholic Church worry about the Hierarchy of the Catholic Church loaded with homosexuals as well as the priesthood. Seminaries are loaded with gays so we are living in times so horrendous to the Church it's really pathetic.Sedevacantism is the least of our worries.
The Dogma that all heretics and apostates are outside - and consequently have absolutely no Power or Office whatsoever in - the Church is the very basis of "Sedevacantism". "Sedevacantism" is a Dogmatic Fact. "Vatican 2" sect's adherents and heresiarchs (especially the Antipopes) alike, all ipso facto automatically excommunicated from Christianity for schism, heresy, and apostasy, as non-Christians, have absolutely no Office or Power in the Church. The "seminaries" are propagandization centers. To accept "Vatican 2" or Novus Inordinatio or any of the Antipopes or heresiarchs behind it is to attack God's Promises (Matthew 16:18; 28:20). They constantly praise other Antichristians. Vatican has the apostate Martin Luther's ugly fat face on their "official" stamp.
Unlike Bergoglio and Vatican II, With it's Bastard Child ' Novus Ordo Mass ', Our Faith in Jesus The Christ is Stronger Than EVER !!!!! Truth Be WELL KNOWN, The Real Catholic Church of Jesus The Christ, Is No Longer In Rome !!! Rome EXCOMMUNICATED Itself, Formerly With VATICAN II, How Dumb Do You Think Us ? Our Blessed Immaculate Mother and Queen Mary Told Us .... ' La Sallet and Fatima ', Got it Bergoglio ?
When I first started going to a Sedevacantist traditional Roman Catholic Church in Spokane, Washington those of the Vatican II Church tried to tell me all sorts of bad things about the church. They even tried telling me, and others, that it was a satanic church! I was 19 years old at the time, and unfortunately what was said about Mount Saint Michael’s by those who went to the Vatican II Church stuck in my mind and left me with questions for quite some time. I can’t see myself going to a V-2 service (I can’t call it a Mass) because the majority of the priest don’t make sense to me. I feel that the FSSP are heretics and I stay clear of the SSPX because from my understanding they’ve gone with Vatican.
With all my respect I have it very clear,
the FSSP is the one that is with the Vatican II;
And the FSSPX isnt’ heretic,
That is why the Vatican CAN NOT stand them.
Then you willfully reject Christ's Church and place yourself in a state of schism. Like all schismatics, you justify yourself by accusing the Church of heresy and speak blasphemies against the Church and Her rites.
It’s a big confusing mess. Thanks for some clarity, Father. Rest in peace
So then how will we ever get a new Pope? In what universe will the Sedevicantists accept a new Pope that all would agree on? Because I agree with your assessment of Burgoglio as a heretic and I speak it freely with the many Novus Ordo Catholics I know, a few Priests as well. What does one do?
Interesting that my politics and my sede vacantism are consistent and sound. I am a secessionist and a Sede Vacantist. The 2 are necessary conclusion to the current crises. That of Rome and that of Washington. Secessionists are erroneously dismissed as racists and anti Semites. Sede Vacantist are dismissed as nut jobs. I am in prayer about writing a book that will touch on both subjects and how they are intertwined. One cannot be a Sede Vacantist and a Neo Con and be intellectually honest. Perhaps the later has not been given any thought.
I actually have a book published called Americans are Asleep. It is philosophical and discusses sovereignty in a political light. In it I submit to the only Sovereign the God and Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Thank you for asking. I forgot I even made this comment, but the book needs to be edited to include Sede Vacantism and it's lonely road.
One cannot be a true Catholic and be proud of America. America is enemy of Christ and Catholic faith, so rather than bless, God curses America.
Neither are taken seriously cuz everyone knows they won't do shit.
Neither are taken seriously cuz everyone knows they won't do shit.
The teachings of Fr. Gregory Hesse (RIP), and Fr. Paul Kramer brought me here.
Well I know for sure that Gregory Hesse is quite different to Rev Anthony Cekada. Hesse has no respect for papal authority and his words on Pope SAINT Pius V are utterly shameful. Beware of him and stay with Rev Cekada instead.
@@ecopley9013 ; I know not every word spoken by Fr. Gregory Hesse.
I do know, he praised St. Pius V. regularly, don't be ridiculous.
@@ecopley9013 ; Fr.Paul Kramer stated on Coast To Coast,
"Call me Sedevacantist (now)".
I heard what I heard, and not taken out of context in any sense, it was the context.
If I heard wrongly, please let me know.
@@Johnnycdrums Thanks Johnny. You will find the comments I mentioned about fr Kramer in his video on Cum Ex. : ( Make sure you read Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio yourself and see that it is the Church's teaching which shows that a heretic can never be a valid pope.) You probably know that Fr Kramer was ordained in St Peter's by Modernists.
@@ecopley9013 ; I'll look it over.
Not crazy about this infighting amongst traditionalists.
Although a "revert", I'm old enough to remember the Church.
Noticed a big change in about 67' when I was twelve.
In 1969, the Metropolitan of Krakow wrote a book entitled "The Acting Person". This book is no ordinary book but one of the most significant treaties of the phenomenological current of philosphy. Experts regard its author John Paul II, as being the second most important promoter of this phenomenological current. The most important one being Husserl, an Austrian free thinker. In this book, Pope John Paul explains that the New Testament deserves a symbolic interpretation. He also mentions that God does not act directly but exists only as long as people interact. When I read Francis' offensive statement about the fish and the bread among other... I immediately identified that most of his words are nothing else but an "inclusive language" (or street language) versions of what Pope John Paul II taught in that treaty. John Paul was an educated and enlightened man, unlike Francis' whose known to have no writing skills and an IQ much lower than that of President Maduro of Venezuela. From what I know, Wojtyla wrote this treaty before he became a Metropolitan. At that time he was a very liberal priest and intellectual. Fr. Cekada.
Amen Fr, from my humble opinion, "from their fruits you shall know them, as wolves in sheep's clothing" Bergolio is nothing but a forerunner of the false prophet to come...
May the Immaculate Heart of Mary Triumph over the smoke of satan and evil that has pervaded Holy Mother Church and mankind..
He's right. I am convinced.
After 40years of research you haven’t read the Papal Bull, Unam Sanctam?
I'm really confused by all this. What is truth/fact? Who's right and who's wrong?
My question too
Me too, still studying Catholicism
@@TheRajapala let me gueas. Are you Indonesian?
@@TheRajapala Fr Cekada is right and the others are wrong, and often dishonest as well or misled.
@@isiwaktu2525 Fr Cekada has the truth.
Traditionalists don't fear sedevacantism, it's the other way 'round.
The ramifications of this are mind-blowing. Does this mean that I have never been baptized, never received absolution, and have never received Holy Communion? I am deeply troubled about all of this.
The baptism you received was valid. As regards other sacraments, there are a lot of other factors to consider that would take more space than we have here.
A few important things to know about Catholicism before leaving the Church for the Sedevcantist Movement:
1. Recognise and Resist is a long practiced Catholic Tradition ( www.trueorfalsepope.com/ ); Take a look at Dr Roberto de Mattei's book - "Love for the Papacy and Filial Resistance to the Pope in the History of the Church" - a selection of easy to read articles from the passed few years.
2. The Catholic Church (the very visible Church with churches and priests everywhere) has a valid priesthood ( www.trueorfalsepope.com/p/sedevacantistwatch-peter-dimond.html ); Cardinal Ottaviani, no less, never had any concerns over the validity of the new rites, even though he expressed concern to Pope Paul VI over the legitimacy of Novus Ordo Mass.
3. Exactly who are these men who started the Sedevacantist ant-Catholic sect and what are their aims? ( www.trueorfalsepope.com/p/sedevacantist-watch.html ).
Another article refuting the rubbish shouted on N.O.W. ( www.acatholicthinker.net/a-response-to-novus-ordo-watch/ ); Scroll down to Traditionalist Issues for the article if the link won't take you straight there.
Also give this refutation a read, if you are serious about being Catholic ( matt1618.freeyellow.com/sedevacantism.html )
@@soniamartin2007 1. recognize and resist was never catholic teaching and in fact goes against several dogmas. all of dr de matteis examples of history are a misrepresantation of the actual facts and draws conclusions from false analogys. such as: paul refutet peter in the bible. while it is correct that paul refutet peter, it is also correct that it never was a refutation about peter spreading heresy! but instead paul refutet peter because peter didnt act according to his own preaching and the preaching of the church.
Which proves that the Sedevactists are simply modern Donatists.
Good video, but y'all need to turn up the audio on your videos.
Sorry -- it's a problem with the older ones. I think we got it solved with the latest.
The one problem I have with sedevacantism(not that there aren't issues with RnR) is that it doesn't offer a way out. What do we do if it's true? To me, that's the final roadblock. And even the late, great Father Cekada, did not have an answer for that. May he rest in peace. If someone has an answer I'd like to know
The one thing that confuses me about sedevacantism is, if they consider the current priesthood invalidly ordained, then how do we gain access to God's divine mercy? Our sins can only be forgiven through a valid priest in the sacrament of confession, and if there's no validly ordained priests to be found anywhere, then we are doomed forever.
@@grupoaranzamusic that's a huge issue however their answer would be that anyone who was ordained through the old rite would be validly so long as bishop was consecrated thru same. So SSPX, and sedes(excepting those stemming from the Thuc line as their orders appear to be in doubt)and even some still in the Novus Ordo still have valid orders. So the Church can carry on it's business there, by having us seek out non Novus Ordo clergy to ensure validity of Sacraments. I was talking to someone else about the issue I was wondering about how we get out of the mess, which goes into your concern too, but with regards to if no pope then no Cardinals and no new pope. He said that we don't need an answer for everything. man was sinful and deserving of Hell owing an eternal debt to God. There was no answer on how to pay that debt. Then came Christ. So we don't know what God has in store for us. I like watching What Catholics Believe with Father Jenkins on TH-cam because he is very balanced and reasoned on this. He says that in his opinion, based on the evidence Francis is an obvious heretic, never had the faith and does not now therefore cannot he the pope. However, this is simply an opinion and he could be wrong. It is not necessary for salvation we get this question right. It may make it easier so we aren't following a false pope though. Personally, I no longer feel Francis is the pope. One must be Catholic to he the pope and Francis is not Catholic.
There is the Cassciacum thesis as a potential solution. In short, it proposes that the V2 Popes hold the office materially, but do not formally possess the authority of the papacy because of heresy. They are basically "pope-elect" until they renounce their errors and heresies and reject V2. This means their pronouncements and appointments made as "pope-elect" are invalid because they do not possess petrine authority. It is because of this distinction that there leaves open the possibility of their being a valid Pope in the future. For example, if Ratzinger came out and renounced all of his heresies and rescinded Vatican II, he would formally become the Pope.
If you look at what has come out of the Vatican and these "Popes" since V2, it becomes apparent that this may be the case.
@@DigitalLogos Utter nonsense. A man who is not the Pope cannot appoint Cardinals or authorize the ordination of bishops. Since all the bishops and Cardinals from before Vatican II are dead, the Cassciacum thesis posits the total defection of the Church, which both Scripture and Tradition hold to be impossible. The truth is that Sedevacantism is untenable.
Cardinal Siri was elected pope in the 1958 conclave but was threatened not to accept and Vatican Guard Scortesco who revealed that outside interference in the Conclave was there was later found Cheese Wired in his room.
White smoke and then Black and again White.
Roncalli or John 23rd attended the Paris Workshops.
Allan.
AVE MARIA.
Fr Cekada.How do you resolve the issue that a pope has to conscrate russia when there are no popes.
+Chopin euler Fatima, even though it received approval from the Church, is a private revelation, so its content is not, properly speaking, a datum that can be used in a theological argument.
Great stuff. Saints ARE living in this age afterall.
Sedevantism never adds, does not circumvents any dogmas or traditions whatsoever only adhering to tbe original church that the Lord has founded that there's nothing to be contended with. True faith is and must always be constant.
Many sedevacantist theories deny in practice the visibility of the Catholic Church
even the theories that don't do so are problematic
Catholic doctrines are not just theories, they have a practical beneift for the Faithul (especially the indefectibility of the Church)
Under sedevacantism, there is no difference between an defected Church and a Sedevacantist one with a false Pope sitting on the throne and 99.999% of Catholics submitting to him
The doctrine of the indefectibility of the Church is rendered as an abstract theory that is useless in practice.
time 18:40 and following > this is undeniable. But I must add; The Chair is hardly vacant, It is totally occupied: But by whom is it occupied; that is in fact, the question we face.
Correction, the only thing needed to recognize formal heresy is in ones words or deeds, discovered knowledge that they know they are contradicting in part or whole the declared faith.
This is such an interesting topic, and a lot of things make more sense when I consider it.
Not sure what the truth is yet, but it’s mind blowing this topic is so hidden unless you are Catholic and invested in it.
Had never in my life hear of it until I became interested in Catholicism and started digging into the topics of the faith.
Regarding, The contention/apologetic of “what will people think???” Uhhh, people will think it’s interesting and explains a lot...it’s weirder and harder to to imagine that Francis is legit.
Again, not fully sure and settled on which position is true.
The Church has a legally elected leader who is not the Vicar of Christ, or even a Catholic. That's the problem. The seat isn't empty, it's occupied by an imposter.
What's the intro organ piece?
Dynamite Video.
Father, I have not done reading or research into the papal condemnation of Acion Francaise and Marraus. Do you think such a study could lead to drawing paralleled between what was done then (and subsequently condemned in France) and what is now done at CFN, Remnant, and other R&R enterprises? It’s my understanding that it was condemned as a magisterium unto itself which is what you are saying R&R is...
Before we talk about something vacant or unoccupied, it is logical to talk first about something occupied. Something, not in the order of creation, is prior to nothing. Applied to the Pope or the issue of sedevacantism, the question is: how did a Pope come to be or how did a Pope come to be constituted? The story is too well known that Jesus changed the name of Simon to Peter (Cephas). This changing of name, oftentimes initiated by the Lord God, has a history in the Bible. Thus, Abram to Abraham, Jacob to Israel, and Saul to Paul, to name a few. Such a change had a purpose. In the philosophy of St. Thomas on essence, purpose is that cause by which an essence comes to exist. The existence of a being therefor presumes the presence of an essence. What Jesus constituted therefore at the act of changing the name of SImon to Peter is to constitute the essence of the Pope in Peter. St. Thomas further says that act of essence is different from essence, with the former issuing forth from the latter. It goes without saying that an act of essence does not make or unmake an essence. In other words, what a Pope says and does does not make or unmake him a Pope. As corollary: 1) Pope John XXIII was never a Pope is he was a Freemason at the time of his election as alleged; same as Pope Paul VI; 2) the election of Pope John Paul I came from a duly constituted electoral college of cardinals; 3) the election of Pope John Paul II came from a duly constituted electoral college of cardinals and is not valid if the allegation that he was a Freemason at the time of his election is true and correct; 4) an essence cannot be resigned; only acts of essence may not be discharged and can be resigned from thus Benedict XVI is still pope; 5) Pope Francis discharges the act of essence of Benedict XVI. Therefore, the Seat of Peter is not vacant.
Excellent talk. I'm not a Feeneyite, but Fr. Leonard Feeney was never excommunicated. I like both Feeneyites and Sedevacantists.
Well, he was. The text of the 1953 Decree is here: www.traditionalmass.org/articles/article.php?id=1&catname=2
SoRE and Feeney have some similar ideas?
Feeneyism was very confusing to me as new sede. Thankfully I read about UOM.
Believe me, Bugnini's ccd didn't expose me to UOM.!!
Thinking of Sedevecantism, however, in Australia their isn't a sedevecantist parish i am aware of, so if I do go down that road, where can i receive sacraments?
+SuperScarrow CMRI has a missionary priest in Australia, and you can contact him through their site, cmri.org
+Rev. Anthony Cekada Thanks for that Father
I am in America also a sedev. How do I received the sacraments?
It is not a matter of fearing sedevacantism. It is a matter of Catholic doctrine as to how we are to act in accordance with the faith in such a confusing time within the Church. Vatican I, is extraordinary infallible doctrine which forbids accepting in principle a sedevacantist position with the exception of a normal death of a pontiff and gap between a death and re-election of a successor. Today's issue has to do with heresy of pontiff or succession of pontiffs who can be recognized based off the Catholic faith to be in formal heresy.
Vatican I was clear on perpetual successors to the chair of Peter: "...with the approbation of the sacred council, and for the protection, defense and growth of the catholic flock, to propound the doctrine concerning the institution, PERMANENCE and nature of the sacred and apostolic primacy, upon which the strength and coherence of the whole church depends" (Vatican I, Sess. 4 #6).
The only objection I've heard is who's going to pick the next Pope? Well, at Fatima, Our Lady said she would return a seventh time. Who better to pick the next Pope!
What do you think about the magic videos by the Dimonds? Apostasy?
they're crazy stay away
@@garyolsen3409 why are they "crazy"? They give evidence unto everything they say!
The magic videos are silly. Clear natural illusions are used as proof of supernatural
2 Thessalonians 2-15 hold your Traditions handed down by the Apostles don't change a thing. Vatican 2 went from being Catholic to Protestant church teaching. Creating a false faith which is apostacy and invalid in the eyes of God. A counterfeit religion away from Lord Jesus Christ teaching.
Dramatic but truthful ending!Untold millions are actually following the vicar of Satan masquerading as a catholic.
Fr. could it be that once our Queen Mother picks a cardinal to be pope through st peter & st. paul as a prophecy points out. Could this be the answer? Thanks for your time.
I'm feeling lost and confused. I thought I could always trust the Church ... what do I do... there is so much digging/research to do (and I'm working on something currently with a tight window this summer) ... I suppose I'll continue going to the latin mass I go to here in the UK (started going last year), when in Poland I go to the NO masses as they're closer and my babcia needs to go too, and that's what I was raised in and in Poland they're not as bad as in the west ...yet, although they're getting there, I've lost count of sermons of "God loves you" "the faith is love" "love love love" ...I've started rolling my eyes during such sermons, if priests would spend their time teaching the faith or things that are actually affecting young people e.g. LGBT etc. we'd see an increase in attendance -_- ...if they're scared, at least teach the faith re. canon law or history or life of the saints or why we do certain things or certain traditions ... but no, they choose "do you know... God loves you" .... and then are surprised no one knows anything, you can go to Catholic school, attend mass weekly and know hardly anything. I'm lucky with my family and growing up was okay, but also I started digging in online... ironically it was Islam that made me dig more into our faith.
Anyway my point is... I'm feeling lost recently after looking into what happened after Pius XII ... what does that mean for he church, how do we fix this, did my baptism as a baby count? my Holy Communion? all the sacraments? ...what about when I go for adoration... what about the Eucharistic miracles...
So much confusion ...what do we do, how do we have a strong Church ...I'm lost and on the more devout side, what of just the normal members? :(
Anyone can perform a valid baptism, even pagans and heretics. That's a defined dogma from the Council of Florence. You should read An Open Letter to Confused Catholics by Marcel Lefebvre and The Catechism of the Crisis in the Church by Mathias Gaudron. I can give you copies if you like.
The rite (or fraternity or diocese or brotherhood, etc) spoken of here, or the SSPV, SSPX, CRMI, etc are ALL valid so long as they continue to adhere to the traditional catechism, traditional sacraments, etc as described by Father Gregory Hesse Canon lawyer, etc etc. and they were consecrated by valid bishops in valid sacraments. I’m still trying to figure out why they are/were fighting amongst themselves! The New Order is the one to stay away from.
@@PahooKatawahcheck Bp Donald Sanborn on this. The real problem is una cum with heretic Francis.
All I know is the Novus Ordo is a new Protestant Church the Anglican Communion was installed in 1987 it is not the mass of PaulVI.
The Pope is a Bishop of Rome on a daily basis He is Peter at Counsel but if He and the Bishops have abandoned the true faith then watch out!
Matthew 16:17 Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. 18 And I tell you that you are Peter,[b] and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades[c] will not overcome it.
What is so hard to understand about the gates of hell will not prevail quote. Novus Ordites say that if there is no pope then hell has prevailed. Does that really nullify all licit and properly ordained priests and bishops who celebrate Mass? They're effectively saying that the Pope is the Church. Which is objectively false.
Ordaining a bishop without the consent of the Pope is an act of schism, incurring latae sententiae excommunication. It follows then, that if the Papacy were vacant for long enough that all the bishops ordained prior to the vacancy die, Apostolic Succession would fail, as there would be bishops except those who had been ordained in schism, and there would be no way to reconcile the schismatic bishops to the Church because the excommunication can only be lifted by the Pope. That would mean that the Gates of Hell had prevailed against the Church.
I'm a protestant and this is true
I hold that the Siri Thesis is the most likely explanation for post Pius XII happenings.
Why Siri has joined modernists later on?
@@dawidtrybula Perplexing for many, but he wasn't a free agent.
He was under duress, threatened and probably killed in 1989. That God gave us a pope on 26 Oct 1958, is the best explanation for events.
Sedevacantism is less likely.
The evil is the money power acting on the world and Church.
It goes back, I think, to 1515, Pope Leo X, a Medici with his position on usury and to around the time of William the Conquer in 1066.
The Church hasn't contained usury.
William granted London it's first Royal Charter to be,in effect, a special economic zone, which it has retained since.
The Church has to fix the bad effects of Leo X 's bull of 1515 on usury and shut usury down.
Because it hasn't, usurers own the world and finance evil events.
Ludicrous. He never accepted the office.
@@j.knight9335 He did and resigned under duress.
That's illegal, so he remained pope, in exile until he died in 1989.
@@dawidtrybula He was under duress, was not a free agent, like David in the Old Testament after he was anointed king by Samuel.
Arguably, he was king in exile from about 22 years old to about 30 years old, when he was recognised as king and reigned.
Siri was in exile from 26 October 1958 till May 1989,when he died, likely murdered by poisoning.
Maybe Christ has given us these days to see who will stay with his Church or who will abandon his Church.
Stay on the Ark!
I suppose you have been told that sedevacantists have abandoned the Church *sigh*. How silly. If sedevacantists believe all of the doctrines of the Church, including that heretics are not a part of the Church, how have they abandoned Her? It's just false. ; ) We are Catholic.
@John piang_4211965 I agree, so stop thinking of us as "sedevacantists" and just think of us how we think of ourselves, Catholics.
@@ecopley9013 They have abandoned the Church. They refuse to submit themselves to the Pope and use all kinds of high-sounding nonsense to argue that the Pope is not the Pope. They hold to a teaching that implies the defection of the Church, contrary to both Scripture and Tradition. They can't even agree with each other, which is a mark of heresy.
There's no sedevacantist chapels near me
Try novusordowatch.org/now-what/ . Not all parishes or priests are online, so contact one of those priests... I hope you will find one nearby. God bless!
I wish Fr. Cekada would have addressed the matter of jurisdiction. It may be that there have been popes that are material heretics, regardless, I have no jurisdiction to make a formal judgment. It is not a matter of cowardice, rather, it is a matter of humility. I simply do not have the authority. Imagine, I see my neighbor unjustly kill a man with a gun. I may objectively say, he is materially a murderer. However, I am not the local magistrate and have no authority to publicly pronounce guilt and or sentence my neighbor. I must rely on the proper authority to pronounce his judgment. I do not know who the proper authority is for a "Pope". Perhaps a future Pope? Or a council of Bishops?
Sedevacantism is a novelty, not found in tradition. The Church has never taught it, nor was it ever believed by the faithful always and everywhere. It is mere speculation of a few of the Fathers. Catholics have always and everywhere believed there are two ways for a pope to lose his office; 1) His death and 2) His resignation. Beyond that, We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man.
But doesn't the qualification for a man to be the Vicar of Christ in the office and chair of Peter at least in a similar way effect the office and authority of all the Apostles (i.e. V-II bishops)? How then is this issue of sedevacantism resolved? How would we come to know if the man elected by the cardinalate is truly in the person of Peter?! From such a brood of mistaken men at best, would that even be possible? How long would it take?
No doubt if this plague fell Peter himself, it's infected the whole world and the world then must be purged. What are the first steps needed to make resolution?
"This doctrine is to be believed and held by all the faithful in accordance with the ancient and unchanging faith of the whole church" (Vatican I, Sess. 4 #7).
"That which our Lord Jesus Christ, the prince of the shepherds and great shepherd of the sheep, established in the blessed Peter, for the continual salvation and permanent benefit of the church, MUST OF NECESSITY REMAIN FOR EVER, BY CHRIST'S AUTHORITY, in the church which, founded as it is upon a rock, will stand firm until the end of time" (Vatican I, Sess. 4 Chapt. 2 #1). Here is more on the institution and PERMANENCE: "if anyone says that it is not by the institution of Christ the Lord Himself (that is to say, by divine law) that blessed Peter should have PERPETUAL SUCCESSORS IN THE PRIMACY over the whole church; or that the Roman Pontiff is not the successor of the blessed Peter in the primacy: let him be anathema" (Vatican I, Sess. 4 Chapt. 2 #5).
Father Anthony Cekada:
In many of your comments you refer to R&R; what do these initials stand for?
Recognize and Resist. Recognize x as Pope but Resist him since he Is a heretic.
It makes no sense at all though
If SSPX and FFSP use the 1962 Roman Missal, then what's wrong with them? What's the problem? What Roman Missal do you use? What's the right one? Please tell me if you dare....
You might want to view videos 2 & 3 in the series based on chapters of Work of Human Hands. They will explain why priests like me don't use the 62 Missal.
Rev. Anthony Cekada I now understand why many Sedevacantists do not use the 62 Missal. However, the question of "what Missal is the correct one to use?" is left unanswered.
Is it the 1958 edition? Is it Lefebvre's 1952 edition? Is it Lasance's 1945 edition? Is it Lasance's 1937 edition? How far back should we go?
LoL "if you dare". "dun dun duuuuuuuuun" You can't even follow proper procedure. Everybody knows in times of serious matters only a "triple dog dare" is appropriate.
TheRindy84 Since Sedevacantists only use pre-1962 Roman Missals, there's the big question of "WHAT" pre-1962 Roman Missal to use? Every pre-1962 Roman Missal has different liturgical calendars.
If Sedevacantists can't agree on which one to use, then everyone of them are following a different liturgical calendar, pre-1960.That isn't uniformity, all it is is using whatever Missal you feel like using so long as it's pre-1962 (i.e. a Protestant way of thinking).
Say what you will about the Novus Ordo Church and the SSPX, at least they all use the same Missal with the same Liturgical Calendars.
You do understand that the "uniformity" that you speak of is supposed to be the faith right? I couldn't actually tell you what year of missal I have but I can say that I've never had a problem following along (regardless of if I went to CMRI, SSPX or independents) unless, of course, I'd forgotten to move the marker and didn't catch or remember what sunday it was but anyway that's beside the point. The point is I was assisting in the real Sacrifice of the mass, the uniformity is in being one with the priest as the mass is said. Holding the same faith. With the Novus Ordo, you're trading uniformity of certainty (to say the least) and faith. I have 2 Novus Ordo Catholic friends, brothers that went to the same church who both still go to church and have differing ideas on both morality and even whether the Eucharist is the true body and blood of Christ but you seem to be telling me that "hey, at least they have the same calendar"? Are you kidding me? The novus ordo has a 50/50 chance (and I'm probably being generous) of actually practicing idolatry. If the priest hasn't been validly consecrated then his mass and the sacrament is also invalid. Hence you might as well worship the protestant crackers and grape juice as your God. I don't lump the SSPX with the novus ordo since I don't agree that they've completely given in and gone along with the Novus Ordo but I do find it odd that as much as they practice and act like there is no pope (Resist) they seem to be incredibly intolerant to an opposing view one that does not directly affect any pertinent matter of faith. If you have to resist and disobey the person believed to be the current pope and you don't trust him to lead you as the spiritual head and Christ's appointed vicar, who the *bleep* cares if he's sitting in the chair or not? He's useless to you, he can't help you, he doesn't give a crap. I've heard the bad dad argument and I get where they're coming from but the analogy doesn't work at all. Taking an occupation is not the same as a biological fact. If you help create or birth a child you are (biologically) that child's parent and nothing you do will ever negate that fact. However, you can choose to be mum or dad (in action) to that child or you can abandon it and let someone else raise it. In that case you have chosen not to raise or even look after that child. Being pope and taking on the responsibility of tending Christ's flock is strictly a choice and it is by your actions whether you are or not. Even in the case of a validly ordained pope who decided to fly to Jamaica and forget his flock, he's still pope but he's still useless to anybody because he doesn't care to do his duty. Go ask children who have been adopted or had to rely on themselves for the majority of their upbringing and even they will tell you that they don't really have a parent and that they don't consider them their parents because they opted out. Sedevacanists basically are that child. We were abandoned by our parent a long time ago and nobody has wanted to step up to the plate by conforming to Christ's teachings. The SSPX has no real reason to be such bullies when it comes to sede's since (at least in action) they do the same thing.
Rev. Cekada, Do you hold that John23 was a legitimate pope?
no he doesnt. it becomes clear if you atch hius other videos.
So, who WAS the last valid pope for you fr. Cekada? Have you declared yourself about that? Or are you afraid to say? If i were to accept sedecavantism, can i pick my own last valid pope?, or do i have to accept yours?
You have to accept Pope Pius as the last valid Pope, but all the Vatican II "popes" were not popes but antipopes.
I have some doubts about the man above, so I recommend to you:
Vaticancatholic. Com
That website I can verify is the truth.
Sorry to say Father, but Salza and Siscoe are both correct in what they teach.
No,.
th-cam.com/video/WAmqlOfbcb8/w-d-xo.html
They were refuted already
Your comment went into a garbage before it was written. And Fr. Cekada has binned it before he passed away.
Thinking the pope can not follow Catholicism and be catholic is just absurd
Was John XXIII validly elected pope? I understand that he lost his "Power or Authority" because of his role in VII and other beliefs, but did his papacy start out legit?
+Steven Osterhaus No it did not, John XXIII was a heretic since the 1920's and was also a Freemason, he was the one that called the Masonic council V2 that brought the end times counterfeit "Catholic" sect. A one world religion.
Pope Pius XII was the last Pope Catholics had.
Yves Marsaudon, 33rd degree Scottish Rite Freemason said: "The sense of universalism that is rampant in Rome these days is very close to our purpose for existence... with all our hearts we support the revolution of John XXIII."
You can find all his heresies here:
www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/catholicchurch/anti-pope-john-xxiii/#.VocKbhUrLIU
scroll down once you're on the page
John XXIII was a public heretic. According to canon 188 of the CIC 1917 (church law at that time) he lost his office by doing the deed ("Any office becomes vacant upon the fact and without any declaration by tacit resignation recognized by the law itself if a cleric: 4) publicly defects from the catholic faith." canon 2314 makes it even more clear: "All apostates from the Christian faith and each and every heretic or schismatic: 1) incurs by that fact excommunication 2) unless they respect warnings they are deprived of benefice, dignity, pension, office, or other duty that they have in the Church, they are declared infamous, and [if] clerics, with the warning being repeated, [they] are deposed; 3) if they give their names to non-Catholic sects or publicly adhere [to them], they are by that fact infamous, and with due regard for the prescription of Canon 188n. 4, clerics, the previous warnings have been useless, are degraded." So you see. As John XXIII has publicly spoken heresy and never denounced it, he is outside the church by the fact itself and never received the papcy validly!
This video is just mayor infighting between different traditionalists. A mess bad enough without Francis ;)
After reading some of the commits - I just had too.
I have no doubt Father will unmask them!
The Sedes I know are very devout to St. Michael the Archangel. This is going to be a fun one. Can’t wait for the action to begin.
The R & R authors are innovators, popularizing the use of legalize, using their position as reigning experts and authority and trying their power moves to win over audiences, by introducing this book as a maneuver to squash the Sedes with their Doomsday Device. LOL
Hurry up with the book - 700 hundred pages! Complications - say no more; say no more.
Thank you Jesus.
Ezeckiel 18:29
And the children of Israel say: The way of the Lord is not right. Are not my ways right, O house of Israel, and are not rather your ways perverse?
Isaiah 55:8
For my thoughts are not your thoughts: nor your ways my ways, saith the Lord.
Have to give it to them - they took a page out of “Macho Man Randy Savage’s” PR play book.
How does a sede picture the next pope to be elected? Doesn't seem like it's something in the pay grade of a layman.
I very much appreciate Fr Cekada's critique of the mass of Paul VI. It is very eye opening as to the hidden and not so hidden heresies embedded within the liturgy. I believe Fr Cekada is a very sincere and holy priest but just like any one of us, he too is prone to error. I believe his belief in sedevanctism is gravely wrong and here is why: Jesus Christ gave us a Church and he placed at the head of the Church a very flawed man, Peter. If the Church did not need a head, or if Christ did not intend for it to have a head, he would not have established the office. If the Church required a perfect man to be the head, he would not have chosen Peter. The Church is the living body of Christ. When you cut off the head of any living being, man or beast, it dies immediately. So too, with the Church. Without a head, the Church dies. A man may go insane, become overun with dementia, but it does not kill him. Cutting off his demented head will kill him. We have had popes much worse than the post Vatican II popes, why do we not go back further and say the seat has been empty since Peter himself.? This arbitrary cut off seems very suspicious to me. For good or bad, for better or worse, we are stuck with a bad Pope, Francis. But he is the head and as long there is a head the Church has life. This evil will pass, for sure, but just as surely new evil will replace it. Satan will never rest until God, in the fullness of time, says "it is finished". We don't know the day or the hour, we must trust in Jesus and know that he will never abandon us. I pray for the return of good and holy priests and a good and holy Pope, until then we must suffer with the Church. Adopting false beliefs, like sedevacantisim, is not a solution, it compounds the problem.
Bottom line: Fr. Feeney preached no heresy!
Bottom line Feeney was a heretic
What planet are you from??? He was excomunicated by Pope Pius XII
Once again, Fr. Feeney preached no heresy.
@Kevin Faler Feeney was excommunicated by Pius XII. He preached heresy, because he denied baptism of desire / blood. Just saying no doesnt prove anything. You have to show some kind of proof. It is common knowledge that Feeney was excommunicated!
@@skabedab Father Feeney was never excommunicated for heresy but for alleged disobedience. His position on Baptism of desire (that it contradicted the absolute necessity of water baptism) was not even formulated at the time of his so called excommunication. The misinformation abroad was that he was excommunicated for his stance on the dogma EENS. This was a diabolically clever ruse as this happened to be the very dogma standing in the way of the modernist ecumenical heresy. Very timely, I must say. The heretic Rahner was the one who translated the infamously ambiguous protocol letter to the Bishop of Boston (which never appeared in the Acts of the Holy see) into Latin and made sure it was inserted into Denzinger when he was editor of that publication (talk about a wolf being in charge of a sheepfold!) in order to give it an authority it did not have and to set the stage for the infamous Council of apostasy.
i DO like the fact that you relativize Fatima and put it in its place...needs so much demytholization, even if it did take place
We must see the aparition as what it was: an aparation of Our Lady, approved by the Catholic Church and have deep respect for it and its vidents, but nothing else. Personally, i'm just tired of all those "messages" atributed to Our Lady in Fátima, Lasallete and Lourdes, they are so confusing and contradictorious that i am even starting to think all those "messages" didn't even took place. The same goes to those that talk about "3 days of darkness" (and i was REALLY obsessed with that). The only private prophecies i believe (and i admit its just for personal interests) are those that talk about a Great Catholic Monarch and an intercession of Heaven to elect a new Pope. But again, i know we are not meant to believe in private revelations so if people don't believe them there Is no problem at all (though i hope they could happen).
@@LuisRincon-wr4dm yep! :)
As a former Mormon now Protestant, I don't see the appeal of disagreeing with your pope and staying Catholic. It could just be because the papacy is just one of many modern Catholic dogmas that is unbiblical. If you're throwing away the pope, why hold on so dearly to veneration of saints, immaculate conception and bodily assumption of Mary, transubstantiation, a sacerdotal priesthood (claiming the blasphemous title "altar Christus", i.e. "another Christ"), etc.? Read your Bibles and you'll abandon these false traditions.
You need to get beyond the idea that the Bible is the sole criterion for deciding whether a religious proposition is true of false.
Rev. Anthony Cekada
It's not the only rule of faith. But it is the sole infallible rule of faith. If anything contradicts the word of God, it must be abandoned. This is the position held by Protestants (at least those in the reformed tradition who hold to the 5 solae (sola scriptura, sola fide, solus Christus, sola gratia, soli Deo gloria) and have a high view of scripture.
The Bible is not merely a "part of sacred tradition" (how a Catholic friend described it). It is inspired by God (literally God-breathed, 2 Tim. 3:16-17) and is sufficient to prepare the man of God for any good work. No other tradition, earthly preacher or idea can do the same.
And how do we know "infallibly" that the Bible is "the SOLE infallible rule of faith"?