Bishop Bernard Fellay, SSPX and Antipope Francis Exposed Beliefs, Heresies and Practices

This article contains content used from authors: Brother Peter Dimond and Brother Michael Dimond of Most Holy Family Monastery.com

Bishop Bernard Fellay (born April 12, 1958 in Switzerland) is a bishop and superior general of the self-professed Traditionalist Catholic Society of St. Pius X. He grew up near the seminary of Ecône where he entered in October 1977. He was ordained to the priesthood on June 29, 1982. On June 30, 1988, he was consecrated a bishop by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.

In 1988, the Vatican II sect declared Bishop Fellay "automatically excommunicated" through being consecrated a bishop by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, an act that they described as "unlawful" and "schismatic" (cf. Apostolic Letter Ecclesia Dei). In January 2009, at Fellay's request, the Vatican II sect lifted the excommunication that it stated had automatically occurred.

In July 1994 Fellay was elected as Superior General of the SSPX, and in 1996, the General Chapter re-elected him for a second term of office.

In October, 2012, Bishop Bernard Fellay expelled Bishop Richard Williamson from the SSPX.

Society of St. Pius X

The Society of St. Pius X (commonly known as the SSPX) is a self-professed traditional Catholic priestly society, founded in 1970 by the Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre from France. The current superior general of the SSPX is Bishop Bernard Fellay. The purpose of the society is to provide validly ordained priests who claim to uphold traditional and orthodox Catholicism, free from any association with neo-modernist doctrines which, through external influences, came to prominence following the Second Vatican Council.

Although they were not the first such society, the SSPX and the personality of Archbishop Lefebvre became in the eyes of the wider world, the standard bearers of "Catholic tradition" in resistance to the diabolical innovations of the Second Vatican Council and it's "spirit" in the period after. Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop Antonio de Castro Meyer consecrated four Bishops at Écône in 1988 (Bishops Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson, and Alfonso de Galarreta).

Existing in around sixty countries to date, the SSPX claims to adhere to authentic Catholic doctrine and celebrates the traditional Latin Mass according to the missal promulgated by Angelo Roncalli (John XXIII) in 1962.

It is in large part because of the SSPX (and other traditionalist societies) that the Vatican II sect has responded by creating their own traditional societies to poach members and bring them under their control, such as the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter and Fraternity of St. Vincent Ferrer. There have been break-aways from the SSPX over the years such as the Society of St. Pius V (or SSPV).

Many sedevacantists view the SSPX as in schism from the Vatican II sect they recognizes as a valid Catholic hierarchy. The SSPX also consider the Vatican II antipopes as "true" popes in its public declarations, though it considers that many of the Vatican II's leaders are, as individuals, erroneous. So the SSPX obstinately operates outside of communion with the Novus Ordo hierarchy, even though it recognizes it as a true and Catholic hierarchy. This is actually schismatic.

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Declaration of August, 1976: “All those enter into schism who cooperate in this realization of this upheaval and adhere to this new Conciliar Church, as His excellency Bishop Benelli designated it in the letter he addressed to me in the Holy Father’s name last June 25th.” (Quoted in Sacerdotium)

Fr. Franz Schmidberger, former Superior General of the Society of St. Pius X: “We have never wished to belong to this system which calls itself the Conciliar Church, and identifies itself with the Novus Ordo MissaeThe faithful indeed have a strict right to know that priests who serve them are not in communion with a counterfeit church.” (Quoted in Sacerdotium)

The Angelus, Official publication of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), May, 2000: “This current of renewal has given birth to a new church within the bosom of the Catholic Church, to that which Msgr. Benelli himself called ‘the conciliar church,’ whose limits and paths are very difficult to define... It is against this conciliar church that our resistance stands. We do not refuse our adherence to the Pope as such, but to this conciliar church, for its ideas are foreign to those of the Catholic Church.” (The Angelus, Angelus Press, May 2000, p. 21)

After Marcel Lefebvre's controversial consecration of four bishops in 1988, the Vatican II's Congregation for so-called Bishops declared him "automatically excommunicated", a declaration confirmed by John Paul II, who had tried in vain to achieve a reconciliation with then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger's help.

Society of St. Pius X - Marian Corps

The Society of St. Pius X - Marian Corps, also refered to as the SSPX-MC, (originally known as the Society of St. Pius X of the Strict Observance or SSPX-SO) is a break-away group from the SSPX, founded in September 2012, by members of the Society of St. Pius X who disagreed with Bishop Bernard Fellay's overtures to modernist Rome. The first elected leader of the group is Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer, one of the five co-founders along with Fr. Francois Chazal, Fr. Ronald J. Ringrose, Fr. Richard Voigt and Fr. David Hewko. They see themselves as holding true to the principles of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, opposing any drift towards liberalism and modernism, as laid out in their document the Vienna Declaration.

The SSPX-MC has not changed the operating rules of the Society of St. Pius X, but provides a refuge for priests who no longer believe they can fulfill their vows in that Society. Fr. Chazal has said that liberalism has seeped into the highest levels of the SSPX. The SSPX-MC has chapels affiliated with it in the US, Canada, Europe, and Asia.

SSPX-MC group is far worse (in regard to their doctrinal views) than most people can imagine. They completely reject Catholic teaching just as their main sect, the SSPX. They are basically Protestants.

See: The Heresies of the Heretical Society of St. Pius X

The Vienna Declaration

+“ONLY SHE CAN HELP YOU”+

Vienna, Virginia, 10th August 2012 Priest Meeting.

TODAY’S SITUATION

1. The Society of St. Pius X declaration of July 14th, 2012, while proclaiming the notion of the Divinity of Christ and His Kingship, actually moves in the opposite direction by using ambiguous language and by preparing to place the SSPX under the authorities of “the Rome of neo-Modernist and neo-Protestant tendencies.” (1974 Declaration)

2. There has been a longtime slide in the SSPX towards Vatican II and a growing silence about Novus Ordo scandals against the Faith.

3. There is an illusion that one can join the Vatican II Church without accepting Vatican II.

4. There is a need to assure souls that the combat for Catholic Tradition, maintained by Archbishop Lefebvre against Modernist Rome, will continue.

5. A new attitude favoring compromise has infected the leadership of the SSPX.

6. This new attitude now prevails in publications, websites, seminaries and pulpits.

7. The priests who resist this new attitude are being punished or threatened with punishment and in all cases are being silenced. The present crisis demands a public response of priests and faithful against this compromise with Modernist Rome.

8. Many priests are personally disillusioned with Menzingen for doctrinal reasons but are unsure, cowed or do not know what to do.

9. Many independent priests trust the SSPX less and less. They hope to pass on their parishes to doctrinally reliable priests.

10. There is a replacement of the original Fatima solution, which is the consecration of Russia by the pope united with the bishops, by a belief that the SSPX can negotiate Modernist Rome back to the Catholic Faith.

11. The imprudent and reckless willingness to agree to a “suitable condition” of abandoning the flock to the “wolves” of the diocesan bishops.

DECLARATION

The heart of the Faith is the Divinity of Christ and his Kingship over all nations: “Oportet illum regnare”. The errors of Vatican II are an indirect attack against his Divinity and a direct attack on his Social Kingship. They will forever remain the Revolution of 1789 within the Church.

Today’s Vatican has only changed for the worse since the Council (more damage, more new heresies, more effective semi-modernism), to such an extent that we can repeat the Archbishop’s words of 1974 and 1976: “The Church that affirms such errors is at once schismatic and heretical. This Conciliar Church is therefore not Catholic. To whatever extent Pope, bishops, priests or faithful adhere to this new Church, they separate themselves from the Catholic Church.” (June 29, 1976)

The Pope [referring to Benedict XVI] has allowed the True Mass, but only within the Pantheon of modernist liturgies. Further, he has made clear his espousing of the false doctrine of Religious Liberty by preaching it to be the model of how the Church and State are to relate one to another. Lastly the doctrine of Ecumenism has been widely and consistently professed by the Pontiff in his visits to protestant temples, synagogues and mosques and Assisi III confirms that the spirit of Assisi is alive and well. It was this spirit that moved the Archbishop to undertake an “Operation Survival”, that is now itself in great peril.

Today’s SSPX clearly wants to place itself under this Conciliar Church, mitigates the poison of Vatican II, is more and more silent in face of the abuses by the conciliar hierarchy, uses ambiguous language referring to two opposite Magisteria. At the same time that it is ever ready to believe in a constant debate with obdurate Roman officials, it uses strong arm tactics toward those standing against wicked reconciliation.

We must wait for Our Lady to convert the Pope and inspire him to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart in union with all the bishops and we must persevere in the Charity of the Truth and the Truth of Charity, organized in a united corps of priests faithful to the position always maintained by Archbishop Lefebvre.

Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer, Fr. Ronald J. Ringrose, Fr. Richard Voigt, Fr. David Hewko, Fr. François Chazal

Bishop Bernard Fellay's Heretical Practices Exposed

Give us the Mass; Forget the Faith

The Society of St. Pius X proves their priority is the Mass and not the Faith, which they do not possess anyway—they deny the Salvation Dogma, they believe certain men can be saved who died worshipping false gods and practicing false religions; they believe in the heresy of Natural Family Planning; and, they are schismatics for consecrating bishops contrary to the expressed will of a man they believe is the true pope. Accompanying the loss of the faith is the loss of reason, the loss of proper priorities.

The Superior General of the heretical and schismatic non-Catholic sect of the Society of Saint Pius X, Bishop Bernard Fellay, had met with apostate Antipope John Paul II, whom he believes is Catholic and a pope. This inevitable meeting is only more proof that the Society of Saint Pius X is an opposition party set up by Satan to keep Sunday “Catholics”—those who put the Mass before the Faith—in the Conciliar Church and thus under the power of Satan. This fateful meeting only confirms what is already known of the motives of the SSPX (Society of St. Pius X). I will quote from Bishop Fellay’s official statement on 1/22/2001 that describes his meeting with John Paul II.

Bishop Bernard Fellay, Menzingen, January 22, 2001: “4. December 30, during a few moments, the Superior General visits the Pope in his private chamber (no words of importance are exchanged).”

Did Bishop Fellay not speak of the apostasy, heresy, and idolatry when he met with John Paul II, if, as he said, “no words of importance are exchanged”? - If he did not speak of the heresies when he meet with John Paul II, or, if he he did speak of the heresies when he meet with John Paul II but called it “no words of importance” - why did he do that? Because Bishop Fellay and his sect are guilty of the same crimes by way omission and some by commission. The SSPX does not recognize the clear heresies in the Vatican II documents. They do not refer to heresy as heresy but only as errors or deviations, and thus they do not condemn as heretics those who teach them. They also believe in and embrace several heresies themselves, such as salvation outside the Church and Natural Family Planning. Not once have they denounced John Paul II or any other of the apostate antipopes as non-Catholic apostates, heretics, idolaters, and blasphemers; (the few SSPX followers however who call some of their actions blasphemy, idolatry or heresy nevertheless excuse the men perpetuating these crimes from the formal charge of heresy, or still regard them as popes anyway); thus, they are guilty of crimes and sins of omissions since they do not denounce the clear heresies rampant in the Vatican II hierarchy. If anyone in the SSPX did denounce the clear crimes of the Vatican II sect as formal heresy or apostasy, they would have to break of communion and membership with the SSPX, since their beliefs then would not be shared by the official SSPX position. If they did not break off communion with the SSPX, even if they do not share their beliefs, they would outwardly profess communion and membership with a heretical non-Catholic sect and hence fall outside the Catholic Church by tacit approval of heresy and heretics. What good could one derive from attending the Holy Mass if he does not have the Catholic faith? This would only result in sacrilegious receptions of the Holy Eucharist. This, alone, proves that the Holy Mass is being abused by traditional so-called Catholics, just as it was before Vatican II, in that these Sunday “Catholics” have no true regard (love) for the Catholic faith. In truth, “Without faith it is impossible to please God,” (Heb. 11:6) no matter how many Masses a heretic or schismatic attends.

Bishop Fellay clearly shows where his priorities lie.

Bishop Bernard Fellay, Menzingen, January 22, 2001: “6. January 16, a new meeting with Cardinal Castrillon, during which the Superior General exposes the need for guarantees on behalf of Rome, before going further in possible discussion or agreement: +That the Tridentine Mass is granted to all the priests in the whole world. +That the censures which strike the bishops be cancelled.”

Bishop Fellay has put Mass before the Faith, and to be exact, the Mass while forgetting or ignoring the Faith. If the faith is not put before the Mass, then the Mass will only serve to damn those who receive unworthily to a deeper pit in hell. In truth what Bishop Fellay has said, in essence, is this: let us ignore and forget the Catholic faith, let us forget that John Paul II teaches Moslems worship the one true God and that he kissed the Koran; let us forget that he teaches and practices the heresy of Religious Liberty; let us forget that he teaches the apostate Jews worship the true God and that they are still in possession of the Covenant and are Catholics’ “elder brothers in the faith”; let us forget that John Paul II teaches Protestants and Schismatics are joined to the Catholic Church and that some have died as martyrs for the faith; let us forget that he teaches that Catholics are now allowed to pray in communion with non-Catholics; let us forget that he teaches that non-Catholic religions are a means to salvation; yes, let us forget and ignore all of that for now, just give us the Mass. We do not really care or deem as important, or worthy of mention, if the priest or his flock teach and practice the Catholic faith or lead souls to hell; this, we will not think of or come to an agreement on now, just give us the Mass. Dear reader, can you not see the truth of the matter and, in fact, how evil this is? Where is the priority of Bishop Fellay and his sect, the SSPX? If you cannot see the truth (the Catholic Faith) vs. what is false (not the Catholic Faith), it is because you “will not to see it” and therefore God has sent you the operation of error that you may believe lying and thus be condemned to everlasting hell fire on your judgment day just as you deserve for your bad will and obstinacy (2 Thess. 2:9-11). God indeed will permit a faithless, godless people that rejects Him and that loves pleasure more than they love Him, to receive the fruits of their sins and their own evil ways (Prov. 1:31; Proverbs 14:14), just as they desired (2 Tim. 3:1-5) and in fact deserves as a recompense for their evil crimes (Prov. 1:25).

Open Communion with the Vatican II Church

The SSPX is in the process of leading its wayward flock back into open communion with the Vatican II Church, which they claim to belong to. Bishop Fellay, the Superior General of the SSPX, is negotiating reconciliation with the Vatican II Church. The two points he requires for reconciliation are the uninhibited use of the Tridentine (Pius V) Mass and the lifting of their excommunications. He does not even mention the faith issues, the multiple crimes of idolatry, blasphemy, apostasy and heresy of the Vatican II Church and its apostate antipopes. Bishop Fellay, indeed, says, give us Pius V’s Mass, but forget the Faith!

The Catholic World Report, June 2003, "World Watch," pp. 8-9: “A move toward traditionalists? - Lefebvrist leader sees reason for optimism - A sensational report that appeared in an Italian newspaper late in April, alleging that the Vatican was close to a final reconciliation with the schismatic Society of St. Pius X… The new negotiations between Rome and the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) that began in 2000 reportedly opened with a letter in which Cardinal Castrillón Hoyos assured the traditionalists that the Vatican would allow their continued use of the Mass of Pius V… SSPX, Bishop Bernard Fellay, led a delegation to talks with Rome, during which the SSPX representatives expressed regret that two key traditionalist concerns had not yet been resolved. The group sought an assurance from the Holy See that all priests would be assured of the right to use the Tridentine liturgy, and that all disciplinary measures meted out against traditionalists after the 1988 break would be lifted. The traditionalists said that they had not gained assurances on either point… Bishop Fellay, on the other hand, said that his group is continuing talks with the Congregation for the Clergy. “The negotiations are continuing,” he said. “They are not dead. But they are advancing with prudence on both sides.”… However he reiterated that traditionalists would insist on two conditions: every priest must have the right to use the pre-conciliar liturgy, and the excommunications that were imposed on traditionalist leaders in 1988 must be lifted.”

In essence, what Bishop Fellay says is this: “We do not care about the blasphemies and crimes against God so long as we have the Mass! Just give us the Mass of Pius V and lift our excommunications—and then we can be in full and open communion with you. Restore our good name, but forget the good Name of God that is being blasphemed. Let us negotiate the Mass and our excommunications, but those other things (the heresies and apostasies) we can forget for now, for we wholeheartedly wish to be in full communion with you—if only we can get the mass!” Dear reader, can you not see how evil this is? Can you not see how Pius V’s Mass will not save these faithless bastards?

See: The Heresies of the Apostate Antipope John Paul II Exposed

SSPX Bishop Fellay states his group will "vigorously protest these canonizations"

The article below is an example of how the position of the SSPX and Bernard Fellay is theologically absurd, schismatic and heretical; for they acknowledge the leaders of the Counter Church but vigorously oppose their solemn ‘canonizations.’

From the sspx.org

Dear friends and benefactors,

If on April 27th John XXIII and John Paul II are canonized, the act will present a double problem to the Catholic conscience. Firstly, the problem of the canonization itself: how can it be possible to offer to the whole Church as an example of sanctity the instigator of Vatican Council II and the Pope of Assisi and human rights?

But there is also the deeper problem of what will appear to be an unprecedented recognition of catholicity: how is it possible to put the Church’s stamp of approval and sanctity on the teachings of such a Council, which inspired all of Karol Wojtyla’s action and whose rotten fruits are the indisputable indication of the Church’s self-destruction? This second problem offers the solution: the errors contained in the documents of Vatican Council II and in the reforms that followed, especially in the liturgical reform, could not possibly be the work of the Holy Ghost, who is at once the Spirit of Truth and the Spirit of Holiness.

That is why it seems necessary to us to recall the principal errors and the fundamental reasons for which we cannot subscribe to the novelties of the Council and of the reforms that came of it, any more than to these canonizations that hope to “canonize” Vatican II.

For this reason, as we vigorously protest these canonizations, we wish to denounce the undertaking that has denatured the Church since Vatican Council II…

Winona, Palm Sunday, April 13, 2014

+Bernard Fellay

The Joint Declaration of Schism by Catholic Family News and The Remnant on the SSPX

As noted, The SSPX rejects the solemn actions of its “Popes,” such as Canonizations, which are infallible if declared by a true Pope. Nevertheless, Michael Matt and John Vennari are coming out publicly in support of the SSPX’s schismatic position.

Michael Matt and John Vennari, A Joint Statement from The Remnant and Catholic Family News on Rome and the SSPX: “Three years ago, Bishop Fellay advanced wise criteria for negotiations with today’s Vatican. In his January 3, 2003 “Letter to Friends and Benefactors”, Bishop Fellay cautioned: ‘To guarantee our future, we must obtain from today’s Rome clear proof of its attachment to the Rome of yesterday. When the Roman authorities have re-stated with actions speaking louder than words that “There must be no innovations outside of Tradition” then ‘we’ [the SSPX] shall no longer be a problem.’ Based on this prudent criteria, we fail to see how any present-day negotiations will guarantee the future of the Society of Saint Pius X, since today’s Rome provides no clear proof of its attachment to the Rome of yesterday; no evidence by actions that speak louder than words that “there must be no innovations outside of Tradition”. We see, in fact, the contrary; so much so that many who initially celebrated Cardinal Ratzinger’s election to the papacy, including a number of Novus Ordo Catholics, are now crestfallen at Pope Benedict XVI’s first nine months of office….”

In other words, the SSPX should not put itself under “the Catholic hierarchy” because “the Catholic hierarchy” has not submitted to the demands of the SSPX. “The Catholic hierarchy” has not satisfied the SSPX and the “traditionalist” world that it is Catholic enough, so the SSPX should continue to remain independent and shun it until Rome gets its act in order. This is totally schismatic. Oh, but don’t let anyone say that the SSPX doesn’t recognize the hierarchy, for they pray for their “Pope” and “Bishops” at every Mass… and they are not sedevacantists. All of this means nothing except that they honor their phony “hierarchy” and “Pope” with their lips, but their actions totally reject them. The fact of the matter is that Matt, Vennari, Fellay and the SSPX are sedevacantists in their approach to apostate Rome – they advocate an independent position which is only acceptable if the Chair of Peter is vacant – but they are too dishonest to take the position.

They want the best of both worlds. They want the SSPX (and other independent groups) to be able to act like sedevacantists, to be able to have an independent Latin Mass, and to be able to totally shun Benedict XVI or his successor, Francis and his “Bishops,” while at the same time claiming that there is a true Pope in Rome whom they are under. But in attempting to have the “best of both worlds,” they are rejected by both. They are rejected by God and the true Catholic Church because they recognize a manifestly heretical Antipope as Catholic. They are also rejected by their counterfeit, Vatican II sect of Benedict XVI and Francis, because they advocate a schismatic position which obstinately operates outside of it and rejects its official teaching (Vatican II).

Canon 1325.2, 1917 Code of Canon Law: “One who after baptism… rejects the authority of the Supreme Pontiff or refuses communion with the members of the Church who are subject to him, he is a schismatic.”

Schism can be either refusing communion with a true Pope (not an Antipope) or refusing communion with the members of the Church who are in communion with the Pope. The position of the SSPX acknowledges the Vatican II “Popes” as true Popes and holds the Novus Ordo “Bishops” to be Catholic Bishops. However, the SSPX and its current leader, Fellay, operates outside of communion with this hierarchy, which it considers to be the Catholic hierarchy. Since the SSPX has been obstinate in this position for decades, its position is clearly schismatic.

The SSPX silences bishop for questioning official "Holocaust" story

Bishop Bernard Fellay of the SSPX has silenced a member of his group because he dared to offend the Jews.

This is truly outrageous. The control and influence of the Jews has created a world-wide ambience in which even supposed Catholics and Christians are terrified at the thought of offending Jews or questioning their beliefs. The official story of the Holocaust is refuted even by Jewish sources, as credible documented proof shows. But even if one isn’t convinced on that point, certainly inquiry and divergent opinions in this area are acceptable for a Catholic. But no… the heretical leadership of the SSPX is so ashamed of offending the Jews that they feel obliged to silence a bishop of their society for simply expressing his opinion on the matter. Think about this! In so doing, they have essentially elevated belief in the Jewish version of the Holocaust to the status of a dogma which one cannot question.

If we continue on this path, in just a short time it will probably be illegal basically everywhere to question anything the Jews do or believe. If this comes to pass, it will be, in large part, as a result of weak and phony “Christians,” as well as the machinations of those who wield Jewish power and influence. Here’s a headline which captures where we are headed: "Holocaust denial violates Catholic teaching"

“Bishop Bernard Fellay… said that he had disciplined the bishop who made the statement, British-born Richard Williamson, and ordered him not to speak out again on any political or historical issues. Williamson's remarks on the Holocaust, most recently on Swedish TV last week, provoked widespread criticism by Jews who said he had wiped out nearly half a century of dialogue with Catholics.”

Consider these fact: 1) there are many facts which contradict the official “Holocaust story”, 2) news articles shows how the “Holocaust” has become the super-dogma of the nations; 3) combined with the control and influence of the Jews, the Official Holocaust hoax story has effectively created a world-wide ambience in which even supposed Catholics and Christians are terrified at the thought of offending Jews or questioning their beliefs.

It’s illegal in at least 14 countries to deny the official “Holocaust” story. Holocaust denial is illegal in Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Israel, Lichtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Spain and Switzerland. Think about that for a moment, and then ask yourself who is really in power. It’s illegal to question the official story of the “Holocaust,” even though it’s perfectly legal in those countries to deny the Divinity and Resurrection of Jesus Christ. That means that those countries are truly Jewish states, for their laws uphold and imprison those who deny beliefs dear to Jews, but not to people of other religions.

Bishop Bernard Fellay's Heretical Beliefs Exposed

Bishop Bernard Fellay of the SSPX blatantly denies Catholic dogma by teaching that Hindus can be saved

It’s repeatedly been documented that almost all traditionalist priests deny the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation. It’s also been documented that among those dogma deniers, the priests of the SSPX are prominent. It’s also been pointed out that almost all of these dogma deniers sometimes make statements which seem to indicate that they hold the dogma; when, in fact, they don’t. All of this was on display in Bishop Bernard Fellay’s recent Conference in Denver, Colorado. His speech was printed in the recent issue of The Angelus. Notice that near the beginning of his Conference, Fellay made statements which absolutely seemed to indicate that he holds strictly to the necessity of the Catholic Faith and Jesus Christ for salvation.

Bishop Bernard Fellay, Conference in Denver, Co., Feb. 18, 2006: “So Faith is necessary. The Church is necessary. If we want to be saved, there is no other way except for the Church which Jesus has founded. Between God and creation, there is an infinite gap. On the side of man, since Original Sin, there is no way to cross this infinite abyss except by the bridge imposed and created by God in His only-begotten Son made flesh, Our Lord Jesus Christ. There is no other way to go to heaven except Our Lord Jesus Christ and Our Lord Jesus Christ wanted to associate with this work of Redemption the souls who would be united with Him, in Him, through Baptism, and which constitute the Mystical Body of Christ, the Catholic Church. What a tremendous mystery. This is why the Church is as necessary as Jesus; because it is the same reality.” (The Angelus, “A Talk Heard Round the World,” April, 2006, p. 5)

Very shortly after making these statements, however, Fellay proceeded to deny the dogma and reveal that he doesn’t believe anything he just said.

Bishop Bernard Fellay, Conference in Denver, Co., Feb. 18, 2006: “We know that there are two other baptisms, that of desire and that of blood. These produce an invisible but real link with Christ but do not produce all of the effects which are received in the baptism of water… And the Church has always taught that you have people who will be in heaven, who are in the state of grace, who have been saved without knowing the Catholic Church. We know this. And yet, how is it possible if you cannot be saved outside the Church? It is absolutely true that they will be saved through the Catholic Church because they will be united to Christ, to the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the Catholic Church. It will, however, remain invisible, because this visible link is impossible for them. Consider a Hindu in Tibet who has no knowledge of the Catholic Church. He lives according to his conscience and to the laws which God has put into his heart. He can be in the state of grace, and if he dies in this state of grace, he will go to heaven.” (The Angelus, “A Talk Heard Round the World,” April, 2006, p. 5)

This is blatant heresy. Hindus, by the way, worship many false gods; they are not only without the Catholic Faith necessary for salvation, but idolaters.

Kali, one of the approximately 330,000 false gods worshipped by the Hindus – a religion not condemned, but praised by Vatican II

Pope Leo XIII, Ad Extremas (#1), June 24, 1893: “Our thoughts turn first of all to the blessed Apostle Thomas who is rightly called the founder of preaching the Gospel to the Hindus. Then, there is Francis Xavier… Through his extraordinary perseverance, he converted hundreds of thousands of Hindus from the myths and vile superstitions of the Brahmans to the true religion. In the footsteps of this holy man followed numerous priests… they are continuing these noble efforts; nevertheless, in the vast reaches of the Earth, many are still deprived of the truth, miserably imprisoned in the darkness of superstition.”

Pope Pius IX, Qui Pluribus (# 15), Nov. 9, 1846: “Also perverse is that shocking theory that it makes no difference to which religion one belongs, a theory greatly at variance even with reason. By means of this theory, those crafty men remove all distinction between virtue and vice, truth and error, honorable and vile action. They pretend that men can gain eternal salvation by the practice of any religion, as if there could ever be any sharing between justice and iniquity, any collaboration between light and darkness, or any agreement between Christ and Belial.”

By the way, these words are found on the very same page of The Angelus as the words in the first quote above. This is disgusting and bold heresy, and proves that Fellay doesn’t believe anything he said above. First, notice that he says “We know that there are two other baptisms.” Excuse me, but we know that there is ONLY ONE BAPTISM OF WATER. Catholics confess one baptism. If you don’t confess only one baptism, you are not a Catholic.

Pope Clement V, Council of Vienne, 1311-1312, ex cathedra: “Besides, one baptism which regenerates all who are baptized in Christ must be faithfully confessed by all just as ‘one God and one faith’ [Eph. 4:5], which celebrated in water in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit we believe to be commonly the perfect remedy for salvation for adults as for children.” (Denz. 482)

Second, Fellay says a Hindu – that is, an idolater who worships many false gods and doesn’t believe in Jesus Christ – can be in the state of grace and be saved. This is a total rejection of infallible Catholic dogma. This proves again that Bishop Bernard Fellay is not a member of the Catholic Church. He rejects the solemn teaching that all who die in non-Catholic religions and without the essential mysteries of the Catholic Faith will be lost. He has changed the dogma that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church or without the Catholic Faith (the truth that all individuals who die as non-Catholics will be lost, all the Hindus, Muslims, Jews, etc.) to the heretical idea that no one can be saved except through the Catholic Church (meaning that all individuals who are saved, even if they are not Catholic and part of a false religion or even worshipping false gods, are saved in their religions but through the Catholic Church). This is evil heresy which is contradicted by ex cathedra Papal teaching. The fact that he holds that Hindus, etc. can be saved in their false religions reveals that he has no Faith. (By the way, notice that he also teaches the condemned heresy of an invisible Church by teaching that non-Catholic Hindus are invisibly united to the Church.) The fact that he is guiding a large body of those who consider themselves traditional Catholics in our day is a frightening signal of exactly where we are in history and the Great Apostasy.

By the way, Bishop Fellay holds the same heresy that Archbishop Lefebvre held.

Archbishop Lefebvre, Open Letter to Confused Catholics, 1986: “‘Outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation’Does that mean that no Protestant, no Muslim, no Buddhist or animist will be saved? No, it would be a second error to think that. … The doctrine of the Church also recognizes implicit—baptism of desire. This consists in doing the will of God. God knows all men and He knows that amongst Protestants, Muslims, Buddhists and in the whole of humanity there are men of good will. They receive the grace of baptism without knowing it, but in an effective way. In this way they become part of the Church.” (From his book Open Letter to Confused Catholics, 1986, Chapter X, Ecumenism, p. 73-4)

Those who refuse to believe in the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation until they understand how there is justice in it are simply withholding their Faith in Christ’s revelation. Those with the true Faith in Christ (and His Church) accept His teaching first and understand the truth in it (i.e., why it is true) second. A Catholic does not withhold his belief in Christ’s revelation until he can understand it. That is the mentality of a faithless heretic who possesses insufferable pride. St. Anselm sums up the true Catholic outlook on this point.

St. Anselm, Doctor of the Church, Prosologion, Chap. 1: “For I do not seek to understand that I may believe, but I believe in order to understand. For this also I believe, that unless I believed, I should not understand.”

In many ways the dogma outside the Catholic Church there is no salvation is one of the most important dogmas in the Catholic Church. Connected with this is the necessity of receiving the Sacrament of Baptism. But today both of these truths are almost universally denied by those calling themselves Catholic. They assert that the unbaptized can be united to the Church, justified (attain the state of grace) and saved by what is called baptism of desire. A tiny minority of those who believe in baptism of desire (less than 1%) limit it to those who actually desire baptism and believe in the Catholic religion (e.g., unbaptized catechumens). The vast majority of them (more than 99%) extend the possibility of salvation by baptism of desire to pagans, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, etc. and people of no religion, who do not actually desire baptism or believe in the Catholic Faith. This majority group also somehow extends the "saving capability" of baptism of desire to Protestants, even though Protestants have already been baptized.

The heretics believe ‘invincible ignorance’ can save anyone in any situation. They deny the defined Catholic dogma that one must have the ‘Catholic faith’ (which involves belief in the Trinity and Incarnation) to be saved. They are heretics who don’t possess an ounce of faith in Christ or His truth. St. Alphonsus and St. Thomas, like all of the fathers of the Church, rejected the modern heresy of “invincible ignorance” saving those who die as non-Catholics. Their speculation and erroneous teaching on baptism of blood/desire only regarded those who believe in the Trinity and Incarnation (the most essential mysteries of Catholic faith). And this point really shows the dishonesty of modern heretics, who like to quote St. Alphonsus and St. Thomas Aquinas on baptism of desire to somehow justify their heretical idea that members of false religions can be saved by “baptism of desire.”

The Catholic Church teaches that all non-Catholic religions are false. There is only one true Church, outside of which no one can be saved. This is Catholic dogma.

Pope St. Gregory the Great, 590-604: “The holy universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her and asserts that all who are outside of her will not be saved.” (The Papal Encyclicals, Vol. 1 (1740-1878), p. 230)

All of the other religions belong to the Devil. This is the teaching of Jesus Christ, the Catholic Church and Sacred Scripture.

But the things which the heathens sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God.” (1 Corinthians 10:20)

For all the gods of the Gentiles are devils: but the Lord made the heavens.” (Psalm 95:5)

Anyone who shows esteem or respect for non-Christian religions, or regards them as good or deserving of respect (such as the Vatican II sect and it’s antipopes constantly does), denies and disrespects Jesus Christ and is an apostate.

Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos (# 2), Jan. 6, 1928: “… that false opinion which considers all religions to be more or less good and praiseworthyNot only are those who hold this opinion in error and deceived, but also in distorting the idea of true religion they reject it, and little by little, turn aside to naturalism and atheism, as it is called; from which it clearly follows that one who supports those who hold these theories and attempt to realize them, is altogether abandoning the divinely revealed religion.”

We hear all the time from people who deny that their “traditionalist” priest denies the salvation dogma. “No, my priest doesn’t believe that,” they say about SSPX priests, CMRI priests, SSPV priests, etc. We try to tell them “yes, your priest most likely does believe that, just ask him about the ‘good’ Jews and Hindus and you will see.” And if your priest does not believe that yet adheres to a society that does (that is, believes in baptism of desire for non-Catholics), then, if he obstinately choose to remain in communion with them despite being aware of their heretical beliefs, he would become a schismatic (if he wasn’t one already) since he professes religious communion and membership with non-Catholics and a non-Catholic heretical sect and hence, he is a schismatic unless he separates from them, since by professing communion with heretics, he automatically breaks of communion with the true Catholic Church.

The unity of faith that must exist between people who call themselves Catholic and who worship God is one constant that can never be changed according to Catholic teaching. This is called divine law. Without the unity of faith, there is only darkness and eternal hellfire as Pope Leo XIII and the following quotes makes perfectly clear:

Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 10), June 29, 1896: “For this reason, as the unity of the faith is of necessity required for the unity of the Church, inasmuch as it is the body of the faithful, so also for this same unity, inasmuch as the Church is a divinely constituted society, unity of government, which effects and involves unity of communion, is necessary jure divino (by divine law).”

Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi (# 22): “As therefore in the true Christian community there is only one Body, one Spirit, one Lord, and one Baptism, so there can be only one faith. And therefore if a man refuse to hear the Church let him be considered – so the Lord commands – as a heathen and a publican. It follows that those who are divided in faith or government cannot be living in the unity of such a Body, nor can they be living the life of its one Divine Spirit.”

Pope St. Clement I, 1st Century: “If any man shall be friendly to those with whom the Roman Pontiff is not in communion, he is in complicity with those who want to destroy the Church of God; and, although he may seem to be with us in body, he is against us in mind and spirit, and is a much more dangerous enemy than those who are outside and are our avowed foes.”

This Heresy shows us again how priests who deny the salvation dogma will make statements (often in the same speech) which make it seem as if they believe in it.

Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos (# 13), Aug. 15, 1832: “With the admonition of the apostle, that ‘there is one God, one faith, one baptism’ (Eph. 4:5), may those fear who contrive the notion that the safe harbor of salvation is open to persons of any religion whatever. They should consider the testimony of Christ Himself that ‘those who are not with Christ are against Him,’ (Lk. 11:23) and that they disperse unhappily who do not gather with Him. Therefore, ‘without a doubt, they will perish forever, unless they hold the Catholic faith whole and inviolate (Athanasian Creed).”

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, The Athanasian Creed, Sess. 8, Nov. 22, 1439, ex cathedra: “Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity.” (Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Vol. 1, pp. 550-553; Denzinger 39-40)

Pope Gregory XVI, Summo Iugiter Studio (# 2), May 27, 1832: “Finally some of these misguided people attempt to persuade themselves and others that men are not saved only in the Catholic religion, but that even heretics may attain eternal life.”

Pope Pius IV, Council of Trent, Iniunctum nobis, Nov. 13, 1565, ex cathedra: “This true Catholic faith, outside of which no one can be saved… I now profess and truly hold…” (Denz. 1000)

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Cantate Domino,” 1441, ex cathedra: “The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that all those who are outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans but also Jews or heretics and schismatics, cannot share in eternal life and will go into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels, unless they are joined to the Church before the end of their lives; that the unity of this ecclesiastical body is of such importance that only for those who abide in it do the Church’s sacraments contribute to salvation and do fasts, almsgiving and other works of piety and practices of the Christian militia produce eternal rewards; and that nobody can be saved, no matter how much he has given away in alms and even if he has shed blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”

Bishop Fellay is preaching a new gospel directly contrary to Sacred Scripture. He is preaching that idolaters (Hindus) can actually be saved.

1 Corinthians 6:9: “Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God.”

The Theology of the SSPX

I attended the SSPX for years, enjoying the freedom to be devoted at mass, and agreed with almost everything I heard, except the fact that the figure of John Paul II hung like a dark cloud in the background at all times. Then a priest echoed Bishop Fellay, saying, "We know that people can be saved in other religions..." without blushing. After mass, I looked around for support - no one said a thing, although many looked concerned. I am now far away, and I follow the disciplines you have graciously provided, with Consecration to the Blessed Virgin Mary according to St. Louis de Montfort, and the full rosary daily, if possible.

If BOD is valid, the Baptism of the Church cannot be said to "signify that which it effects, and effect that which it signifies." This is unavoidable, since there would be occasions when, upon approaching the Salvific Waters, the catechumen would already have been reborn; thus the sacrament would not be effecting that which it signifies…

Thanks for all your efforts. God bless you,

James B.

Response: They simply don’t have the Catholic faith. Their dissent from Catholic dogma on salvation is a prime reason for that. The incident you mention is another example of their complete rejection of the defined dogma, Outside the Church There is No Salvation. Furthermore, their obstinately heretical adherence to the antipopes has led them into a false view of the Papacy that is, in terms of the strict doctrinal content of the position, basically no different from that of the “Old Catholics”. (The “Old Catholics” were schismatics and heretics who accepted papal primacy, but rejected papal infallibility.) That’s essentially the position of all obstinate false traditionalists at this point: by adherence to the heretical antipopes, they have so degraded the office of the Papacy that they reject papal infallibility.

For example, they hold that popes can err in teachings solemnly promulgated at an “ecumenical council” (i.e., Vatican II); in the teaching of their “universal” or “ordinary” magisterium (e.g., Antipope Francis’ Evangelii Gaudium); in their “solemn canonizations” (e.g., the “canonization” of Antipope John Paul II); etc. Their position is absurd, evil and heretical, yet amazingly many in the “traditional movement” still hold it. It’s a striking example of the profound bad will and faithlessness of such people. The supernatural principles proving that the antipopes cannot be popes or members of the Catholic Church are outweighed, in their faithless minds and hearts, by the external component of having a live body who dresses up in robes to call the pope, even if the man practices Judaism, says atheists can be saved, professes a false faith, etc.

Another reason many false traditionalists still hold such an absurd position, despite the mountain of evidence refuting it, is that they serve man instead of God. They don’t simply tell the truth as it is, but rather hide, distort or alter the message for reasons of human respect, to avoid offending people, to remain in certain groups, to maintain certain friendships or positions, etc.

CONCERNING THOSE BAPTIZED VALIDLY AS INFANTS BY MEMBERS OF NON-CATHOLIC SECTS

The Catholic Church has always taught that anyone (including a layman or a non-Catholic) can validly baptize if he adheres to proper matter and form and if he has the intention of doing what the Church does.

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” 1439: “In case of necessity, however, not only a priest or a deacon, but even a layman or woman, yes even a pagan and a heretic can baptize, so long as he preserves the form of the Church and has the intention of doing what the Church does.” (Denzinger 696)

The Church has always taught that infants baptized in heretical and schismatic churches are made Catholics, members of the Church and subjects of the Roman Pontiff, even if the people who baptized them are heretics who are outside the Catholic Church. This is because the infant, being below the age of reason, cannot be a heretic or schismatic. He cannot have an impediment which would prevent Baptism from making him a member of the Church.

Pope Paul III, Council of Trent, Sess. 7, Can. 13 on the Sacrament of Baptism: “If anyone shall say that infants, because they have not actual faith, after having received baptism are not to be numbered among the faithful… let him be anathema.”

This means that all validly baptized infants wherever they are, even those baptized in heretical non-Catholic churches by heretical ministers, are made members of the Catholic Church. They are also made subject to the Roman Pontiff (if there is one). So, at what one point does this baptized Catholic infant become a non-Catholic – severing his membership in the Church and subjection to the Roman Pontiff? After the baptized infant reaches the age of reason, he or she becomes a heretic or a schismatic and severs his membership in the Church and severs subjection to the Roman Pontiff when he or she obstinately rejects any teaching of the Catholic Church or loses Faith in the essential mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation.

Pope Clement VI, Super quibusdam, Sept. 20, 1351: “…We ask: In the first place whether you and the Church of the Armenians which is obedient to you, believe that all those who in baptism have received the same Catholic faith, and afterwards have withdrawn and will withdraw in the future from the communion of this same Roman Church, which one alone is Catholic, are schismatic and heretical, if they remain obstinately separated from the faith of this Roman Church. In the second place, we ask whether you and the Armenians obedient to you believe that no man of the wayfarers outside the faith of this Church, and outside the obedience of the Pope of Rome, can finally be saved.”

So, one must be clear on these points: 1) The unbaptized (Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Mormons, pagans, etc.) must all join the Catholic Church by receiving valid Baptism and the Catholic Faith or they will all be lost. 2) Among those who are validly baptized as infants, they are made Catholics, members of the Church and subjects of the Roman Pontiff by Baptism. They only sever that membership (which they already possess) when they obstinately reject any Catholic dogma or believe something contrary to the essential mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation. In the teaching of Pope Clement VI above, we see this second point clearly taught: all who receive the Catholic Faith in Baptism lose that Faith and become schismatic and heretical if they become “obstinately separated from the faith of this Roman Church.”

The fact is that all Protestants who reject the Catholic Church or its dogmas on the sacraments, the Papacy, etc. have obstinately separated from the Faith of the Roman Church and have therefore severed their membership in the Church of Christ. The same is true with the “Eastern Orthodox” who obstinately reject dogmas on the Papacy and Papal Infallibility. They need to be converted to the Catholic Faith for salvation.

The baptized children who reach the age of reason (and become adults) in Protestant, Eastern Schismatic, etc. church buildings and believe in the Trinity and the Incarnation (the essential components of the Catholic Faith) and who don’t reject any Catholic dogma because they don’t know of any other than the Trinity and Incarnation, and who don’t embrace any positions incompatible with the Catholic faith, Faith in God, Jesus Christ, the Trinity, the Natural Law (see The Natural Law) or what they know to be clearly taught in Scripture, WOULD BE CATHOLICS IN A HERETICAL CHURCH BUILDING.

Council of Elvira, Canon 22, 300 A.D.: “If someone leaves the Catholic Church and goes over to a heresy, and then returns again, it is determined that penance is not to be denied to such a one, since he has acknowledged his sin. Let him do penance, then, for ten years, and after ten years he may come forward to communion. If, indeed, there were children who were led astray, since they have not sinned of their own fault, they may be received without delay.” (The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 1: 611n)

This means that the children above reason who were attending the church of a heretical sect with their parents were not heretics because they were not obstinately against something they knew to be taught by the Church! This fact is also true of all people of all ages who go to a heretical church without being obstinately opposed to any Church teaching. This is exactly the Catholic position and what the Church has always taught (as we have seen) – which is that to be a heretic one must obstinately reject something they know to be taught by God or the Catholic Church.

Canon 1325, 1917 Code of Canon Law: “After the reception of baptism, if anyone, retaining the name Christian, pertinaciously [or obstinately] denies or doubts something to be believed from the truth of divine and Catholic faith, [such a one] is a heretic.”

Please consult the following sections to learn what things one can and cannot be ignorant about when it comes to the Catholic faith, its teachings and dogmas – and concerning whether such a person is to be considered a Catholic, an unbeliever or a heretic:

http://www.allmonks.com/catholic-dogma/#material-heresy

http://www.allmonks.com/catholic-dogma/#the-natural-law

PROOF FOR THE SEDEVACANTIST POSITION

As infallible taught in the bull Cum ex apostolatus officio: someone who calls himself the “Pope”, even if unanimously elected by all the cardinals, but who is a heretic must be rejected by us as an antipope. Therefore, this also proves that we must reject Francis as an antipope since he rejects many Catholic dogmas and the Natural law (such as Francis’ heresy on atheism and homosexuality) which no one can reject and be a ‘material heretic’ or in material heresy or ignorant about.

Francis’ Heretical Teaching on Homosexual “Civil Unions” and Homosexuality

As we will show, since Antipope Francis teaches heresies against the natural law (a law which no one can reject and be a ‘material heretic’, or in material heresy or ignorant about without becoming a heretic), such as his heresies on atheism and homosexuality, all those who regard him as the Pope after being aware of these facts sin mortally against their conscience and become heretics and schismatics.

The natural law is written on the heart of all men, so that all men know that certain things are against God’s law and that certain things are in accordance with the natural law of charity, etc.

The natural law is the law that every person knows by instinct from birth. It is planted by the Creator in our heart, and everyone – even pagans who have never heard about God or the true Catholic religion – receive this gift from God. Examples of sins that break the natural law and that are easy to recognize are abortion, murder, rape, theft, pedophilia, homosexuality, slander, and lying. The conscience always convicts a person who does these things and thus there can never be an excuse for people who commit such sins.

Romans 2:14-16: “For when the Gentiles, who have not the law, do by nature those things that are of the law; these having not the law are a law to themselves: Who shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness to them, and their thoughts between themselves accusing, or also defending one another, In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel.”

As the Haydock Bible and Commentary correctly explains about Romans 2:14-16:

these men are a law to themselves, and have it written in their hearts, as to the existence of a God, and their reason tells them, that many sins are unlawful...”

As we will see, Francis says he respects those who favor the abomination of same sex “marriage”, and says he never was disrespectful to sodomites and perverts. Francis also says he does not “judge” homosexuals and that a person who is gay can have “good will”.

Discussing homosexuals (people in general and clergy), Francis said in July 2013:

If a person is gay and seeks God and has good will, who am I to judge them?

Francis claims to be the first Judge in the Catholic Church, a pope, and yet says “who am I to judge” homosexuals. It is shocking and a total inversion of Catholic morals… It is not surprising that Francis believes such horrible things when he idolizes man.

Also notice the following interesting statements Francis makes about gay “marriage” and homosexuals.

Francis, On Heaven and Earth, p. 117: “When the head of the Government of the City of Buenos Aires, Mauricio Macri, did not appeal the judge’s opinion right away authorizing a [same-sex] wedding, I felt that I had something to say, to inform; I saw myself with an obligation to state my opinion. It was the first time in eighteen years as bishop that I criticized a government official. If you analyze the two declarations that I formulated, at no time did I speak about homosexuals nor did I make any derogatory reference toward them… Macri told me that these were his convictions; I respected him for that, but the head of the Government does not have to transfer his personal convictions to law. In no moment did I speak disrespectfully about homosexuals…”

Here we see that Francis says he respects those who favor the abomination of same sex “marriage”, and that he never was disrespectful to sodomites and perverts.

Francis also mentions how he allowed the pro-gay “marriage” supporting president of Argentina, Nestor Kirchner, to preside over a “Catholic” memorial service to honor deceased “Catholic priests” and seminarians:

Francis, Conversations, p. 145: “I even asked him to preside over the ceremony when he arrived at the church…”

Later when the apostate president died, Francis immediately offered a public “requiem mass” for him.

Francis also allowed politicians who are vocal pro-abortion and gay “marriage” supporters to receive “communion” at his installation “mass”.

LifeNews, Mars 20, 2013: “Pro-abortion Biden and Pelosi Received Communion at Mass for Antipope Francis - The communion issue was exacerbated when, despite their pro-abortion views, Vice President Joe Biden and House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi both received communion at the Mass to celebrate Pope Francis’ inauguration. Biden’s office confirmed to the Washington Times that he had received communion and reporters in the White House presidential reporting pool confirmed in an email to LifeNews that Pelosi had received it as well. … “At a Mass during which our new Pope emphasized the duty public officials – and all the rest of us – have to protect the weakest among us, Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi have the audacity to receive Communion while publicly renouncing their responsibility to protect the weakest among us.”

It has now also been documented and confirmed that Francis favored homosexual civil unions when he was in Argentina. He just didn’t want a homosexual civil union to be called a marriage.

CNN, March 21, 2013: “Behind closed doors, pope supported civil unions in Argentina, activist says - Less than an hour after he fired off an angry letter to Catholic Church leaders about their handling of Argentina’s same-sex marriage debate, Marcelo Marquez says his phone rang. … "He [Francis, then the “archbishop” of Buenos Aires] told me. … I’m in favor of gay rights and in any case, I also favor civil unions for homosexuals, but I believe that Argentina is not yet ready for a gay marriage law," said Marquez, a gay rights activist, a self-described devout Catholic and a former theology professor at a Catholic seminary.”

HuffingtonPost, March 20, 2013: “Pope Francis Advocated For Civil Unions For Gay Couples In 2010 As Argentina’s Cardinal Bergoglio - Pope Francis supported civil unions for gay couples as recently as 2010. … As Argentina’s legislature debated President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner’s bill to allow gay marriage, Francis -- then known as Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio -- suggested to his bishops that the Church support civil unions as a compromise of sorts. At the time, civil unions were already legal in parts of Argentina ABC noted. Civil unions were the “lesser of two evils,” said Sergio Rubin, authorized biographer for then-Cardinal Bergoglio, according to The New York Times. “He [Bergoglio] wagered on a position of greater dialogue with society.”

It has also been reported that Francis still favors homosexual civil unions as “Pope”.

DailyMail, March 10, 2014: “Pope to stop condemning same-sex civil partnerships hints leading cardinal in move which could be step towards Catholic gay marriage - Pope Francis has suggested that the Vatican could support gay civil unions in the future, according to one of the church’s most senior cardinals. Cardinal Timothy Dolan said that the pontiff wants the Catholic Church to study same-sex unions, ‘rather than condemn them’. Cardinal Dolan told American television that Francis wants church leaders to ‘look into it and see the reasons that have driven them.’ … In an interview to mark his first year in the church’s top job, Pope Francis last week reaffirmed the Vatican’s opposition to gay marriage but indicated that some types of civil unions could be acceptable to the church. The Pope restated the church’s teaching that ‘marriage is between a man and a woman,’ but added ‘We have to look at different cases and evaluate them in their variety.’ Some countries justify civil unions as a way to provide the same economic and legal rights to cohabitating couples as those who are married, the Pope said in the interview with Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera. … Francis’ comments are the first time that a Pope has indicated even tentative acceptance of civil unions, according to Vatican watchers. … In recognition for the perceived change in stance Francis appeared on the cover of gay magazine The Advocate as their person of the year.”

Sergio Rubin is an Argentine journalist and authorized biographer of Francis. He wrote (in 2010) the only biography of Jorge Bergoglio (now Antipope Francis) available at the time of his election. Rubin testified that while taking a strong stand against same-sex marriage, Bergoglio raised the possibility in 2010 with his bishops in Argentina that they support the idea of civil unions as a compromise position. On Gay Unions, a Pragmatist Before He Was a Pope. The article went on to say that “a majority of the bishops voted to overrule him”.

In addition to Marquez and Rubin’s testimonies, two other Argentine journalists and two senior officials of the Argentine “bishops conference”, supported Rubin’s account:

NCR Online, Apr. 12, 2013: “On March 19, The New York Times reported that when Argentina was gearing up for a bitter national debate on gay marriage in 2009 and 2010, Bergoglio quietly favored a compromise solution that would have included civil unions for same-sex couples. … On this score, I was told by three sources in Argentina that the Times basically got it right: Bergoglio did, in fact, favor civil unions. That was confirmed on background by two senior officials of the bishops’ conference in Argentina, both of whom worked with Bergoglio and took part in the behind-the-scenes discussions as the conference tried to shape its position. "Bergoglio supported civil unions," one of those officials told me. Mariano de Vedia, a veteran journalist for La Nación, has covered church/state issues in Argentina for years and said he could confirm Bergoglio’s position had been correctly described in the Times account. Guillermo Villarreal, a Catholic journalist in Argentina, said it was well known at the time that Bergoglio’s moderate position was opposed by Archbishop Héctor Rubén Aguer of La Plata, the leader of the hawks.”

This is heresy. It means that Francis approved perverted and abominable sexual behavior that is condemned in Scripture and Catholic teaching. His stance is no different at all from endorsing abortion under the condition that the state does not give abortion special or privileged status by using state funds for it.

All of this without a doubt proves that Francis is certainly not a Catholic. He’s not a pope, he’s not a lover of truth and of the true God, he’s not honest, he’s not seeking to convert souls to the one true faith, etc. As he cannot defend openly gay pseudo-marriage, he uses relativism to defend the “gay agenda”, reducing the issue of homosexuality to the mere political lobby. “If a person is gay and seeking God, who am I to judge her?”, says Antipope Francis.

Since Francis idolizes man, it’s no wonder he endorses such blasphemies and perversions. One hear the “You can’t judge!” heresy so many times it makes one sick. Heretics love this evil phrase and will recite it every time someone charitably rebukes their sinful lifestyle. They don’t seem to grasp the fact that God has already judged (Leviticus 20:13; 1 Corinthians 6:9).

More on Francis’ Heresies on Homosexuals and Homosexuality

Antipope Francis recently gave a shocking interview to the editor of the so-called Jesuit journal, La Civilta Cattolica. He was interviewed by Antonio Spadaro on behalf of La Civilta Cattolica, Thinking Faith, America and several other major Jesuit journals around the world. The interview was conducted in Italian. After the Italian text was officially approved, a team of five independent experts were commissioned to produce the English translation, which is also published by America.

We will be quoting from the English pdf translation found in the Jesuit journal Thinking Faith, Sept. 19, 2013.

On p. 7 of the interview, Francis is talking about homosexuals. He says:

“In Buenos Aires I used to receive letters from homosexuals persons who are ‘socially wounded’ because they tell me that they feel like the church has always condemned them. But the church does not want to do this. During the return flight from Rio de Janeiro I said that if a homosexual person is of good will and is in search of God, I am no one to judge.” He goes on to say, “it is not possible to interfere spiritually in the life of a person.” Thinking Faith, Sept. 19, 2013, p. 7.

He then re-quotes something he said previously about homosexuals:

“A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: “‘Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?’ We must always consider the person.” Thinking Faith, Sept. 19, 2013, p. 8.

This is wicked heresy! First he says, he’s “no one to judge” and that “the church does not want to do this [that is, condemn the homosexuals].” That’s interesting because the First Vatican Council declared that a Pope (a true Pope) is the supreme judge of the faithful. Francis doesn’t judge or condemn anyone because he’s not a Catholic and he’s not the Pope. Also, to say that the Church does not condemn homosexuals is equivalent to saying that God does not condemn homosexuals. There is no difference between the two.

Second, he’s discussing homosexuals. He says he’s no one to judge, and he teaches that God and the Church doesn’t condemn them or reject them. That indicates quite clearly, that homosexuals could be justified despite their wickedness and abominable behavior. And, we know Francis is including active homosexuals in his comments, because he makes no distinction between people who merely consider themselves to have a homosexual orientation, and those who engage in homosexual behavior.

Indeed, we know he’s talking about those who engage in homosexual acts because Francis refers to homosexuals who have claimed to him that they feel excluded. That obviously includes active homosexuals. In fact, in this very context Francis speaks of confession. “This is also the great benefit of confession as a sacrament: evaluating case by case and discerning what is the best thing to do for a person who seeks God and grace.” Thinking Faith, Sept. 19, 2013, p. 8.

The Vatican II sect would only consider homosexual acts, not the homosexual orientation, matters for confession. (both are equally wrong, however).

Antipope John Paul II, New Catechism, #2357: “Homosexuality… Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained.”

And Joseph Ratzinger (Benedict XVI) and John Paul II both approved of the following statement concerning homosexuality:

“Sacred Scripture condemns homosexual acts “as a serious depravity... (cf. Rom 1:24-27; 1 Cor 6:10; 1 Tim 1:10). This judgment of Scripture does not of course permit us to conclude that all those who suffer from this anomaly [homosexuality] are personally responsible for it, but it does attest to the fact that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered”. …

The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul II, in the Audience of March 28, 2003, approved the present Considerations, adopted in the Ordinary Session of this Congregation, and ordered their publication.

Rome, from the Offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, June 3, 2003, Memorial of Saint Charles Lwanga and his Companions, Martyrs.

Joseph Card. Ratzinger

Prefect”

(Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), Considerations Regarding Proposals To Give Legal Recognition To Unions Between Homosexual Persons, nr. 4, 2003)

By the way, Scripture is quite clear that the homosexual orientation is unnatural and results from mortal sin, idolatry and apostasy. See Romans chapter 1.

Romans 1:26-27: “For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature. And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error.”

People can be delivered from it by the grace of God. See Overcoming Homosexuality.

Francis then speaks in the very same context of gay “marriage”. That obviously refers to, and includes practicing homosexuals. Francis also says in this very context, “that we must consider their situation” and look upon things with “mercy” which come in the context of his reference to confession, and which can only have meaning if he’s referring to practicing homosexuals, since the Vatican II sect would only consider homosexual acts, not the homosexual orientation, matters for confession.

Francis also applied his comments to both “homosexual persons” and to “homosexuality.”

Read carefully in context, there is no doubt that Francis’ teaching that he does not judge, condemn or reject homosexuals or homosexuality including practicing homosexuals. That is totally evil and it is heresy.

Francis’ Heresies on Atheism and Atheists

Antipope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium (# 254), Nov. 24, 2013: “Non-Christians [such as pagans and atheists], by God’s gracious initiative, when they are faithful to their own consciences, can live “justified by the grace of God, and thus be “associated to the paschal mystery of Jesus Christ”… to the sacramental dimension of sanctifying grace... to live our own beliefs.”

It is infallibly taught in Sacred Scripture that everyone above the age of reason can know with certainty that there is a God. They know this by the things that are made: the trees, the grass, the sun, the moon, the stars, etc. Anyone who is an atheist or agnostic (who believes that God does not exist or is unknowable) is without excuse. The natural law convicts him. This is a revealed truth of Sacred Scripture.

Creation itself bears witness that there is a God, that is, a living, omnipotent and intelligent Being who created it. The apostle Paul wrote to the saints in Rome that since the creation of the world, God’s invisible qualities – His eternal power and Godhead – have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made (Romans 1:20); and David said that the heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament shows His handiwork (Psalm 19:1). Therefore, since the existence of God is so clearly witnessed by His works, those who deny His existence are without excuse. “The fool has said in his heart, ‘there is no God’” (Psalm 53:1).

God defined infallibly, based on Romans 1, that the one true God can be known with certitude by the things which have been made, and by the natural light of human reason.

Romans 1:19-21: “Because that which is known of God is manifest in them. For God hath manifested it unto them. For the invisible things of Him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; His eternal power also, and divinity: SO THAT THEY ARE INEXCUSABLE.”

St. Paul teaches that atheists are inexcusable because God’s creation proves His existence. Francis, on the contrary, teaches that atheists can be excused and saved. This causes us to ask, “What bible was Francis using?” It must have been the revised satanic edition. His statement about those who don’t acknowledge God is not only condemned by St. Paul, but also by Vatican Council I. Vatican I dogmatically defined the principle set forth in Romans 1 – which directly contradicts the teaching of atheism, agnosticism and Antipope Francis.

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Session 3, On Revelation, Can. 1: “If anyone shall have said that the one true God, our Creator and Lord, cannot be known with certitude by those things which have been made, by the natural light of human reason: let him be anathema.”

Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Session 3, On God the Creator, Can. 1: “If anyone shall have denied the one true God, Creator and Lord of visible and invisible things: let him be anathema.”

Francis falls directly under these anathemas by its heretical teaching above.

Yet despite this dogmatic teaching based on Romans 1, in On Heaven and Earth, pp. 12-13 Francis says he respects atheists and doesn’t try to convert them. He also says that their “life is not condemned”:

I do not approach the relationship in order to proselytize, or convert the atheist; I respect himnor would I say that his life is condemned, because I am convinced that I do not have the right to make a judgment about the honesty of that person… every man is the image of God, whether he is a believer or not. For that reason alone everyone has a series of virtues, qualities, and a greatness of his own.” (Francis, On Heaven and Earth, pp. 12-13)

In contrast to Francis, the Council of Florence dogmatically defined that any individual who has a view contrary to the Catholic Church’s teaching on Our Lord Jesus Christ or the Trinity, or any one of the truths about Our Lord or the Trinity, is rejected, condemned and anathematized by God.

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Bull Cantate Domino, 1442, ex cathedra: “… the holy Roman Church, founded on the words of our Lord and Savior, firmly believes, professes and preaches one true God, almighty, immutable and eternal, Father, Son and Holy SpiritTherefore it [the Church] condemns, rejects, anathematizes and declares to be outside the Body of Christ [and of God], which is the Church, whoever holds opposing or contrary views.”

An atheists interviewed Francis for the Italian newspaper The Republic. The interview was published on October 1, 2013. Francis directly told the atheist that he has no intention of trying to convert him. Francis rejects proselytism four different times in this interview. Francis declared: “Proselytism is solemn nonsense, it makes no sense.”

Now, our Lord commanded the apostle to go and proselytize, to go and teach. He said: “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commended you.” (Matthew 28:19)

How clear is that? And what’s really outrageous about this statement is that he’s essentially spitting on and mocking the martyrs, who suffered, died, were tortured, for teaching, preaching and spreading the true faith; and this apostate has the nerve to call it a solemn nonsense. That anyone claiming to be the Pope says such an evil statement, is incredible.

Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 13), June 29, 1896: “Therefore if a man does not want to be, or to be called, a heretic, let him not strive to please this or that manbut let him hasten before all things to be in communion with the Roman See.”

Pope Pius IV, profession of faith, Council of Trent, ex cathedra: “This true Catholic faith, outside of which no one can be saved… I now profess and truly hold…”

The Catholic Church infallibly teaches that atheists are condemned and that they must be converted to the Catholic faith for salvation. Yet, Antipope Francis is dominating the headlines around the world with his assertion that people don’t need to believe in God to get to heaven.

Antipope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium (# 254), Nov. 24, 2013: “Non-Christians [such as atheists], by God’s gracious initiative, when they are faithful to their own consciences, can live “justified by the grace of God, and thus be “associated to the paschal mystery of Jesus Christ”… to the sacramental dimension of sanctifying grace... to live our own beliefs.”

Concerning atheists, Francis wrote:

“First of all, you ask if the God of Christians forgives those who do not believe and do not seek faith. Given that - and this is fundamental - God’s mercy has no limits if he who asks for mercy does so in contrition and with a sincere heart, the issue for those who do not believe in God is in obeying their own conscience. In fact, listening and obeying it, means deciding about what is perceived to be good or to be evil. The goodness or the wickedness of our behavior depends on this decision.” (“Pope” Francisco writes to La Repubblica: “An open dialogue with non-believers”, 2013/09/11/)

Here Francis clearly indicates that people who don’t believe in God can be forgiven and saved if they obey their own conscience and follow what they perceive to be good; and later in his “Evangelii Gaudium” (254) he confirmed that this indeed was what he meant. So don’t allow any liar to claim that Francis’ statement has been misrepresented. It has not been misrepresented as Antipope Francis himself confirmed.

That’s an astounding heresy because it’s a basic dogma of Catholicism that faith is necessary for salvation. This is a fundamental issue. As Hebrews 11:6 says, “…without faith it is impossible to please God.”

The dogma of the Church, that no one can be justified, saved or pleasing to God without faith was taught throughout history and solemnly declared by the Council of Trent and Vatican I. Both Councils repeated the truth of Hebrews 11:6. Of course, it’s also a dogma that one must have the Catholic faith to be saved, and that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church. These truths have been defined by many popes.

Francis’ heresy trashes and denies all of those proclamations, but it gets even worse, because there are specific dogmatic definitions against the notion that atheists can be excused or saved.

Read more: Antipope Francis approves of Atheism, False religions, and Homosexuality, teaching that they all saves a person!

Related articles:

www.allmonks.com
Free DVDs, Articles and Books
FREE DVDs & VIDEOS
WATCH & DOWNLOAD ALL OUR DVDs & VIDEOS FOR FREE!