Todayscatholicworld.com. There is a problem for many regarding the ability to find a Tridentine Mass. It is not my wish to send you to a Mass for reasons that the use of novus ordo clergy especially those who were ordained after June 18, 1968 are not validly ordained priests, or the priest is a heretic, gay or has another defect that will render a Mass invalid or illicit. My objective is to have you leave the new ordo and disobey Vatican II first despite the numerous problems with all indult offered by a diocese or one of the other organizations that has associated with or is part of the new church, the Vatican. Some indults have more problems than others depending on the bishop or clergy or other issues that cannot always be sensed. Many so called traditional chapels from other traditional organizations are a problem also. John Paul the Great Apostate Imposter. JP II was a pope but of the Masonic Catholic Church of Novus Ordo Fatican II Cult. If you are CATHOLIC he is not your pope. The Mass has been taken away from us and I believe we should not cite canon law or epikeia to make what is invalid into what is valid. I say we can live without the Mass but not the faith. I believe you can only use canon law or other reasons to justify only for baptism, extreme unction and confession. The Mass must be prayed alone, not with these heretics who have no true authority in the traditional chapels. No not one is valid in that I mean they are not turning the host into the Body of Christ. They are either doubtful sacraments or like all the Society of St. Pius X chapels who offer a 1962 Mass of John XXIII which are INVALID, HERETICAL AND SCHISMATIC. All non-sedevacantist clergy are manifest heretics and you cannot go to them for Mass. I would not be able to send you anywhere for one reason or an other and for issues of faith and morals. You must fulfill the Sunday obligation some way which can never truly take the place of the Mass since it is the highest form of prayer. Next if you cannot get to a Mass for health reasons, emergencies if these are applicable, you don't need to attend. In no way would I tell you clearly to receive communion at any indult since the novus ordo have consecrated the hosts to their invalid blasphemous novus ordo messes already, I do say you cannot attend an indult under pain of mortal sin. There maybe an independent chapel and priest properly ordained that may be close enough to you. Is the consecration valid or is the Mass licit? Firstly, never attend a new ordo even if your life depended on it even during the week, funerals, weddings, events..., you may lose your soul for it. Most new order catholics will lose heaven due to this mortal sin. Sanctify Sunday, keep holy the Sabbath, sanctify yourselves when you cannot get to a Mass for Sunday. Pray the fifteen decades of the Rosary and meditate on the mysteries instead of doing five decades. Don't eat that day or fast, offer up any acts of charity, poverty, or do some acts of corporal or spiritual works of mercy if you cannot get to a Sunday Mass. Some may mortify their flesh in that I say not to whip yourself but to for example not take a painkiller if you have a bad headache. Let it go away on its own during the day. Pray perhaps an extra hour of adoration in a chapel that is open on Sunday. Close off all temporal and worldly things that day unless you have babies and small children that need attention. Next I urge you to buy a Missal one that will probably be a reprint of the 1955 Missal but use it and pray it on Sunday, watch a video of the Mass and be attentive, or even a dvd of the Mass. I link sites that sell these items and you can search the internet for this, some sites have online Masses one in which I link to on my other sites. Use this if necessary. You may never as a layperson offer the Mass even if you know Latin in your house or privately unless you are an ordained catholic priest. The time of persecution such as earlier days of the Church and other nations deprive its citizens the Mass. Offer up persecution in the name of Christ. Be reverent more on Sunday to fulfill the weekly obligation, no slang, no tv, radio, no pleasure. I say this only if you do not attend a Mass because it is impossible to attend. Graces come to those who sacrifice and suffer instead. You can find links on the front pages of some of the sites I have set up for your use and your learning the truth. Kneel when you pray and or watch/listen to the Mass from a media source. Since the other options cannot truly fulfill to the level the Mass I do advise that you attempt to get to the Mass if at all possible. The days are getting closer that you will no longer have valid traditional priests to celebrate Mass, bless items, give you rites or sacraments. They (hell) that is heretics shall not prevail against the Church even if one or two in the world remain faithful to the eclipsed Church. Vatican II and its bastard novus ordo church have tried not only to hide the true church but to destroy it.

Below I have taken from another site the Good Friday Prayer anti-pope John removed from the Liturgy prior to Vatican II. I urge you on Good Friday to cite this prayer at the Latin Mass or if you are not at a Latin Mass, pray it anyway. Are you being targeted for Euthanasia? - Catholic Tradition, Catholic Tradition. As anyone can see with the millions of abortions in Russia and many of its other evils such as the false "democracy" it has and liberal views just like the states it is evident that it will grow worse. How did Russia kill off its population in the past? See how it also went from 300 million to 145 million. The Church has not consecrated it properly and as a nation Russia will rise again. I believe what I have read in the Devil's Final Battle and I will cite certain t ext in any of my sites. A sample of the petition is in this site.

Alleged antisemitism

Let us pray also for heretics and schismatics: that our Lord and God would be pleased to rescue them from their errors; and recall them to our holy mother the Catholic and Apostolic Church. Let us pray. Let us kneel. Arise. Almighty and eternal God, Who savest all, and wouldest that no one should perish: look on the souls that are led astray by the deceit of the devil: that having set aside all heretical evil, the hearts of those that err may repent and return to the unity of Thy truth. Through our Lord Jesus Christ, Who livest and reignest with God the Father in the unity of the Holy Ghost, through all endless ages. Amen.

Let us pray also for the faithless Jews: that our God and Lord may remove the veil from their hearts; that they also may acknowledge Our Lord Jesus Christ. Let us pray. (Here the congregation does not kneel) Almighty and Eternal God, Who dost not exclude from Thy mercy even the faithless Jews: hear our prayers, which we offer for the blindness of that people; that acknowledging the light of Thy Truth, which is Christ, they may be delivered from their darkness. Through the same Lord Jesus Christ, Who livest and reignest with God the Father in the unity of the Holy Ghost, through all endless ages. Amen.

Let us pray also for the pagans: that Almighty God take away iniquity from their hearts: that leaving aside their idols they may be converted to the true and living God, and His only Son, Jesus Christ our God and Lord. Let us pray. Let us kneel. Arise. Almighty and Eternal God, Who seekest always, not the death, but the life of sinners: mercifully hear our prayer, and deliver them from the worship of idols: and admit them into Thy holy Church for the praise and glory of Thy Name. Through our Lord Jesus Christ, Who livest and reignest with God the Father in the unity of the Holy Ghost, through all endless ages. Amen.

The congregants did not kneel during the prayer for the conversion of the Jews, because the Church did not wish to imitate the Jews who mocked Christ before his Crucifixion by kneeling before him and reviling him. During the major revision of the Holy Week Liturgy in 1955 Pope Pius XII instituted kneeling in the same place as the other petitions. More recently, this prayer has been changed in the way it refers to the Jews, and the Catholic church has now revised this petition. In 1960, John XXIII removed the word "faithless" (Latin "perfidis") from the prayer for the conversion of the Jews. This word had caused much trouble in recent times because of misconceptions arising from false translations by anti-Catholics of the Latin "perfidis" as "perfidious", which has a much more negative undertone in English than its cognate in Latin. This lead some anti-Catholics to claim the prayer accused the Jews of treachery, which was a complete misunderstanding of the prayer since it was not a litany of accusation, but a petition for conversion. In handmissals used by the laity to follow the Latin Mass, the word was always correctly translated as "faithless" or "unbelieving".

There is also a prayer for atheists as well as one for non-Christians in general.

An Anglican form of the prayer ran like this:

O merciful God, who hast made all men, and hatest nothing that thou hast made, nor wouldest [wantest] the death of any sinner, but rather that he be converted and live; Have mercy upon all Jews, Turks, Infidels, and Hereticks, and take from them all ignorance, hardness of heart, and contempt of thy Word; and so fetch them home, blessed Lord, to thy flock, that they may be saved among the remnant of the true Israelites, and be made one fold under one shepherd, Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, one God, world without end. Amen. (Older editions of The Book of Common Prayer.)

Latin text of the older Catholic prayers prior to changes since 1955

Oremus et pro hæreticis et schismaticis: ut Deus et Dominus noster eruat eos ab erroribus universis; et ad sanctam matrem Eclesiam catholicam atque apostolicam revocare dignetur. Oremus. Flectamus genua. Levate. Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, qui salvas omnes, et neminem vis perire: respice ad animas diabolica fraude deceptas; ut, omni hæretica pravitate deposita, errantium corda resipiscant, et ad veritatis tuæ redeant unitatem. Per Christum Dominum nostrum qui vivit et regnat cum Deo Patre in unitate Spiritus sancti per omnia secula seculorum. Amen.

Oremus et pro perfidis Judæis: ut Deus et Dominus noster auferat velamen de cordibus eorum; ut et ipsi agnoscant Jesum Christum, Dominum nostrum. (Non respondetur 'Amen', nec dictur 'Oremus', aut 'Flectamus genua', aut 'Levate', sed statim dicitur:) Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, qui etiam Judaicam perfidiam a tua miscericordia non repellis: exaudi preces nostras, quas pro illius populi obcaecatione deferimus; ut, agnita veritatis tuae luce, quae Christus est, a suis tenebris eruantur. Per Christum Dominum nostrum qui vivit et regnat cum Deo Patre in unitate Spiritus sancti per omnia secula seculorum. Amen.

Oremus et pro paganis: ut Deus omnipotens auferat iniquitatem a cordibus eorum;ut, relictis idolis suis, convertantur ad Deum vivum et verum, et unicum Filium ejus Jesum Christum, Deum et Dominum nostrum. Oremus. Flectamus genua. Levate. Omnipotens sempiterne Deus, qui non mortem peccatorum, sed vitam semper inquiris suscipe propitius orationem nostram, et libera eos ab idolorum cultura; et aggrega Ecclesiæ tuæ sanctæ, ad laudem et gloriam nominis tui. Per Christum Dominum nostrum qui vivit et regnat cum Deo Patre in unitate Spiritus sancti per omnia secula seculorum. Amen.

Note: other writers have brought this devastating argument out and expanded upon it at length, but unfortunately their treatments of this are often very long and complex – so that, unfortunately, only those willing to read their long treatises and think about them in detail grasped the nevertheless devastating point of the argument. The following hopefully simplifies this argument – an argument which, in reality, is very simple – so that more people will internalize how it totally devastates any claim that the word “all” can validly replace “many” in the words of Consecration. This is by far the strongest argument on this particular matter.

In his famous Bull, Apostolicae Curae in 1896, Pope Leo XIII teaches:
“All know that the Sacraments of the New Law, as sensible and efficient signs of invisible grace, must both signify the grace which they effect and effect the grace which they signify.” The Sacraments must signify the grace which they effect and effect the grace which they signify. If it does not signify the grace which it effects and effect the grace which it signifies, it is not a sacrament – period. So, what is the grace effected by the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist? The Council of Florence, the Council of Trent and St. Thomas Aquinas all teach the same on this matter. Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” On the Eucharist, 1439: “Finally, this is a fitting way to signify the effect of this sacrament, that is, the union of the Christian people with Christ.” Pope Julius III, Council of Trent, Sess. 13, Chap. 2: “He (Christ) wished, furthermore, that this (the Eucharist)... be a symbol of that one ‘body’ of which He Himself is the ‘head’, and to which He wished us to be united, as members, by the closest bonds of faith, hope and charity...”

St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Pt. III, Q. 73, A. 3: “Now it was stated above that the reality of the sacrament [of the Eucharist] is the unity of the mystical body, without which there is no salvation...” As the Council of Florence, the Council of Trent, St. Thomas Aquinas and many other theologians teach, the grace effected by the Eucharist is the union of the faithful with Christ; in other words, the Mystical Body of Christ. Note: the grace effected by the Eucharist [the union of the Mystical Body] must be carefully distinguished from the Eucharist itself: the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ. Since the union of the faithful with Christ/the Mystical Body is the grace effected by the Sacrament of the Eucharist – or what is also called the reality of the Sacrament (Res Sacramenti) or the grace proper to the Sacrament of the Eucharist– this grace must be signified in the Form of the Consecration for it to be valid, as Pope Leo XIII teaches. Okay, so we must look at the Traditional Form of Consecration and find where this grace – the union of the faithful with Christ – is signified.

The Traditional Form of Consecration as declared by Pope Eugene IV at the Council of Florence and Pope St. Pius V in De Defectibus is as follows:
FOR THIS IS MY BODY. FOR THIS IS THE CHALICE OF MY BLOOD, OF THE NEW AND ETERNAL TESTAMENT: THE MYSTERY OF FAITH, WHICH SHALL BE SHED FOR YOU AND FOR MANY UNTO THE REMISSION OF SINS.
Note again: we are looking for that part of the Form which signifies that the person who receives this sacrament worthily becomes united or more strongly united with Jesus Christ and His Mystical Body. Do the words “FOR THIS IS MY BODY. FOR THIS IS THE CHALICE OF MY BLOOD” signify the union of the faithful with Christ/the Mystical Body? No. They signify the true Body and Blood of Christ, which become present when this Sacrament is confected; but these words don’t signify the union of the faithful with Christ or the Mystical Body, which is the grace effected by the Eucharist. Again... Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” On the Eucharist, 1439: “Finally, this is a fitting way to signify the effect of this sacrament, that is, the union of the Christian people with Christ.” St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Pt. III, Q. 73, A. 3: “Now it was stated above that the reality of the sacrament [of the Eucharist] is the unity of the mystical body, without which there is no salvation...” Do the words “OF THE NEW AND ETERNAL TESTAMENT” signify the union of the faithful with Christ/the Mystical Body? No. These words do not signify the Mystical Body either, but rather they contrast the temporary and prefiguring sacrifices of the Old Law with the eternal and propitiatory sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Do the words “THE MYSTERY OF FAITH” signify the union of the faithful with Christ/the Mystical Body? No. These words signify the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, as Innocent III teaches; they do not signify the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ. Do the words “WHICH SHALL BE SHED” signify the union of the faithful with Christ/the Mystical Body? No. These words denote true sacrifice.

The only words left in the Form of Consecration are: “FOR YOU AND FOR MANY UNTO THE REMISSION OF SINS.” The remission of sins is necessary for incorporation into the Mystical Body, and remission of sins is an indispensable component of true Justification, by which one is fruitfully united to Jesus Christ. The words “for you and for many” denote the members of the Mystical Body who have received such remission. Thus, we can see that the words “FOR YOU AND FOR MANY UNTO THE REMISSION OF SINS” are the words in the Form of Consecration which signify the union of the faithful with Christ/the union of the Mystical Body of Christ – which is the grace proper to the Sacrament of the Eucharist. Now, if we look to the Novus Ordo Form of Consecration, do we find the Mystical Body/the union of the faithful with Christ [the grace proper to the Sacrament of the Eucharist] signified? Remember, the Form must signify the Mystical Body in order for it to be valid. Here is the form of Consecration in the New Mass or Novus Ordo:

This is my body. This is the cup of my blood, of the new and eternal testament. It shall be shed for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven. Is the union of the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ signified by the words “for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven”? No. Are all men part of the Mystical Body?

No. Are all men part of the faithful united with Christ? No. We can see very clearly that the New Mass or Novus Ordo most certainly does not signify the union of the Mystical Body [the grace proper to the Sacrament of the Eucharist], and therefore it is not a valid sacrament! Pope Leo XIII, Apostolicae Curae, 1896:

“All know that the Sacraments of the New Law, as sensible and efficient signs of invisible grace, must both signify the grace which they effect and effect the grace which they signify.” Pope Leo XIII, Apostolicae Curae, 1896: “That form cannot be considered apt or sufficient for a Sacrament which omits that which it must essentially signify.” Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence,: “...this is a fitting way to signify the effect of this sacrament, that is, the union of the Christian people with Christ.” One does not have to say anything more... the New Mass is not valid!

It is very interesting to note that in all the formulas of Consecration in the Catholic Church, whether it be the Armenian Liturgy, the Coptic Liturgy, the Ethiopic Liturgy, the Syrian Liturgy, the Chaldean Liturgy, the Malabarese Liturgy, etc. the union of the faithful with Christ/the Mystical Body is signified in the words of Consecration. And no liturgy that has ever been approved by the Church has used the word “all” in the Formula of Consecration. Form of the Consecration of the Wine Used in Eastern Rites
THE ARMENIAN LITURGY: “This is my Blood of the New Testament, which is shed for you and for many for the expiation and forgiveness of sins.”

Note that the union and members of the Mystical Body are signified by the words “for you and for many for the expiation and forgiveness of sins.” THE BYZANTINE LITURGY: “This is my Blood of the New Testament, which is shed for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins.” Note that the union and members of the Mystical Body are signified by the words “for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins.” THE CHALDEAN LITURGY: “This is my Blood of the New Eternal Covenant, the mystery of faith, which is shed for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins.” Note that the union and members of the Mystical Body are signified by the words “for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins.” THE COPTIC LITURGY: “For this is my Blood of the new Covenant, which shall be shed for you and for many unto the forgiveness of sins.” Note that the union and members of the Mystical Body are signified by the words “for you and for many unto the forgiveness of sins.” THE ETHIOPIC LITURGY: “This is my Blood of the New Covenant which is shed for you and for many for the forgiveness of sin.” Note that the union and members of the Mystical Body are signified by the words “for you and for many unto the forgiveness of sin.” THE LITURGY OF MALABAR: “For this is the chalice of my Blood of the New and Eternal Testament, the mystery of faith, which is shed for you and for many for the remission of sins.” Note that union and members of the Mystical Body are signified by the words “for you and for many for the remission of sins.” THE MARONITE LITURGY: (this form is identical to that which was always used in the Roman Rite)

THE SYRIAN LITURGY: “This is my Blood, of the New Covenant, which shall be poured out and offered for the forgiveness of the sins and eternal life of you and of many.”

Note that the union and members of the Mystical Body are signified by the words “for the forgiveness of the sins and eternal life of you and of many.”

Thus, we see that the Formula of Consecration in all these liturgies signifies the union of the faithful with Christ/the Mystical Body of Christ. But the Novus Ordo says, “for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven,” and this does not signify the Mystical Body, since all do not belong to the Mystical Body. Thus, the Novus Ordo does not signify the grace which the Eucharist effects. It is not valid.

Thus, a Catholic cannot attend the New “Mass” under pain of mortal sin. Those who persist in doing so are committing idolatry (worshipping a piece of bread). Jesus Christ is not present there. The host is merely a piece of bread, not Our Lord's Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. The Church has always taught that to approach a doubtful sacrament (which employs doubtful matter or form) is mortally sinful. In fact, Pope Innocent XI, Decree of the Holy Office, March 4, 1679 (Denz. 1151), even condemns the idea that Catholics can receive "probable" sacraments. And the New Mass is not merely doubtful, it is clearly invalid, since it does not signify the grace it is supposed to effect. It is actually worse than a Protestant service; it is an abomination, which falsifies the words of Jesus Christ and the Catholic Faith. This is why the fruits of the New Mass are so bad, so rotten, so evil, so destructive to the Faith.

The facts above totally refute those deceived teachers who tell us that “all” can be substituted for “many” in the words of Consecration. These men are deceiving Catholics and leading them to Hell. Please be evangelistic and spread this information far and wide to inform as many people as possible why no one can attend the Novus Ordo and why it is certainly invalid. Please spread this information to silence the defenders of the validity of the New “Mass.”
Pope St. Pius V, De Defectibus, chapter 5, Part 1:

"The words of Consecration, which are the FORM of this Sacrament, are these: FOR THIS IS MY BODY. And: FOR THIS IS THE CHALICE OF MY BLOOD, OF THE NEW AND ETERNAL TESTAMENT: THE MYSTERY OF FAITH, WHICH SHALL BE SHED FOR YOU AND FOR MANY UNTO THE REMISSION OF SINS. Now if one were to remove, or change anything in the FORM of the consecration of the Body and Blood, and in that very change of words the [new] wording would fail to mean the same thing, he would not consecrate the sacrament."

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Session 11, Feb. 4, 1442, "Cantate Domino": "However, since no explanation was given in the aforesaid decree of the Armenians in respect to THE FORM OF WORDS which the holy Roman Church, relying on the teaching and authority of the apostles Peter and Paul, has always been wont to use in the consecration of the Lord's Body and Blood, we concluded that it should be inserted in this present text. It uses this form of words in the consecration of the Lord's Body: FOR THIS IS MY BODY. And of His blood: FOR THIS IS THE CHALICE OF MY BLOOD, OF THE NEW AND ETERNAL TESTAMENT: THE MYSTERY OF FAITH, WHICH SHALL BE SHED FOR YOU AND FOR MANY UNTO THE REMISSION OF SINS."(Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Vol. 1, p. 581)

St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Pt. III, Q. 78, A. 3:
"I answer that, there is a twofold opinion regarding this form. Some have maintained that the words 'This is the chalice of My blood belong to the substance of the form, but not those words which follow. NOW THIS SEEMS INCORRECT, because the words which follow them are determinations of the predicate, that is, of Christ's blood: consequently they belong to the integrity of its (i.e., the form's) recitation."

St. Alphonsus De Liguori, Treatise on the Holy Eucharist:
"The words pro vobis et pro multis (for you and for many) are used to distinguish the virtue of the Blood of Christ from its fruits: for the Blood of Our Savior is of sufficient value to save all men but its fruits are applied only to a certain number and not to all, and this is their own fault... This is the explanation of St. Thomas, as quoted by [Pope] Benedict XIV." (St. Alphonsus De Liguori, Treatise on The Holy Eucharist, Redemptorist Fathers, 1934, p. 44)

The Catechism of the Council of Trent, On the Form of the Eucharist: "The additional words for you and for many, are taken, some from Matthew, some from Luke, but were joined together by the Catholic Church under the guidance of the Spirit of God. They serve to declare the fruit and advantage of His Passion. For if we look to its value, we must confess that the Redeemer shed His Blood for the salvation of all; but if we look to the fruit which mankind have received from it, we shall easily find that it pertains not unto all, but to many of the human race. When therefore (our Lord) said: For you, He meant either those who were present, or those chosen from among the Jewish people, such as were, with the exception of Judas, the disciples with whom He was speaking. When He added, And for many, He wished to be understood to mean the remainder of the elect from among the Jews and Gentiles. WITH REASON, THEREFORE, WERE THE WORDS FOR ALL NOT USED, as in this place the fruits of the Passion are alone spoken of, and to the elect only did His Passion bring the fruit of salvation." (The Catechism of the Council of Trent, TAN Books, 1982, p. 227.)

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Session 8, Nov. 22, 1439, "Exultate Deo": "All these sacraments are made up of three elements: namely, things as the matter, words as the form, and the person of the minister who confers the sacrament with the intention of doing what the Church does. If any of these is lacking, the sacrament is not effected." (Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Georgetown Univ. Press, Vol. 1, p. 542; Denzinger, The Sources of Catholic Dogma, no. 695)

I believe that some publications on dogma, doctrine and other issues that were not received by modernists and liberals ever since the time of the Reformation have been printed and circulated into the Church way before Vatican II. These enemies only grew stronger in the time of the French Revolution and I would think that masonic and heretical points can be found in some of these books and pressings of the pre-Vatican II revolution. Some of these heretics were bishops and clergy during the full 19th Century but it is my belief at the time of Pius IX the increased use of modernism found its way in the latter catechisms of Baltimore and Pius X without their knowledge. I specify the interpretations of baptism of desire and blood as some of those heretical points or misinterpretations of previous saints and doctors of the church. I also must agree St. Cyprian was in error on a baptism of desire or any doctrine similarly. We must be attentive to what the Popes of the true church specified. The problem has increased ever since Pius IX made a declaration on it and then you have it widespread among the heretics of the novus ordo giving everyone universal baptism and salvation. Never was the novelty teachings of desire and blood in the Council of Trent and the Catechism of Trent. I have read sources on the net but the internet has been tampered with by false traditionalists as well as the novus ordo. Publications were tampered with also before Vatican II.

I urge you to go and download the audio files on sedevacantism at traditionalcatholicsermons.org, sedevacantist.com and cmri.com. I also urge you to look at the mostholyfamilymonastery.com site and start downloading the mp3 files and view them on the internet at no cost. Listen to the two debates last year on sedevacantism and you will see how William Golle had to lie, hide or bring up silly arguments to defend the whore novus ordo church and its heretic apostate anti-popes. To defend heretics is to be a heretic. Mr. Sungenis because he is a well known expert in the faith would even be more of a brown nosing Vatican II sect lover. Kiss JP II's butt Mr. Sungenis. I will take off where John Lane left off. Silly argument Number 12 to your futile rebuttals of the sedevacantist position. Now for Sungenis and the John Lane debate, I will call Mr. Sungenis a dirtball for the Vatican II sect, who is a liar with a nose 20 times the size of Pinocchio. He is a deceiver and a manifest heretic. You should only attend the novus ordo Mr. Sungenis. No you are not a son of the Catholic Church. I am correcting the moderator on this. I notice you and a handful of other websites show up with the same argument that came out in April 2007 Catholic Family News that Lagrange quoted or reasoned Billuart (De Verbo Incarnato). No where does Lagrange indicate your argument or the SSPX's laughable argument that the Pope and the hierarchy can lead the Roman Catholic Church if they are heretics. Divine law cuts off heretics and apostates by supreme authority. No canon law can undermine the Divine Will pal. Jurisdiction no longer remains or never can be with heretics, schismatics or apostates in the Holy Church. In no way can the heretic and his heresies co-exist with valid authority and jurisdiction in the Holy See, local diocese or in any instance inside the Mystical Body of Christ (the Church). For where Christ the Head of the Church is that is where His few faithful are today. Heaven has taken over to run the Catholic Church since the death of Pius XII. You cannot be truthful if you attempt to defend the anti-popes of the conciliar novus church. SSPX priests are mostly a bunch of manifest heretics, liars and are not even validly ordained. Their ordinations being done by Lefebvre and the bishops he consecrated are null and void. Mr. Lefebvre was never a valid priest nor a valid bishop. Since the notorious non-catholic Lienart a high level freemason and infiltrator of the Church could in no way possess licit jurisdiction since he is not a member of the Church. It does not suffice to say Lienart was ordained and consecrated in the Tridentine Rite. It is not valid by divine law, so that canon law has no effect in the holy institution whereby no grace can be given to those separated from Christ. If eight popes declared modernists, liberals and freemasons are not in the Church then by what authority do they have to ordain, consecrate, bless or celebrate a Mass? No they are cut off and lack the priestly powers and the powers of a bishop or Pope if they are freemasons and modernists. St. Pius X has condemned them as the enemies of the Church. Lefebvre never had any jurisdiction.

Even if a bishop or one who claims to have the powers of a bishop is a heretic such as Lienart, Lefebvre cannot claim to have jurisdiction of his own. He did claim he had authority but had none. He believed you could be outside the Church and be saved. He was a flip flop politician in doctrine and dogma. No even valid rites and sacraments in the external form can make valid what is declared null and void by Holy Mother Church. Ecclesiastical law even specified by true Popes will not make licit what is not licit and never was, never will be. For those who think they can cite epikeia and Canon Law which is not infallible you need to wake the hell up and that includes all the sedevacantists who think they can attend invalid or illicit Masses, obtain sacraments from heretics and schismatics and lead many into hell. SSPX and the non-sedevacantist lead the way to hell and I call them the mini branch of the Novus Ordo Vatican II Church since they claim to be in communion with apostates and heretics like their "Pope" Benedict. You hypocrites, you tell people not to go to the adulterous indult nor any sedevacantist chapel. Who the HELL do you think you are SSPX? You're a bunch of pigs. So I may call John Paul II a pig and the novus ordo bishops of the world but so are you. Hell is waiting for you too. If you attend the chapels at SSPX you are consuming a piece of bread. They were not sent by the church nor do they have any jurisdiction or authority. First they are in communion or claim to be in communion with apostate Rome and if not they are a schismatic organization under 501C. You cannot want to be attached to present Rome and call yourself Catholic. Wake the hell up you heretics! Your not in the Catholic Church. Benedict the anti-pope and the Vatican II sect will never consecrate Russia. They want the schismatic Russian Orthodox to stay where they are. I searched for the publication of De Verbo Incarnato and they all are in Latin, German, French but not English. I think this is a good reason why pigs like Sungenis, SSPX, SSPX France who wrote this article in April 2007 Catholic Family News would misquote or even lie as to what Lagrange and Billuart actually said. Incarnato is about Christ and even a Latin translation published in 1952 indicated from my understanding of Latin that page 232 of De Verbo Incarnato had nothing to do in mentioning a pope and being a heretic or anything about heresy.

REALITY—A Synthesis Of Thomistic Thought by Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O. P.

CH43: THE TREATISE ON THE CHURCH

Throughout the Summa we find the lineaments of a treatise on the Church, a treatise which became an actuality against Protestant errors. But this later mode of treatment, being predominantly exterior and apologetic, led to a disregard for the theological treatment, properly so called, of the inner constitution of the Church. Such a treatise has its normal place after the treatise on Christ the Redeemer and His sacraments. [987] Here lies the road pointed out by St. Thomas.

In his treatise on Christ's grace of headship [988] he calls the Church the mystical body, which includes all men in the measure of their participation in the grace that comes from their Savior. [989].

In his treatise on faith [990] he finds in the Church a doctrinal authority that is plenary and infallible, extending even, as in canonizing her saints, not merely to dogmatic truths, but also to dogmatic facts. The pope has this power in its fullness, and can even, against heretics, define the exact meaning of the articles of faith.

He compares the relation between Church and state to that between soul and body. [991] The Church has power to annul the authority of unbelieving or apostate princes, a power extending to excommunication. [992] This normal pre-eminence of the Church derives from her superior goal, in virtue of which princes themselves are bound to obey the sovereign pontiff as vicar of Jesus Christ.

In the fifteenth century the disciples of St. Thomas clung closely to the saint's formulas. Special distinction here belongs to Torquemada, [993] whose work is a careful study of the notes of the Church, of the union in the mystical body between head and members, of the Church's indirect power in matters temporal. [994].

The above by Garrigou-Lagrange appears to be the English translation of page 232 of De Verbo Incarnato. Now it does prove if so that SSPX France who also may include Laisney and Rulleau as liars, heretics and totally butt kissers of the Vatican II sect. SSPX has its involvement with heretics and liars. Even if they don't associate with Sungenis they will work with him to attack sedevacantism and other issues. Sungenis is a mouthpiece for the Vatican II sect. There are many more infiltrators. Also while not all but some if not many of the SSPX are infiltrators to destroy the last bit of Catholic faith. I specify certainly valid orders and the validity of sacraments.