Thank you for your article. I plan to read each of the chapters, albeit it is all very sad and troubling. I agree with your thoughts, that the Conciliar Church is not the Catholic Church and it's current head is not a genuine pope nor were any of the men claiming to be popes after 1958. It has been difficult for me to openly confess this; yet I do believe the Catholic Church still exist today, but not in the Conciliar false Church.
I think that any educational facility which calls itself a "Theological Seminary" is suspect right off the bat. That is what the Judeo-Masonic and Protestant educational facilities are called. You are spot on when you carefully define all the terms. Language manipulation is one of the earmarks of deception and propaganda. If the Catholic Church had anything whatsoever to do with the Conciliar church, I would never have converted to it. They are polar opposites.
As the Church is hidden in these times (Apoc. 12: 15-18) Her visibility is not required, but is suspended like the Papacy (2 Thess. 2:6-7 and Apoc. 12:5). This is not a permanent situation but has been 'in the cards' from the start - so it does not contradict Visibility dogma. In fact, Visibility dogma confirms the crisis, as it is the one thing to cause the Church to, for a time, become obscure (if there were no such doctrine, the Church's becoming obscure would not be so striking).
Bishop Tissier de Mallerais I think raises an important issue however. Defining the Conciliar/Synodal church itself so that it can be rightly recognized as a separate entity from the Catholic Church might go a long way toward convincing people why they can not remain in it during what appears to be a coming schism, apart from or in conjunction with your argument that it lacks the marks. By demonstrating succinctly and convincingly what it is as well as what it is not, more and more people will be able to decide what to do in event of that schism.
I think also the championing of sedevacantism as some are wont to do as to whether or not you are truly Catholic is the wrong approach, forcing many people to adhere to where the pope is out of ignorance, fear, and blind obedience. Rather, as you have, focusing clearly in pointing out that the Conciliar church can not be the Catholic Church but coupled also with clear explanations of where it is unequivocally doctrinally opposed by its own definition to infallible magisterial teaching (as the letter from the FSSPX does), and not just pastorally mushy so it can get away with it, will make it self evident secondarily that a pope of a Conciliar church can not be the pope of the Catholic Church, rather than sedevacantism foremost being the rallying cry.
This heresy that infected the veins of the Catholic Church, which perhaps could not have previously been rooted out without destroying Her, has, as the letter from 1913 you previously posted referenced, now matured into a recognizable alien life form or cancer, this Conciliar/Synodal church. Being now visible, with a more clear division of allegiances and borders, it is capable of being extirpated by the Divine Surgeon, Who perhaps has patiently waited for this maturation, maybe via schisming itself, and leaving behind a healthy Mystical Body. And, although that Mystical Body may seem small, perhaps its is roughly the same size or even slightly larger than it really was when this crisis began. I hope to God we are on the right side, but I can not see how we are not.
Thank you for your article. I plan to read each of the chapters, albeit it is all very sad and troubling. I agree with your thoughts, that the Conciliar Church is not the Catholic Church and it's current head is not a genuine pope nor were any of the men claiming to be popes after 1958. It has been difficult for me to openly confess this; yet I do believe the Catholic Church still exist today, but not in the Conciliar false Church.
I think that any educational facility which calls itself a "Theological Seminary" is suspect right off the bat. That is what the Judeo-Masonic and Protestant educational facilities are called. You are spot on when you carefully define all the terms. Language manipulation is one of the earmarks of deception and propaganda. If the Catholic Church had anything whatsoever to do with the Conciliar church, I would never have converted to it. They are polar opposites.
As the Church is hidden in these times (Apoc. 12: 15-18) Her visibility is not required, but is suspended like the Papacy (2 Thess. 2:6-7 and Apoc. 12:5). This is not a permanent situation but has been 'in the cards' from the start - so it does not contradict Visibility dogma. In fact, Visibility dogma confirms the crisis, as it is the one thing to cause the Church to, for a time, become obscure (if there were no such doctrine, the Church's becoming obscure would not be so striking).
Bishop Tissier de Mallerais I think raises an important issue however. Defining the Conciliar/Synodal church itself so that it can be rightly recognized as a separate entity from the Catholic Church might go a long way toward convincing people why they can not remain in it during what appears to be a coming schism, apart from or in conjunction with your argument that it lacks the marks. By demonstrating succinctly and convincingly what it is as well as what it is not, more and more people will be able to decide what to do in event of that schism.
I think also the championing of sedevacantism as some are wont to do as to whether or not you are truly Catholic is the wrong approach, forcing many people to adhere to where the pope is out of ignorance, fear, and blind obedience. Rather, as you have, focusing clearly in pointing out that the Conciliar church can not be the Catholic Church but coupled also with clear explanations of where it is unequivocally doctrinally opposed by its own definition to infallible magisterial teaching (as the letter from the FSSPX does), and not just pastorally mushy so it can get away with it, will make it self evident secondarily that a pope of a Conciliar church can not be the pope of the Catholic Church, rather than sedevacantism foremost being the rallying cry.
This heresy that infected the veins of the Catholic Church, which perhaps could not have previously been rooted out without destroying Her, has, as the letter from 1913 you previously posted referenced, now matured into a recognizable alien life form or cancer, this Conciliar/Synodal church. Being now visible, with a more clear division of allegiances and borders, it is capable of being extirpated by the Divine Surgeon, Who perhaps has patiently waited for this maturation, maybe via schisming itself, and leaving behind a healthy Mystical Body. And, although that Mystical Body may seem small, perhaps its is roughly the same size or even slightly larger than it really was when this crisis began. I hope to God we are on the right side, but I can not see how we are not.