May Lord Jesus’ Will be done, praying for you Sister Salina.

Stear clear of Catholicism, for within it you'll never find salvation, only obedience to their rituals and man made tradition. You're much better off finding yourself a Baptist church. Good luck.

Don’t do it it’s a house of cards and a lie. You need to wake up. God rest

🙏❤ May the Holy Spirit descended upon you and remain with you in discovering and discerning the one holy, Catholic (universal) and apostolic church that God created here in earth though His Son for us gain eternal life and union with Him - our creator - in heaven.

@@save2a4all You must have copied & pasted that response of yours off of some Papist cult site. I mean, I really hope you haven't allowed yourself to become that mind controlled by that Satanic Papist cult. Good luck.

I agree

This Bible passage shows how Francis is anathema which means he is not Catholic. Galatians 1:8-9 "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema.” Francis professes the following: All men are saved, the Quoron is a holy book, Martin Luther had good intentions on justification, there are non-Catholic saints, homosexual "marriage" is acceptable, it is a grave sin to convince people of the Catholic faith. I have playlists on my channel that support sedevacantism.

Me too. I became one last year

"If I had more time, I would have written a shorter letter."

I once read that Abp. Fulton Sheen spent four hours preparing for a ten minute homily.

Deo gratias! Tradition cannot be stopped, because people will search for it and will make any sacrifice for it, because it transmits to us the best thing on earth: Jesus Christ.

Where? I'm in Defed

@@ScriptureandTraditionFrJM Father, my faith has been tittering lately but I still remain. I wonder where at some point we are going to be able to attend the TLM in the near future? I live in Alabama , just recently moved here from blue state. I wish that I could chat with you.

Yes ! I was lead to the TLM recently . It is PRECIOUS to me. Nothing else on earth as beautiful .

@@crowlikemadness there is sedevacantist valid and licit Mass in southern Alabama, and a big CMRI parish in far north Alabama. Clergy who do not compromise.

Where can I find this prophecy

@@ChrisEAdlay I first heard it on tradcatknight, then several other places. You should be able to search it. I would think goo gle would have scrubbed it. Like Hidegard of Bingen's prophecy of the mass of Babylon. The mass of many tongues that Christ said was not of Him. The one so disrespectful that they had women in pants by the altar.

@@livingpurgatory3 so where am supposed to go for the sacraments? There's an Assyrian church of the East that accepts Catholics here. I don't know what to do

@@ChrisEAdlay Padre Pio said the time would come when you were reduced only to your rosaries. He said a fake church would take over the real church. Look at the last prophecy of St Francis for a wake up call. I believe Quo Vadis did a vid where the read the prophecy. It will be spiritual communion and rosaries

I don't think that Anna Katharina Emmerich said that.

Fr. Cekada was not with the CMRI. He was ordained in the SSPX, expelled and helped form the SSPV but later broke off and sided with Bishop Dolan against Bishop Kelly. May God have mercy on his soul.

@@kansasguthries7259 I wonder why such divisions happened….I pray that all this chaos ends soon

@@binyamin3716 pride....modernist priests are prideful but sadly so are many Traditional priests...Satan knows how to tempt priests

Agreed!! Father Cekada is amazing!!!

The legitimate bishops (=named by a pope) constitute the hierarchy of the Church. To cut oneself off from them, as the sedevacantists do, has already been condemned by Leo XII and Leo XIII. These popes were targeting a group whose members denied the legitimacy of Pope Pius VII: like the sedevacantists. Leo XII, Pastoris Aeterni: “Your Little Church cannot therefore in any way belong to the Catholic Church. By the very admission of your masters, or rather of those who deceive you, there are no longer any French bishops who support and defend the party you follow. Moreover, all the bishops of the Catholic Universe, to whom they themselves have appealed, and to whom they have addressed their schismatic claims in print, are recognized as approving the conventions of Pius VII and the acts which followed, and the whole Catholic Church is now entirely favorable to them.” Leo XIII, Eximia nos laetitia: “Absolutely no bishop considers them and governs them as his sheep. From this they must conclude with certainty and evidence that they are defectors from the fold of Christ. Now, just as the Little Church had no bishop who recognized them, so the sedevacantists had no legitimate bishop who recognized them, all of whom recognized the Council in 1964 and 1965 (they were consecrated under Pius XII).

Excellent book.

The legitimate bishops (=named by a pope) constitute the hierarchy of the Church. To cut oneself off from them, as the sedevacantists do, has already been condemned by Leo XII and Leo XIII. These popes were targeting a group whose members denied the legitimacy of Pope Pius VII: like the sedevacantists. Leo XII, Pastoris Aeterni: “Your Little Church cannot therefore in any way belong to the Catholic Church. By the very admission of your masters, or rather of those who deceive you, there are no longer any French bishops who support and defend the party you follow. Moreover, all the bishops of the Catholic Universe, to whom they themselves have appealed, and to whom they have addressed their schismatic claims in print, are recognized as approving the conventions of Pius VII and the acts which followed, and the whole Catholic Church is now entirely favorable to them.” Leo XIII, Eximia nos laetitia: “Absolutely no bishop considers them and governs them as his sheep. From this they must conclude with certainty and evidence that they are defectors from the fold of Christ. Now, just as the Little Church had no bishop who recognized them, so the sedevacantists had no legitimate bishop who recognized them, all of whom recognized the Council in 1964 and 1965 (they were consecrated under Pius XII).

@@fidefidelis4912 Do Bps. Mendez and Thuc not count?

@@luked7956 They weren't sede in 1965, they even signed V2, Bp. Mendez even signed a document in 1966 where he accepts Paul VI and V2.

@@fidefidelis4912 Yes, that's true. Is there a group of sedevacantists you can identify from 1965 which didn't have support from a bishop at the time?

@@luked7956 They existed, but not as an united group, plus they rejected only Paul VI post-1964/5, not John XXIII. And they weren't recognized by any bishop, which proves that their position is schismatic and that Paul VI was a true pope. Also, the fact that all bishops recognized John XXIII's and Paul VI's acts in 1960s prove they were true popes.

The legitimate bishops (=named by a pope) constitute the hierarchy of the Church. To cut oneself off from them, as the sedevacantists do, has already been condemned by Leo XII and Leo XIII. These popes were targeting a group whose members denied the legitimacy of Pope Pius VII: like the sedevacantists. Leo XII, Pastoris Aeterni: “Your Little Church cannot therefore in any way belong to the Catholic Church. By the very admission of your masters, or rather of those who deceive you, there are no longer any French bishops who support and defend the party you follow. Moreover, all the bishops of the Catholic Universe, to whom they themselves have appealed, and to whom they have addressed their schismatic claims in print, are recognized as approving the conventions of Pius VII and the acts which followed, and the whole Catholic Church is now entirely favorable to them.” Leo XIII, Eximia nos laetitia: “Absolutely no bishop considers them and governs them as his sheep. From this they must conclude with certainty and evidence that they are defectors from the fold of Christ. Now, just as the Little Church had no bishop who recognized them, so the sedevacantists had no legitimate bishop who recognized them, all of whom recognized the Council in 1964 and 1965 (they were consecrated under Pius XII).

​@Pat Last Even if Vatican II church is false church and Vatican II popes are false popes, it doesn't imply that sedevacantists are true Church.

Good man Rob.... you never told me about this priest

Sedevacantists have no ordinary jurisdiction nor canonical apostolic mission from the Church. Council od Trent condemned under pain of anathema thesis, that bishops or priest not send lawfully by the Church are legitimate ministers of the sacraments.

The legitimate bishops (=named by a pope) constitute the hierarchy of the Church. To cut oneself off from them, as the sedevacantists do, has already been condemned by Leo XII and Leo XIII. These popes were targeting a group whose members denied the legitimacy of Pope Pius VII: like the sedevacantists. Leo XII, Pastoris Aeterni: “Your Little Church cannot therefore in any way belong to the Catholic Church. By the very admission of your masters, or rather of those who deceive you, there are no longer any French bishops who support and defend the party you follow. Moreover, all the bishops of the Catholic Universe, to whom they themselves have appealed, and to whom they have addressed their schismatic claims in print, are recognized as approving the conventions of Pius VII and the acts which followed, and the whole Catholic Church is now entirely favorable to them.” Leo XIII, Eximia nos laetitia: “Absolutely no bishop considers them and governs them as his sheep. From this they must conclude with certainty and evidence that they are defectors from the fold of Christ. Now, just as the Little Church had no bishop who recognized them, so the sedevacantists had no legitimate bishop who recognized them, all of whom recognized the Council in 1964 and 1965 (they were consecrated under Pius XII).

What about the indult TLM? Do you attend those?

@@toddpund5761 there are no indult TLM here, only FSSP, SSPX and many independent sedevacantists

Wow. Do you recommend also that for "confirmation"? I was baptized in a Calvinistic"church" where the pastor thinks baptism is just a symbol. So also considering conditional baptism.

@@marce.goodnews The only two sacraments that are NOT effected by the altered rite of consecration are Baptism (which can, in need, be done by anyone, provided the proper form is used) and marriage (which is contracted by the spouses, who intend to do what the Church dies). All others should be conditionally redone. As for Baptism, the mess of NO theology has made it nigh impossible to presume it has been done validly...

@@marce.goodnewsYou could definitely be conditionally reconfirmed. Confirmation is not absolutely necessary for salvation, but I wouldn’t do without it. As to baptism, check to see if the form used in your “Calvinistic” church was correct. If so, it’s valid. The sacrament is in no way dependent upon the personal opinion of the one who administers it.

I can calm you in one respect: for the Requiem Mass in die obitus (the very first Mass after you die) there have been no changes between the pre-55 and 1962. Greetings from a fervent pre-55 supporter!

the Church is immaculate, by faith. She cannot make mistakes in such matters. Therefore the wording "the Church returns to her Pre-1955 Liturgy" is wrong. We have to conclude that the religion using the post-1955 Liturgy is not the Church

@@chabedou It's not God's Church that made the mistake of implementing the Novus Ordo Missae, it was the corrupt and misled hierarchy that put in place a drastic and unnecessary change in the liturgy almost to the liking of those with little faith. Perhaps you should reconsider your source of argument.

​@@andrewf.castaneda4695 Paul VI promulgated the Novus Ordo...

According to sedevacatists, ordinary jurisdiction and power of keys, which are essential components of the Church (according for example to Trent, Vatican I, Leo XIII and Pius XII), has been realy destroyed or lost indeed.

​@kamilmurawski1136 no sedevacantist teaches this. I don't know where you get that from.

That's just as ignorant as KJV only Protestants. The only difference is that the Douay-Rheims is a trustworthy translation and the KJV is not. But to say it's the ONLY trustworthy translation is just contrary to intellectual honesty and Church teaching

I reacted similarly. Although it would be a terrible thing if it were true, it would explain everything. And the truth is always worth having. I don't know if it is the case. Some argue that it cannot be true, because God would never let the Church fall into such a disaster. But when I think how God has been treated over the last decades, then why shouldn't He? We need a wake up call proportionate to the distance we have strayed from Him.

@@ScriptureandTraditionFrJM Indeed, we cannot ignore the truth, no matter how unpleasant it might be.

@@ScriptureandTraditionFrJM the gates of hell cannot prevail....that's why vatican II cannot be the church

Wouldn’t it follow then, that most of the priests are invalid? If the priests are not priests, then all of their Sacraments except Baptism and Marriage are invalid. Those who have confessed their sins are not absolved and those who have received Communion have committed idolatry? Fr., if so, then you should be conditionally re-ordained by a bishop consecrated under the old rite. I actually know someone who might do it who lives in the UK.

"Fr.Marcel Lefeabvre Was once Again Correct. /he Even nailed it down to the 1955 Mass." Lefebvre forced the 1962 Missal on the SSPX in the early 1980s.

marcel lefebvre went along with the vatican 2 liturgical changes, he failed in his duty.... why he expelled the nine? because they refused to except the liturgical changes.

Lefebvre forced the Society to use the 1962 Missal, as it continues to do.

⁠@@littlerock5256Yes, mostly. They add in the second Confiteor, but use the 1962 Good Friday prayers. I don’t think Archbishop LeFebvre was a failure. He kept hope that Rome would come back to tradition. He wasn’t given the grace to know what we know today. It’s my guess that if he were still on earth, he’d be saying the pre-‘55 Mass.

@@mariekatherine5238 Yes, the SSPX has added back in the the people's Confiteor, which is technically an abuse, as Lefebvre had no authority to do that. However, the SSPX does not do the people's Confiteor on Holy Thursday. I agree with you, if Lefebvre were alive today I think he would do the pre-1955. I also think he would recognize that Francis does not have papal authority.

Amen

So define what the Church is. If Chuch can be deprived of entire hierarchy and jurisdiction, and papacy, and possibility of having pope in future, than hierarchy, jurisdiction and papacy are accidental, not essential for the Church. But this is protestant ecclesiology, condemnned by Council of Trent and Vatican I era magisterial teachings

@@kamilmurawski1136 The believers. The people. If the church was built ON a person, BY a person, then it is the people. Why would it be a building or a hierarchy lol, something thats easily corrupted and destroyed

the gates of hell cannot prevail...that's why vatican II cannot be the church

yeah but you still deny you have to have water to be baptised

BOD is UNIVERSAL ordinary Magesterium.

@@johnraymond-pz9bo its also rejected by the Council of Trent and the Council of Florence

Ok, so you guys reject BOD which is Ordinary magisterium, and at the same time you condemn SSPX for the rejecting ordinary magisterium. So you condemn yourself in this way.

@@kamilmurawski1136 Ezekiel 36 25 And I will pour upon you clean water, and you shall be cleansed from all your filthiness, and I will cleanse you from all your idols. 26 And I will give you a new heart, and put a new spirit within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and will give you a heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my spirit in the midst of you: and I will cause you to walk in my commandments, and to keep my judgments, and do them Council of Florence Ecumenical Council "Holy baptism holds the first place among all the sacraments, for it is the gate of the spiritual life; through it we become members of Christ and of the body of the church. Since death came into the world through one person, unless we are born again of water and the spirit, we cannot, as Truth says, enter the kingdom of heaven. The matter of this sacrament is true and natural water, either hot or cold. The form is: I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy Spirit. But we do not deny that true baptism is conferred by the following words: May this servant of Christ be baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy Spirit; or, This person is baptized by my hands in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy Spirit. Since the holy Trinity is the principle cause from which baptism has its power and the minister is the instrumental cause who exteriorly bestows the sacrament, the sacrament is conferred if the action is performed by the minister with the invocation of the holy Trinity. The minister of this sacrament is a priest, who is empowered to baptize in virtue of his office. But in case of necessity not only a priest or a deacon, but even a lay man or a woman, even a pagan and a heretic, can baptize provided he or she uses the form of the church and intends to do what the church does. The effect of this sacrament is the remission of all original and actual guilt, also of all penalty that is owed for that guilt. Hence no satisfaction for past sins is to be imposed on the baptized, but those who die before they incur any guilt go straight to the kingdom of heaven and the vision of God." "With regard to children, since the danger of death is often present and the only remedy available to them is the sacrament of baptism by which they are snatched away from the dominion of the devil and adopted as children of God, it admonishes that sacred baptism is not to be deferred for forty or eighty days or any other period of time in accordance with the usage of some people, but it should be conferred as soon as it conveniently can; and if there is imminent danger of death, the child should be baptized straightaway without any delay, even by a lay man or a woman in the form of the church, if there is no priest, as is contained more fully in the decree on the Armenians" "It 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 catholic church before the end of their lives; that the unity of the 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 his blood in the name of Christ, unless he has persevered in the bosom and the unity of the catholic church." Council of Trent Ecumenical Council " For, although no one can be just, but he to whom the merits of the Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ are communicated, yet is this done in the said justification of the impious, when by the merit of that same most holy Passion, the charity of God is poured forth, by the Holy Spirit, in the hearts of those that are justified, and is inherent therein: whence, man, through Jesus Christ, in whom he is ingrafted, receives, in the said justification, together with the remission of sins, all these (gifts) infused at once, faith, hope, and charity. For faith, unless hope and charity be added thereto, neither unites man perfectly with Christ, nor makes him a living member of His body. For which reason it is most truly said, that Faith without works is dead and profitless; and, In Christ Jesus neither circumcision, availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but faith which worketh by charity. This faith, Catechumen’s beg of the Church-agreeably to a tradition of the apostles-previously to the sacrament of Baptism; when they beg for the faith which bestows life everlasting, which, without hope and charity, faith cannot bestow: whence also do they immediately hear that word of Christ; If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. Wherefore, when receiving true and Christian justice, they are bidden, immediately on being born again, to preserve it pure and spotless, as the first robe given them through Jesus Christ in lieu of that which [Page 36] Adam, by his disobedience, lost for himself and for us, that so they may bear it before the judgment-seat of our Lord Jesus Christ, and may have life everlasting." "If any one saith, that man may be justified before God by his own works, whether done through the teaching of human nature, or that of the law, without the grace of God through Jesus Christ; let him be anathema If any one saith, that man's free will moved and excited by God, by assenting to God exciting and calling, nowise co-operates towards disposing and preparing itself for obtaining the grace of Justification; that it cannot refuse its consent, if it would, but that, as something inanimate, it does nothing whatever and is merely passive; let him be anathema If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema If any one saith, that men are just without the justice of Christ, whereby He merited for us to be justified; or that it is by that justice itself that they are formally just; let him be anathema If any one saith, that men are justified, either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ, or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and the charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost, and is inherent in them; or even that the grace, whereby we are justified, is only the favour of God; let him be anathema. If any one saith, that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ's sake; or, that this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified; let him be anathema If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because that he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema If any one saith, that nothing besides faith is commanded in the Gospel; that other things are indifferent, neither commanded nor prohibited, but free; or, that the ten commandments nowise appertain to Christians; let him be anathema. If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema. If any one saith, that by the said sacraments of the New Law grace is not conferred through the act performed, but that faith alone in the divine promise suffices for the obtaining of grace; let him be anathema If any one saith, that true and natural water is not of necessity for baptism, and, on that account, wrests, to some sort of metaphor, those words of our Lord Jesus Christ; Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost; let him be anathema Council of Vienne "All are faithfully to profess that there is one baptism which regenerates all those baptized in Christ, just as there is one God and one faith’. We believe that when baptism is administered in water in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy Spirit, it is a perfect means of salvation for both adults and children. Yet because, as regards the effect of baptism in children, we find that certain theologians have held contrary opinions, some saying that by baptism guilt is indeed remitted in infants but grace is not conferred, others on the contrary asserting that both guilt is remitted and the virtues and sanctifying grace are infused with regard to habit though for the time being not with regard to use, we, considering the general efficacy of Christ’s death, which through baptism is applied in like manner to all the baptised, choose, with the approval of the sacred council, the second opinion, which says that sanctifying grace and the virtues are conferred in baptism on both infants and adults, as more probable and more in harmony with the words of the saints and of modern doctors of theology." Fourth Council of Lateran Ecumenical Council "But the sacrament of baptism is consecrated in water at the invocation of the undivided Trinity - namely Father, Son and holy Spirit - and brings salvation to both children and adults when it is correctly carried out by anyone in the form laid down by the church." "Certain people who have come voluntarily to the waters of sacred baptism, as we learnt, do not wholly cast off the old person in order to put on the new more perfectly."

read it, brilliant book.

Amen

We can never leave our church. The keys of heaven wasn't given to any group outside the church. They don't speak by the holy ghost. They don't even agree among themselves. They are more like protestant.

For the record: I never attended a Novus Ordo seminary, never learnt to say it, never have said it and never will. (Thought I better clear that up.)

I will look up their interviews, thank you for the information, I’m sure there will be more priests that come to the same conclusion

There are some Novus Ordo priests that have changed their rites to the Byzantine Catholic (I know of two who are now Ruthenian) They would be offering invalid Divine Liturgies. The Byzantines are not immune to this

Benedict is a validly ordained priest, even if he is a heretical anti-pope. Bergoglio on the other hand, is not even a real priest.

I see a reply but, yt won't let me see it

Ratzinger was validly ordained (1952) but invalidly consecrated (1977).

@@hcho7776 and where did this prophecy come from? Who?

@@hcho7776 interesting. One recently said, Peter is not Peter

it is not logical or tenable to believe in a holy church and accept that the vatican II church is such

No, all Catholics don’t write off sedevacantists. I sometimes attend Mass at a sedevacantist chapel. The priest knows I don’t totally embrace sedevacantism and is okay with that. This is an issue that must be decided by a future true Pope. No one else has the authority to make that determination.

Sedevacantists do not consitute Catholic Church nor are part of it - at least according to catholic ecclesiology. For to be Church you must have bishop with ordinary jurisdiction.