The factions that have arisen within the Catholic Church

Let's not kid ourselves and say that the hierarchy of the Church is in the same order today as it was under Pius X/Pius IX. Everything is as it has always been. Pope Francis has everything under control and is properly teaching the faith to the world.
Anyone that does not see that the Pope is struck and the sheep are scattered has to take a closer look with their own lying eyes. From the average New Mass parish where every priest is ordered around (he's a glorified social worker) by officious Susan Parish Council Boomers, where priests are better off being molesters than preferring use of Latin/the Tridentine Mass, then the James Martins, the various "restorationist" factions (SSPX, SSPX-MC, SSPV, CMRI, the independent Feeneyites, the Home Aloner Dimondites, and every other independent group), to the Tridentine Mass societies that are regularized (FSSP, ICKSP, IGS, the Personal Apostolic Administration of Saint John Mary Vianney). These are all a testament that the sheep are scattered. We have lost the unity of the Catholic faith. What do we blame? How far back can we see the gradual changes? Where is one supposed to go to find guidance? The Catholic answer, in better times, would be: The Pope.
But can we really go to Francis for our soul-saving final answers? What do we do? Wait? Are these the end times?

Attached: mantleofthevirgin.jpg (612x518, 79.09K)

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Charismatic_Renewal
sspx.org/en/state-necessity
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

your post makes me sad user, i don't really know how to answer or contribute, im just gonna go pray the rosary then go to bed. pax.

We suffer and hide ourselves in the Heart of Christ. It will end one day, but for now, we suffer. These are either the end times or the fulfilling of some Catholic private revelations.

It's like we live in a clown world or something

Attached: 480237620963_3084j.jpg (326x230, 81.62K)

Does the Catholic Charismatic Renewal count as a faction?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Charismatic_Renewal

Something similar happened 900 years ago, we still survived and cleansed the filth. The new generation of priests are upsetting the old guard for clinging to tradition, and there's a great deal of church orthodoxy going on the in background such as the denouncement of gender ideology. The only thing to do is pray and be patient.

We have Charismatics? Isn't it 100% clear that people who speak in tongues are possessed?

Idk.
I always thought tongues in the bible just meant a language foreign to the speaker themselves. Hence what happened at Pentecost and why you need an interpreter. As far as that convulsing nonsense charismatics do though…

No, the Holy Spirit grants the gift of tounges as well. Usually an exorcist will investigate it though to make sure it is not demonic.

It's perfectly fine to be sad and fret over the disunity in the Church. But if you think that this is a recent phenomenon, and all Catholics before modern times were united and happy and there was no conflict, and that this is the most the Church has ever been divided… well, then I'm sorry to say that you have a VERY rose-tinted view of the Church's history.

Traditionalists vs Liberals, Molinists vs Rigorists, Thomists vs Augustinians… All these different interpretations of the faith. The list goes on and far back. How far back? A huge portion of the Biblical Book of Acts of the Apostles, as well as portions of St Paul's Letters describe the circumcision controversy which divided the Church. A controversy that divided the early clergy, including the surviving Apostles and St Simon Peter, the first Pope. All this was occurring within YEARS of Christ's ministry.

Several episodes in the Church's history have led to disunity, and in some cases, schism. It would be a stretch to say that this is the worst period of disunity in the Church's history. And when you look at some of the darker episodes of disunity in Christiandom: The Cathar heresy, the events surrounding the fourth crusade, the Reformation and the bloodshed which surrounded that… you can almost appreciate the fact that we haven't reached the point where we aren't hacking each other to death.

And one final thought. To answer the question of where to find guidance: from the Church. Not from an individual within the Church, not from a sect within the Church, not from any philosopher or document that was produced by the Church… Just… THE Church as a whole. Follow her teachings, remain loyal to the successor of Simon Peter, o not turn to the left, do not turn to the right. And no matter how much uncertainty or confusion you personally feel, or how bad you interpret things to be going, you will never be led astray as long as you remain within Holy Mother Church.

The popes tolerate and allow it, and with modernism on the rise they don't care.
The Charismatic Movement is a gateway prelest to Evangelicalism.


The Gift of Tongues was literally being able to be understandable to foreign speakers.
Have you ever understood a charismatic?

I've never heard of Charismatic Catholics until this thread, so clearly it's got to be a pretty minor group if it even is one.

My guess is it's southern Catholics getting mixed in with Prots and Pentecostals.

Right. they didn't mumble nonsense at Pentecost, they were just understood by foreigners despite being Galilean The use of the term speaking in tongues for when you're convulsing possessed isn't based on any biblical terminology.

Wrong. Classical evangelicalism has always rejected charismaticism, and we're the most vocal opponents. See the "Strange Fire" conference.
Catholic charismatics comprise the largest single group of charismatics.

Just be happy you can see the heretics out in the open user.

Go to your nearest valid or licit parish (be It NO or otherwise), and read the saints and pray.

God will sort the rest.

...

That's 10 percent. It's substantive.
First you tried to say they must not be significant or even exist because you hadn't heard of them, now you're trying to downplay the significance of a 120 million member group in your church. You're moving the goalposts.

Guess we're not getting any introspection. It's just those dirty protestants's fault, right? Nevermind the fact that confessional Protestantism has always denounced it as a different religion.

Sorry I never knew
No, I'm just saying that only 10% of Catholics means it's reasonable I could go my whole life without meeting one. America is already a minority catholic country.
I never applied any morality to the situation.
Of course they would.
Firstly, the last remark is just rude and immature. Secondly, this isn't a reformation, this is an optional practice.

What the hell is wrong with you, thinking that further fracturing the body of Christ is a good thing?
Have you realized that the the unsightly onslaught on western culture was a result of this stupidity which allowed for enlightenment philosophy to cultivate and ended up killing hundreds of millions because of the backwards method of thinking that man can somehow reveal more about God than the other way around?

This is exactly what a modern Catholic would say. You think you are traditional, but you are simply reactionary. Your admonition would have fallen on deaf ears during the times Catholics actually had to physically defend blood and soil.
Don't let your rootlessness get the best of you. Catholics have no nation, so no justification for violence anymore, but there is still much a layperson can do.
The least you can do is donate to Church Militant or some shit.
This effete helplessness is as much a function of modernism as anything else going on in the Church that you are against.

Of course the Catholic Church has always had internal disagreements, but liberalism presents its own unique set of challenges.
I think what you are trying to say is the deposit of faith. The issue is that the deposit of faith is supposed to be passed down by the Magisterium, but if it fails its duty, a Catholic has little recourse but his own judgement. Hence the fracturing of reactionary elements in the Church.
If you are "traditional" in that you do not agree with the changes done to the Roman rite, and you believe that it even harms the spiritual development of the laity, then in order to save souls, I would take the pragmatic approach and support the lay organizations and Societies that are most effectively raising Catholic consciousness and lobbying the Holy See for the restoration of the post-Trent, pre-Vatican-II Catholic order.
A good example of a lay organization that is raising consciousness is Church Militant, although it is mostly a news organization.
A good example of a successful Society that is trying to create actual change in the Vatican is SSPX. FSSP is not sufficiently challenging the liturgical and doctrinal changes to the Church and is thus only there as recourse if you don't have an SSPX in your area, although that is unlikely since even though FSSP is fully "in communion" with the Holy See, whereas SSPX has just had Pope Francis' "grace extended", SSPX is actually considerably larger than FSSP.
This is actually surprising given the vile things said about SSPX by Novus Ordo priests and their laity. It really speaks to the real motivations behind those who attend Latin mass: it isn't merely a preference, for them; they tacitly believe that it saves more souls and is thus the only way to participate in the Holy Sacrifice.

Attached: trinity_1.jpg (800x450 196.74 KB, 91.82K)

And what of those who can't see the heretics? Those who actually look to them as spiritual authorities?
This is not Christian. Christians have a duty to save souls, not live cloistered lives. Unless you are apart of a monastery, which is unlikely since you are on the internet, what you are advocating for is a sin against charity.

Stop with the SSPX bullshit. If you wanted to help the Church, you wouldn't leave it.

I'll give you a secret: the SSPX are within the Church.

Is it possible to be this blue-pilled in 2019?

Also, I love the double standard. On the one hand, much k'vetching is heard about how SSPX masses are "valid but illicit" simply because the priests believe the old ways save more souls; on the other hand, any degree of liberal heresies could be spread by the likes of Cardinal Cupish (giving communion to homosexuals) or Bishop Barron (Jews can go to heaven) and they remain "valid and licit" simply because the Holy See is complicit.
And because of how the Pope is the Vicar of Christ, we will only "know" that Pope Francis is heretical. Which is why you see so many traditional Catholics chanting the passive "all we can do is wait and pray" mantra. If a Catholic is traditional and is of this type, he almost certainly attends FSSP and not SSPX.
Again, as I've said before, if you believe the old ways save more souls, which is what you implicitly assert when you attend the Latin mass (I do not believe you when you say you "just like it better"), you have a duty to your fellow man to stand with SSPX and lobby for a pre-liberal revanchist restoration of the rites.

Mind you, Cupich and Barron are "valid and licit" priests, and yet they actively condemn souls when the peddle such liberal heresies. In the end, the Catholic layperson should care about the state of their soul and the state of their brothers' souls; not whether the current Pope sees something as "illicit," which is a bookish canonical term as meaningless as the canon is revised.

Why is it ok to be "illicit"? Because, agree or disagree, there is a "state of necessity" in the Church:
>sspx.org/en/state-necessity
Far be it from sufficient, the FSSP "personal preference" position is actually detrimental to the efforts of restoration. That is why everyone currently attending an FSSP mass needs to find their nearest SSPX mass and go there instead, bringing as many friends from the FSSP as they can using the argumentation laid out above.

I do believe souls should be warry in these times, and you are right that valid and licit priests do and csn stray souls. But that does not excuse leaving the church. No matter how things get, you must always stay with the church Christ created. Just think how it must've been in the 1500's. Corruption is rapent in the Church and people are about ready to leave as they think the Church is lost. But it was never lost, and recovered. However, many souls became lost due to falling in with corruption or protesting against the Church. Don't get me wrong, tradition is important and what the SSPX originally did was alright. But leaving the Church because you deem it's lost is never the correct thing to do. Helping your fellow man does not mean you have to leave. We should all pray not only that the Church heals, but that these lost souls return as well.

You're damning souls if you have them leave the Church the Lord started. It almost makes me wonder how the 16th century reformers would have an effect on you if you lived back then.

Oh, the SSPX had the idea of using Lutheran tables as altars? Oh, the SSPX say that Mass is just a meal (like the official Novus Ordo rubrics) and not a propitiatory sacrifice? They have the Lutheran understanding of the Eucharist that Francis recently espoused? Oh, the SSPX believe in the Lutheran idea of the "priesthood of the people"? Ask yourself: who are the real Lutherans? Lefebvre would often get attacked in that manner, but if you're of good will, ask yourself who really is like Luther. It's the modernists.

This is the chastisement, user. Don't think the shepherd hasn't been struck and the flock scattered before. It may be trite by now, but keep in mind the Arian crisis. I think we will suffer and the flock will be scattered, but the Lord has given us many opportunities to repent and participate in true religion. The internet has given us unprecedented access to orthodoxy that churchgoers in the 20th century had to do without. It is incumbent upon us to admonish the errors of the modernists to anyone we are able, that the chastisement may end and we may return to giving glory to God.

Lots of words, and taking your comparison to the Protestant Reformation at face value (they, too, protested changes in the church, like priestly celibacy and the corruption of indulgences) – it all boils down to a single claim: that the SSPX is not "within" the Church. What does that mean to do?

to you* in that, why do you believe this is true? The SSPX sacraments are valid, user, more valid than the Orthodox Church, and yet the same liberal priests who condemn the SSPX for being "in schism" (which is not true, since those in schism do not recognize the authority of the Pope – the SSPX does and is why it's fighting so hard) those who condemn the SSPX for being "in schism" are the same ones who welcome the Orthodox Church and even Muslims with open arms in the spirit of ecumenism.
Where is the ecumenism for your grandfather's beliefs?

The same Catholic priests who will demure to Jews and say that by God's grace the Jews will also go to heaven will viciously condemn anyone who even thinks about attending an SSPX. Suddenly, their ecumenism is nowhere to be found.

I have a question for you, do you believe in God's will more or the will of man? Because if you trusted God, you would obviously stay in his Church no matter what.

SSPX parishes are within the Church because the sacraments are valid according to the Supreme Pontiff. That is my definition of a priest and his parish being “in the Church”.
I asked you a direct question on what you mean by in/within the Church, since it is clearly different than mine, and you repeated the phrase. Why can’t you articulate your reasons why you believe the SSPX is outside the Church?

Right in the feels. Our main local one loves to give lectures on "muh refugees" & "human trafficking" in any and all occasions possible, because it's not Christianity without quasi-Leftist moral posturing apparently. I've even tried explaining that the 2 issues are intrinsically connected & part of why borders are a thing and illegal immigration is a bad thing, but it doesn't help. How is this crap every parish?

Pray the Ave and wait.

The SSPX Mass is illicit and not on good terms with the Catholic Church as a whole. They may be fine to for communion according to the Church, but you're still not technically apart of it. I know you love tradition and I pray it returns to the Church as much as you. But you gotta ask yourself, is it worth going to a Church not fully ingrained with Christ just so you seem more devout?

Do not say it is in every parish. Some parishes focus on the faith and the importance to love and follow Christ. And refugees amd human trafficking is fine to preech as long as it remains Catholic and not political. I would understand your frustration if it was political.

(First off: I am not a Sede). But, even at that time, we never had an Arian Pope. Let's say that the 90%+ majority Arians had gotten one of their own elected pope. Since they had wrested control of the hierarchy at that point, including episcopal appointments, etc, it would not be possible to depose this Arian "Pope" as needed. Consequently, this Arian "Pope" might go on to define various dogmas… including, perhaps, Arianism itself. Consequently, the theory that such a pope goes into a quarantine situation, as articulated by John of Saint Thomas, works the best. As someone noted earlier on this thread, what "good of the Church" comes from a heretically-depraved Pope holding jurisdiction? Undoubtedly all the theologians who speculated about the heretical pope theory envisioned a Pope who held a single isolated heresy… vs a Modernist holding many heresies bent on destroying and then changing the Church.

Is there really a heretical popoe though? Sure modernism is bad as it's lazy faith and could lead to heresy, but not necessarily always lead to it. Again, has dogma been changed? Last time I checked, there were still Latin Masses in good standing with the Church.