Replies

Meanwhile you have no explanation for why the Novus Ordo teaches a religion contrary to the Catholic Faith of 1960 years. That doesn’t mean Christ broke His promise. If the Novus Ordo religion was the same as the Catholic Faith then that would mean that Christ broke His promise. But it isn’t. The Catholic Church and the Catholic Faith is still alive and well in those who believe it and profess it.

Anyone who believes that Christ through His Church would condemn prayer with non-Catholics and then change His teaching hundreds of years later to the complete opposite are the ones who believe that Christ has broken His promise (either that or they are Modernists themselves and don’t even realize it). The subsequent, contrary teachings can NOT be Christ’s teachings because that would make Him a liar.

And I even haven’t touched upon the contrary Novus Ordo teachings on the nature of the Catholic Church (ecclesiology), false ecumenism, and religious liberty.

When Jesus Christ overturned the tables of the moneychangers at the Temple (which He referenced as His Father's house), was the Temple a Catholic Church? Or was Jesus there just to do some carpentry work? When, in His youth He was teaching the rabbis in the Temple, was it then a Catholic Church? Were all the worshipers there Catholics? Are you reading Jesus out of the Church as a Heretic? Interesting.

Also, Peter, a decidedly pre-Vatican II figure in Chrch history got grief for eating with non-Jews (presumably also non-Catholics). Does that mean that Peter, our very first pope was also excommunicated? Other than the fact that we are not told of Peter or any apostle being baptized.

Sede vacantism is NOT Catholicism. You have a problem with religious liberty? Why am I not surprised? What do you suppose true ecumenism would be?

And, oh how convenient is your claim that "The Catholic Church and the Catholic Faith is still alive and well in those who believe it and profess it." This means that the Church founded by Jesus Christ exists only among those who are sedevacantists and agree with your eccentric views.

That will give schismatics hope that, in spite of Marcel's massacre of his priestly vow of obedience, in spite of his defiant disobedience in taking upon himself the papal role of choosing and consecrating bishops of his own choosing against the direct orders of Pope St. John Paul II, despite his having been excommunicated and dying apparently quite unrepentant, old Marcel may have made it to heaven after all. Don't bet the eternal disposition of your soul on it.