Ping
Pachapapa Francis is a heretic.
Heretical practices long-approved by Vatican II, not supported by Sacred Scripture, Tradition, Ecumenical Councils, innumerable popes, saints, etc, that Bergoglio is facilitating for his so-called “unique expression” of the Mass:
A.) 1.) Lay people may be commissioned to proclaim Biblical readings at Mass, except for the Gospel reading which is reserved to clerics.
2.) Lay people may act as Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, distributing Holy Communion with the priest, when not enough ordinary ministers or instituted acolytes are available.
3.) In countries where the bishops’ conference has obtained permission from the Holy See, the consecrated host may be received on the hand, rather than directly into the mouth.
4.) Women and girls may act as altar servers if this is approved by the diocesan bishop & if the parish priest chooses to implement it.
These are in opposition to B.) Sacred Scripture (the disciples in Luke 22, Matt. 26, Mark 14) weren’t laypeople and thus were allowed to receive the host in their hands, and Judas’ sinning wasn’t known and priests prohibit the host to the mortally-sinning unrepentant when it is known) and 1-4 above are in opposition to the following:
C.) 1.) St. Sixtus 1 (c. 115): “The Sacred Vessels are not to be handled by others than those consecrated to the Lord.”
2.) Pope St. Eutychian (275-283)
Forbade the faithful from taking the Sacred Host in their hand.
3) St. Basil the Great, Doctor of the Church (330-379): “The right to receive Holy Communion in the hand is permitted only in times of persecution.”
St. Basil the Great considered communion in the hand so irregular that he did not hesitate to consider it a grave fault.
4.) The Council of Saragossa (380): Excommunicated anyone who dared continue receiving Holy Communion by hand.
5.) This was confirmed by the Synod of Toledo.
6.) Saint Leo the Great read the sixth chapter of Saint John’s Gospel as referring to the Eucharist (as all the Church Fathers did).
Pope St. Leo the Great (440-461)
Energetically defended and required faithful obedience to the practice of administering Holy Communion on the tongue of the faithful.
7.) The Synod of Rouen (650)
Condemned Communion in the hand to halt widespread abuses that occurred from this practice, and as a safeguard against sacrilege.
The Council of Rouen (650): “Do not put the Eucharist in the hands of any layman or laywoman but *only in their mouths.”
8.) The Sixth Ecumenical Council, at Constantinople (680-681)
Forbade the faithful to take the Sacred Host in their hand, threatening transgressors with excommunication.
9.) St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274)
“Out of reverence towards this sacrament [the Holy Eucharist], nothing touches it, but what is consecrated; hence the corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priest’s hands, for touching this sacrament.” (Summa Theologica, Part III, Q. 82, Art. 3, Rep. Obj. 8)
10.) The Council of Trent (1545-1565) “The fact that only the priest gives Holy Communion with his consecrated hands is an Apostolic Tradition.”
11.) Pope Paul VI (1963-1978)
“This method [on the tongue] must be retained.” (Memoriale Domini)
12.) Pope John Paul II
To touch the sacred species and to distribute them with their own hands is a privilege of the ordained. (Dominicae Cenae, 11).
D.) 1.) But, as the article states He [Francis] writes: “The liturgical books promulgated by Saint Paul VI and Saint John Paul II, in conformity with the decrees of Vatican Council II, are the unique expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.” Look at this and compare it to 11 and 12 and then with the following:
2.) “Pope Francis is now putting forth that the current missal — and not the 1962 missal — is the “unique expression of the lex orandi.”
Problem is, 11 and 12 and D 1.) from Francis don’t line up with D. 2) from Francis and given what is shown in A, 1-4.
Did these saints, popes, infallible, binding Councils, etc, commit error, teach lies, dispense falsehoods, and not promulgate truth or has Vatican 2 and the Vat 2 popes done this? Does truth change? Does Sacred Scripture (as shown in B) change? How can Vatican II and its popes undo Sacred Scripture?
E.) Concerning the 6th Ecumenical Council and the Council of Trent for C, 8:
1.) was the 6th Ecumenical Council wrong in promulgating this? Was it in error even though popes then and innumerable ones afterwards agreed with it? Were they in error to do so and promulgate it? Was it true then to do this but not a true thing to do now? Does truth change? If not, then it is binding upon Vat II popes and Vat II popes and they must promulgate it as truth is binding and cannot be changed.
Concerning the Council of Trent (19th Ecumenical Council) in C, 10) which 2a.) also declared the Latin Mass cannot be abrogated, was it in error to declare 2b.) this is truly an “Apostolic Tradition”? Was it wrong in promulgating 2a and 2b? Was they in error on both though popes then and innumerable ones afterwards agreed with it? Was it true then for both but not true now? Does truth change?
Can Popes change truth established for 2k years?
If not for all the aforementioned for the 6th and 19th, then Vatican II and Vatican II popes must abide by them and promulgate them. If they are correct, then Vat II and Vat II popes would be undermining binding and infallible Ecumenical Councils that possess dogmatic force whereas Pope Pius VI said Vatican II was not infallible and 2 popes after him said Vat II did not possess dogmatic force. Or did the church begin in 1962, the first Ecumenical Council then, and the first papacy came into being then with nothing before them to adhere to?
F.) Vat II facilitated the heretical Nostra Aetate to falsely make Christ-denying Islam palatable and salvific.
G.) John XXIII altered the Good Friday Prayer, thus bringing an attack upon Christ’s own words in Jn. 8:21-24 which declared faithlessness on the Jews part would damn them:
[21] Again therefore Jesus said to them: I go, and you shall seek me, and you shall die in your sin. Whither I go, you cannot come.*
[22] The Jews therefore said: Will he kill himself, because he said: Whither I go, you cannot come? [23] And he said to them: You are from beneath, I am from above. You are of this world, I am not of this world. [24]. John XXIII’s move was a capitulation similar to the one fomented against Pope St. Peter but refuted by him in Acts 4:12 which bolstered Christ’s words.
F and G both encapsulate the religious indifferentism promoted and promulgated by Vatican II which declares man is free to choose any religion he deems true in the light of his own conscience and reason and through it obtain salvation, which is refuted by Sacred Scripture per Jesus Christ’ own words in Mt. 7:14, 16:16-18; Jn. 10:7-9, 14:6, Pope St. Peter in Acts 4:12, by the Council of Trent, Pope Pius the 9th in the Syllabus of Errors, and more.
H.) The Roman Catholic Church is not governed by legal positivism.
I.) It is time for all faithful Catholics to stand side-by-side and truly unite the clans through uncompromisingly upholding and faithfully living the holy traditions that have been handed on to us by our ancestors in the Faith. Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle. -2 Thessalonians 2:14
J.) The same, Pope St. Peter, right after Jesus conferred the keys to him and made him his Vicar, was told by Jesus “Get thee behind me Satan” St. Paul opposed Pope St. Peter to his face in Galatians chapter 2, and Pope Honorius I was anathematized, thus all establishing that Popes can be criticized and opposed.