PATRICK HENRY writes at JMJsite.com:

[THIS] YouTube video has received a lot of views, and a lot of comments, and a number of other people making YouTube videos about “Father” James Altman’s YouTube video. In his video, “Father” Altman listed 20 cases of Francis/Bergoglio preaching heresy – and therefore he could not be the head and Pope of the Catholic Church. Because Bergoglio is not the Pope and not the head of the Catholic Church; it follows that the Conciliar Novus Ordo sect of which Bergoglio is actually the head – is not the Catholic Church. A more serious problem then the single fact that Francis/Jorge Bergoglio is not the Pope, is the fact that the Conciliar Novus Ordo sect is not the Catholic Church! Obviously, the true fact that the Conciliar Novus Ordo sect is not the Catholic Church is nothing new! That truth has been known for decades by hundreds of thousands of people. Bishop Francis Schuckardt told thousands of people that truth back in the 1960s. Years ago, Rev. Peter Scott (a priest of SSPX) stated at least 20 times in just one article that the Conciliar Novus Ordo sect is a new non-Catholic religion. It even seems ironically, jeeringly, oddly, and mockingly that Rev. Peter Scott uses the very documents and decrees of Vatican II that Archbishop Marcel 2 Lefebvre, Bishop Thuc, and the other Vatican II Council Fathers signed and promulgated to bring into existence this new non-Catholic Conciliar church!

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre told the world in 1976 that the church he helped bring into existence is not the Catholic Church: “This Conciliar church is, therefore, not Catholic. To whatever extent Pope, Bishops, priests, or faithful adhere to this new church, they separate themselves from the Catholic Church.”

Who started the heretical Arian religion, if not a former Catholic bishop who forsook, rejected, and renounced the Catholic faith? Who started the heresy of Nestorianism, if not a former Catholic bishop who forsook, rejected, and renounced the Catholic faith? Who started the Lutheran heresy, if not a former Catholic priest who forsook, rejected, and renounced the Catholic faith? Who started the new non-Catholic Conciliar Novus Ordo sect if not former Catholic bishops who forsook, rejected, and renounced the Catholic faith – and signed the heretical decrees of Vatican Council II – and thereby brought into existence this new non-Catholic religion? Yes, it is an undeniable fact that the men known as Pope Paul VI, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Bishop Thuc, and several thousand other formally Catholic bishops rejected the teachings of the Catholic Church and brought into existence this new religion. The new non-Catholic Conciliar Novus Ordo sect did not and could not just pop into existence out of nowhere. It is clear that it was brought into existence in 1965 by the men known as Pope Paul VI, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Bishop Thuc, and several thousand other formally Catholic bishops who rejected the teachings of the Catholic Church when they signed the heretical decrees of Vatican Council II.

There is very interesting, important, and instructive information in the August-September, and OctoberNovember, 1985, issues of the Reign of Mary published by CMRI. Both issues state the following:

“The Second Vatican Council did meet during the years 1962-65 to discuss (and pervert) doctrine (witness the ‘Dogmatic Decree of the Doctrine of the Faith’). It is important to note that all the decrees of Vatican II were closed by this, or a similar epilogue: ‘Each and every one of the things set forth in this decree has won the consent of the Fathers. We, too, …join with the Venerable Fathers in approving, decreeing, and establishing these things…’ (There follows the signatures of Paul VI and the Fathers of the Council.) Now these statements, as we have explained in past issues, constitute an exercise of the Teaching Magisterium of the Church. But there is obvious heresy contained in these decrees. Therefore, those who put their signature to these decrees have made themselves culpable for the heresies they contain. They are public heretics and incur penalties as provided for in Church law for all who are guilty of public heresy. Thus we must reject Vatican II as a false council and regard all those who promote and encourage it as public heretics, outside the Catholic Church founded by Jesus Christ.”

To sum it up: 1) The decrees of Vatican II contain obvious heresy. 2) Anyone who signed any of these heretical decrees made himself culpable of public heresy. 3) Those who signed did incur penalties and are guilty of public heresy. 4) We must regard all who promote and encourage it as public heretics, outside the Catholic Church founded by Jesus Christ.

Do you think that “Father” James Altman will ever prove himself to be an honest man searching for the truth? Since he correctly teaches Bergoglio is not the Pope, then why does he think that the man known as Saint John Paul II is canonized – knowing that that was the work of Bergoglio! Will Mr. (“Father”) James Altman come forth and acknowledge that he has never been ordained a priest? The non-popes of this new non-Catholic Conciliar Novus Ordo sect have changed multitudes of teachings of the Catholic Church. Among them was the fact that by 1969, anti-Pope Paul VI changed enough things so that they no longer have valid ordinations and consecrations in the new non-Catholic Conciliar Novus Ordo sect! The result is that “Father” James Altman is no more of a Catholic priest then the female mailman that delivers your snail mail, junk mail. However, this pertains to thousands of people who act like they were Catholic priests or bishops – but the truth is they are not ordained or consecrated. The results should be obvious! Because they do not have the power of Holy Orders or the power of jurisdiction they cannot offer the holy sacrifice of the Mass, absolve from sins in the confessional, or do anything that requires priestly ordinations and/or episcopal consecration! This is indeed very, very 3 serious because millions of the members of this new non-Catholic Conciliar Novus Ordo sect do not attend a valid Mass or receive the Catholic sacraments. Furthermore, it is a gigantic, huge scandal that the general population of the world thinks that this new non-Catholic Conciliar Novus Ordo sect is actually the Catholic Church founded by Jesus Christ!

Pope Pius XII clearly taught how bishops receive jurisdiction. Furthermore, the same pope later explained in greater detail what he truly meant in the dogmatic letter, Mystici Corporis Christi, elaborating on it in his encyclical, Ad Apostolorum Principis, June 29, 1958. Let us read paragraphs 39 and 40, as we listen attentively to the voice of Jesus Christ Himself:

“39. Granted this exception, it follows that bishops who have been neither named nor confirmed by the Apostolic See, but who, on the contrary, have been elected and consecrated in defiance of its express orders, enjoy no powers of teaching or of jurisdiction since jurisdiction passes to bishops only through the Roman Pontiff as We admonished in the encyclical letter Mystici Corporis in the following words: ‘. . . As far as his own diocese is concerned each (bishop) feeds the flock entrusted to him as a true shepherd and rules it in the name of Christ. Yet in exercising this office they are not altogether independent but are subordinate to the lawful authority of the Roman Pontiff, although enjoying ordinary power of jurisdiction which they receive directly from the same Supreme Pontiff.’”

“40. And when We later addressed to you the letter Ad Sinarum gentem, We again referred to this teaching in these words: ‘The power of jurisdiction which is conferred directly by divine right on the Supreme Pontiff comes to bishops by that same right, but only through the successor of Peter, to whom not only the faithful but also all bishops are bound to be constantly subject and to adhere both by the reverence of obedience and by the bond of unity.’” As proven to those who pray and study, the Conciliar Novus Ordo sect is a new religion. Because it is a new religion, those who claim to be the pope in this new religion are not the Pope of the Catholic Church. Consequently, they cannot pass on the power of jurisdiction to anyone. However, we just learned that jurisdiction passes to bishops only through the Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter.

Christian Apologetics by Revs. W. Devivier, S. J. and Joseph C. Sasia, S. J., Imprimi potest, Joseph M. Piet, S. J; Imprimatur Patritius L. Ryan, Archdiocese of San Francisco, August 16, 1924, Copyright 1924 by Joseph P. Wagner, New York, provides very important information because since 1965 the world has a new nonCatholic religion, often referred to as the Conciliar Novus Ordo sect. Neither the bishops in the Conciliar Novus Ordo sect, nor the Traditional Movement bishops living today have ever received jurisdiction from the Roman Pontiff. They have no See and no subjects and therefore, no apostolic succession. At the very best, a few of them might possibly go back to the apostles through the power of Orders; but not so much as one of them go back to the apostles through the power of jurisdiction! Consequently, they cannot be the hierarchy in the Catholic Church founded by Jesus Christ! Subsequently, learn the truth from Revs. W. Devivier, and Joseph C. Sasia:

“…a Christian society whose bishops go back to the apostles only through the power of order, and not also through the power of jurisdiction, cannot claim to be apostolic, and consequently cannot be the Church of Christ.”

“Whosoever, therefore, has not received jurisdiction according to those rules… remains without it; and even if he should have received the episcopal character, he does not belong to the hierarchy of jurisdiction. Having no See and no subjects, it is evident that he is not a chief in the Church, and that he does not belong to the Apostolic Succession… To belong to the legitimate line of the pastors of the Church, or to the hierarchy of jurisdiction, it is not enough that a bishop should have received the power of Orders; he must have received besides the mission or authorization to govern a diocese. This statement, which we can deduce from the words of all the Fathers condemning as schismatics bishops occupying usurped sees, is moreover evident enough by itself.”

Rev. Anthony Cekada wrote an article titled: “Traditional Priests, Legitimate Sacraments.” In that article he basically brings forth his teaching that just by the mere fact of being ordained, priests are bound in charity to dispense the sacraments; and consequently, the Church supplies them with jurisdiction.

Exactly contrary to Rev. Anthony Cekada, CMRI, and other Traditionalist Movement clerics; Father Clarence McAuliffe gives us the true teachings of the Catholic Church in his Sacramental Theology (Imprimatur, April 25, 1958, pages 300-303):

“Conclusion 11. No one except a priest can administer the sacrament of penance. To do so, even a priest needs special faculties.

We treat only of the minister who can validly confer the sacrament. Other conditions are prescribed for licit administration.

Explanation of Terms.

1. No one except a priest. A priest is one who has the priestly character bestowed by the sacrament of orders. Hence both bishops and priests are valid ministers. Deacons, subdeacons, all others are excluded.

2. A priest needs special faculties. This means that even an ordained priest must also receive jurisdiction or ruling power in order to absolve validly. Priestly ordination is not enough. The character of the priesthood confers the sanctifying power necessary for the remission of sins, but not the ruling power which every judge must have.

A bishop or priest can receive this power in either of two ways. He may be appointed to a certain office like the bishopric of a diocese or the pastorate of a parish. Such appointments [from a pope or a bishop that has jurisdiction – P.H.] automatically confer faculties to hear confessions. The same faculties can also be obtained by delegation from a superior, as when a bishop grants them to religious priests. But unless a priest has ruling power, he cannot validly absolve. Mere ordination to the priesthood never confers this power.

The Conclusion, then, has two parts. First, no one except a priest can administer the sacrament of penance.

Second, to do so, even a priest needs faculties.

Dogmatic Note:

The first part is of divine faith from the Council of Trent (DB. 920; CT. 809): ‘If anyone says… that priests alone are not the ministers of absolution… let him be anathema.’

The second part is also of divine faith from the same council (DB. 903; CT. 796) when it states that it ratifies as most true what the Church has always held, namely, ‘that the absolution which a priest confers on one over whom he has neither ordinary or delegated jurisdiction ought to be reckoned of no worth.’

From this statement it follows as Catholic doctrine that a priest does not receive faculties by ordination alone. The Council of Trent supposes that the minister is a priest, i.e., validly ordained. Yet it says that his absolution is of no worth unless he has either ordinary or delegated jurisdiction. Consequently, he did not receive this jurisdiction by the mere fact of his ordination.

Part 1. No one except a priest can administer this sacrament…

Part 2. Even a priest needs special faculties.

Proof 2. From theological reasoning. The argument follows in form.

Judicial power involves the exercise of jurisdiction;

But the power to absolve or retain sins is judicial power:

Therefore, the power to absolve or retain sins involves the exercise of jurisdiction.

Proof for the major. A judge binds or looses the wills of men by imposing or liberating from obligations. This involves the exercise of jurisdiction, which he cannot assume on his own authority. He must have public power.

Proof for the minor. It is clear from the second Conclusion.

Proof 3. From the practice of the Church as revealed by the prescriptions of canon law.

The Code of Canon Law (Par. 872) states: ‘Besides the power of orders, the minister, to absolve sins validly, must have either ordinary or delegated power of jurisdiction over the penitent.’

From this declaration it is evident that delegated jurisdiction to absolve is not conferred by priestly ordination or episcopal consecration. That ordinary jurisdiction is not granted follows from the fact that no man receives a parish or diocese by his ordination.”

Thus, we see how Father Clarence McAuliffe wrote and proved that Rev. Anthony Cekada, CMRI, and other Traditionalist Movement clerics err, and commit a great blasphemy, because the Catholic Church teaches: “From this statement it follows as Catholic doctrine that a priest does not receive faculties by ordination alone. The Council of Trent supposes that the minister is a priest, i.e., validly ordained. Yet it says that his absolution is of no worth unless he has either ordinary or delegated jurisdiction. Consequently, he did not receive this jurisdiction by the mere fact of his ordination.”

Rev. Anthony Cekada seeming wrote his article titled “Traditional Priests, Legitimate Sacraments” to teach his conclusion that: “The jurisdiction we traditional Catholic priests possess has been delegated to us from Christ Himself.”

The Catholic Church teaches infallibly the exact opposite of Rev. Anthony Cekada. Let us hear Jesus Christ speak to us again through the encyclical of Pope Leo XIII in Satis Cognitum: “Indeed, Holy Writ attests that the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven were given to Peter alone, and that the power of binding and loosening was granted to the Apostles and to Peter; but there is nothing to show that the Apostles received supreme power without Peter, and against Peter. Such power they certainly did not receive from Jesus Christ.

Saint Francis De Sales reminds us of this very important truth (The Catholic Controversy, p. 70):

“To say the Church errs is to say no less that God errs, or else that He is willing and desirous for us to err; which would be a great blasphemy.”

Do you agree that they preach a great blasphemy who teach the opposite of the infallible Catholic Church in teaching:

1) That just by the mere fact of being ordained, priests are bound in charity to dispense the sacraments; and consequently, the Church supplies them with jurisdiction. And

2) “The jurisdiction we traditional Catholic priests possess has been delegated to us from Christ Himself”?

You can read what Reverend Peter Scott and Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre wrote using this link.

Pope Benedict XV teaches in Humani Generis Redemptionem:

“Ignorance is the mother of all errors, as the Fourth Lateran Council so truthfully observes.”

I invite you to pray and study and dispel my ignorance if I am not correct in my beliefs. Please send me your answers to the numbered questions between the brackets in the articles found at these two hyperlinks, here and here.

Please follow and like us: