Koram🇻🇦

@JamesEwen0407 Sigh. There's obviously no point in engaging here, but think about the question. Ponder it. I'll pray that our Lady, Mediatrix of All Graces, intercede on your behalf. If you trust the visible, apostolic Church to assemble your Bible, you should trust its interpretation.

@KoramProNobis There is no if, you're not a Christian, you don't have the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and you can't understand the Bible because it's spiritual and you are not spiritual, you are of the flesh. 1 Corinthians 2:14. You're an analogy doesn't work here.

Here is the pagan religion of Catholicism crowning their leader, which is a idol of a dead person, that isn't God. Catholicism is nothing more than a pagan religion that will send people to hell who follow its teachings.

@JamesEwen0407 Hence the word “if.” Imagine I’m an Anglo-Catholic with a high Mariology. The question remains: 2 people can in good faith differ in scripture interpretation. But if scripture is the highest authority, which interpretation should we go with?

@KoramProNobis Well first off you don't believe in solar scriptura, You worship idols and you worship a false god that you call Mary. Your agenda is not to worship Christ, but to protect your false religion. Doesn't apply here, because you're not a Christian.

@JamesEwen0407 And I say it refers to the Blessed Virgin. Now, if we believe in sola scriptura, how shall we go about deciding which of our two interpretations of Scripture is correct?

@KoramProNobis That's a great verse or groups of verses I should say that describe Israel very well, and it's very obvious, so you trying to make it mary is very pathetic. And it shows you have no idea about prophecy or about the Bible for that matter

The more damning quote is him saying that SSPX *is* starting a new religion. But by that logic, SSPX would already be a new religion after the 1988 consecrations. I don't think TM believes there's truly a crisis in the Church. But SSPX-related ideas and content gets views...

The back cover of Taylor Marshall's book Infiltration in 2019 vs. what he said on X today: - "In the mid-19th century ... clandestine societies populated by Modernists and Marxists hatched a plan to subvert the Catholic Church from within. Their goal: to change Her doctrine, Her liturgy, and Her mission." - "Vatican II does NOT 'teach a new religion."

@ViriCenturione He also requested, and was granted permission, to keep saying the TLM privately after the Mass of Paul VI was promulgated.

Padre Pío vivio confinado muchos años pues fue cancelado por sus propios hermanos que no creyeron en sus llagas. La muchedumbre iba a verlo a su ventana.

@TheBadTrad @kennedyhall What attitude? All the things he mentioned are those that faithful Roman Catholics should feel righteous indignation at.

Honest question: If, as the SSPX claims they don’t have a schismatic attitude, why do so many of the laity who attend SSPX Masses say the same exact thing as this person did? How is this attitude any different than a full-on sede’s? Where do they get this attitude? Not from the clergy? I ask this respectfully.

It is often said that the SSPX sets itself up as if it is the only body of priests that can provide for souls, because the Church "can't." For one, this isn't true for a number of reasons, and for evidence of this, you can find working relationships between Society priests and various other priests and even Bishops in some dioceses. If they thought that no one else could help souls, then they wouldn't bother. In addition, the priests of the SSPX are of the Church, so their actions are the Church's actions. By doing their work, they are quite literally doing the work of the Church, the same way any priest who hears a confession does so for the Church. Their activity is not a condemnation of the Church's ability to save, but rather a confirmation of it.

A common misunderstanding I see among Catholics regarding the SSPX involves a facile and erroneous likening of the Society to Martin Luther and/or Protestantism in general. The claim is made: the SSPX, like Luther, substitutes their private judgment for that of the Church’s Magisterium. So I’d like to bring a little clarity here: the principal issue with Martin Luther, as with all heretics, is the substitution of private judgment for the Magisterium on mysteries of faith. Luther denied the papacy, many of the sacraments, the need for good works, etc. All of these truths of faith are matters of infallible Magisterial teaching. The principal issue with the SSPX is fundamentally different. With the Society, the issue is obedience and the allegation of schism, not heresy. And this difference is significant. They do not deny any infallibly-defined truth of faith. They don’t, like Luther and other heretics, substitute their private judgment for Magisterial teaching. Regarding schism, it’s truly a difficult matter - one about which doctoral dissertations in Canon Law have been written (for example, Fr. Gerald Murray from EWTN wrote an important dissertation on the Society and schism). The Society does not intend to set up a hierarchical/juridical structure parallel to that of Christ’s Church. But their bishops do materially disobey the pope when consecrating new bishops (as in 1988 and, forthcoming in July). Whether that amounts to formal (and culpable) disobedience is a matter of genuine good-faith debate. So one of the essential questions to resolve, theologically and canonically, is whether or not that material disobedience is permissible (something all law - divine, natural, and human - has always recognized): for example, speeding in a 25 mph zone to get someone to the hospital before they bleed to death. Honest and good theologians and canonists on all sides of this issue recognize that this is not a simple matter. It really isn’t like Lutheranism or Protestantism at all. And unlike in matters of defined dogmas, the Church is not infallible in her juridical decisions (see, e.g., St. Joan of Arc).

no idea what i thought the Deep South would look like, but i did not expect “mountainous rainforest”

@CathoConser It actually makes perfect sense. Satan wants a watered-down faith. He wants a Liturgy that hides Christ's propitiatory sacrifice; that trades the Sacrificial Altar for a Thanksgiving Table. He wants you focused on the "work of human hands," not Christ's work on the Cross.

It truly is insane that the corner of Catholicism that is actually growing is the one the hierarchy is trying to destroy

@cnalive This "partial communion" stuff is interesting, could you please post a Church Father discussing what I'm sure is an age-old idea universally believed by all Bishops throughout time?

The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) went from full communion with Rome to formal rupture in less than two decades, a break that has never been fully healed. ewtnnews.com/vatican/sspx-a…

@nytimesmusic ...

The New York Times Magazine named the 30 Greatest Living American Songwriters. Here are more contenders, including Billy Joel, Frank Ocean and Neko Case. nytimes.com/2026/04/28/art…

No. “Judica me, Deus.”

Stale i nieodwołalnie ta fotografia, której autorem jest Martin Martinček (lubię poetykę jego prac), robi na mnie duże wrażenie. Lata 60-te i (Czecho)Słowacja. Dwóch mężczyzn klęka przed niesionym przez księdza Przenajświętszym Sakramentem. Z tego co wiem kapłan idzie z wiatykiem do umierającego. Mężczyźni mogą wiedzieć o kogo chodzi. Powaga. p.s Kiedyś to zdjęcie gościło na moim profilu. Pamiętam, że pojawiło się wówczas trochę zjadliwych a czasem zwyczajnie prymitywnych komentarzy. A to, że ciemne chłopy klękają w błocie przed facetem w sukience. Albo, że głupsi są od tego bydła bo bydło stoi a oni klęczą he he he. No cóż, czasem i tak bywa.

For it is a master-stroke of Satan to get Catholics to disobey the whole of Tradition in the name of obedience. -Abp. Lefebvre

@GunsNAmerica @MeltingSnowBro As a Catholic, I chalk it up to poor catechesis, mixed with peoples' natural desire to play a role in their nation's founding. When correctly catechized, it makes perfect sense, because Modernism/Liberalism/Americanism/French Revolution/Protestantism are all deeply connected.

@MeltingSnowBro I don’t understand why Catholics can’t just accept America is a Protestant nation based on Protestant, Christian ideas and ideals, we literally didn’t include a monarchy and we systemically don’t trust those in political authority due to their human nature

Even if you divide protestants into seven or eight different groups, we're still the majority in half the country.

@BaptistBen316 This isn't the slam dunk you think it is when you learn about the "Stonecutter" roots of Liberalism, Protestantism, Americanism, and the French Revolution.

The United States was not built on Catholicism, it was built on Protestantism. This country was supposed to be a Christian safe haven not Catholic or Orthodox.

@VitaDevotionis @MarkTezak @PaulinusOfTrier The legal and moral basis for the consecrations is the state of necessity, which you can’t appeal to if you consecrate more than strictly necessary. At the very least, the argument weakens if they were to consecrate 20 Bishops.

@MarkTezak @PaulinusOfTrier Do you know why they’re only planning to consecrate 4 bishops? I would have thought that they would require several more bishops since the society has grown quite large since 1988.

I saw Fr Pagliarani again in Rome last August. What a great holy priest. My first choice for Bishop on July 1st

Sólo pidió q le “permitieran” consagrar un obispo por el rito por el que él había sido consagrado, q es el único que confiere el sacramento, para que pudiese ordenar sacerdotes por el único rito que confiere el sacramento, que continuasen administrando los verdaderos sacramentos.