Sedeprivationism Leads to Hell

Satan never sleeps. So, be ever-vigilant.

This post will not mean a lot to you if you don’t even know what the issue is, so there is a cliff’s notes version directly below labelled introduction. If you already know what a Novus Ordo impostor clergy is, a fake 2023 “sedevacantist”, an una-cum¹ “sedevacantist”, a sedeprivationist, or finally a 1958 sedevacantist is (i.e. and actual Catholic), then you can skip the intro and go directly to the core post.

If you are a little fuzzy on the above (or even totally ignorant of most of the terms) then the below intro should really help. Let me preface it by saying that it will simply be a summary of the facts. I do not intend to provide exhaustive (or even any) links and references. Mostly because almost all that work has already been done in BELIEVE! and Reclaiming the Catholic Church. This merely aims to explain the concept in very accessible layman’s terms so ANYONE reading it can understand it.

Please be aware that mental retards that start to spout off some mentally retarded nonsense about Catholicism, ignoring the post in order to spout their retardation, will immediately be banned from ever being able to comment again. So, protestants, curb your heretical tongues if you will and instead contemplate this image.

Introduction

The Catholic Church was instituted by Jesus Christ Himself, putting Peter at its head as the first Pope. The Church then put together the Bible some three hundred years after the ascension of Christ, from both written and oral tradition. At this time, the Church already had 300 or so years of Popes, Holy Mass complete with transubstantiation, the perpetual virginity and immaculate conception of Mary and so on. And despite attacks from various Magus, (magicians, wizards, deceivers) described even in the Bible itself, gnostics, heretics and their heresies of all types, not to mention the most barbaric and vicious persecutions by various Roman emperors (and later by various European kins and emperors), the Church continued to grow and spread the gospel.

The schism of the Easter “Orthodox” was nothing more than their usual (aptly named) byzantine politics rooted in worldly matters. Keep in mind that until 1054, literally EVERY Christian until then knew and accepted that the Pope in Rome was the ultimate authority on Church matters wherever and whenever a dispute appeared. In any case, the fact this was mostly just “politics as usual” for the Byzantines, is clearly evidenced by the fact that when they called for help from the Islamic depredations of their cities and lands, some 40 years after splitting from, and rejecting the West and the Pope that had in any even tried his best to reconcile with them, the Catholics immediately mounted the First Crusade, at the behest of Pope Urban II, who gave a rousing speech that convinced the most wealthy and noble families to go so far as sell all their lands and possessions and fund the Crusade to save the Eastern schismatics. And when they started to do so, the Eastern Schismatics immediately made alliances with eh Muslims and literally attacked and tried and kill the Catholic that had saved them. This happened repeatedly and incessantly through the first, second, and third crusade. By the time of the fourth crusade the Venetians had enough and so Constantinople was sacked (rather gently as these things go in history, by the way). The Backstabbing Eastern Schismatics are still whining to this day how the Catholics “massacred them” for no reason at all other than greed. Right.

some 500 years after that we get that maid-raping, nun-fetishists, probably Jewish fake Monk Luther who is at first rejected by everyone, including Henry VIII, until old impotent Henry gets bored of his wife and wants to murder-divorce her, and the Pope say “No. Marriage is for life.” At that point Henry splits from the Church massacres Cathoiliics and steals all their lands, wealth, Churches and so on and invents his own version of religion and by extension gives licence to many other “nobles” on the mainland to do the same. their motives are entirely obvious and historically documented as having to do with money, land and power, and almost precisely nothing with the in any case absurd theological “differences” (wild lies and errors Martin made up) that Protestants supposedly had then with Catholicism.

From this time on, it became increasingly required for the valid Popes of the Catholic Church to spell out things that everyone including illiterate peasants had always known, understood and never questioned. But as is Satan’s way, the gnostics, various tribes of Satanists, and the entirely Satanic Freemasons, whose temples the flaming homosexual and heretic King James instituted as we find them today, along with his version of the “Bible” which aside having already been severely edited by Luther had also been edited by the enemies of christ (the Pharisees) for 700 years, and which today contains more than 33,000 “errors” of translation. This is the “Bible” revered by the most retarded of the Protestants sects, the KJV, also known as the Freemason Bible, which is basically saying the Satanic bible, because Freemasonry is absolutely, 100% Satanism, and anyone who says otherwise is simply an outrageous liar (i.e. Satanist).

So… as a result of the hydra-like spawning of the people rebelling against God’s Church and “Protesting” it, Popes (the valid ones anyway, because there have been more than 40 anti-popes even before 1958) had to start issuing papal encyclicals that spelt out in autistic detail, what everyone who had not been deceived and lied to by these heretics. So things like Cum Ex Apostolato Officio, which says the most obvious and logical thing, which is, if you behave like a heretic, guess what, you’re not a Catholic, and therefore not a priest, or bishop, or Pope. You are nothing but a heretic and no one needs to make any big deal about it, nor is an official pronouncement required. Again, this is not rocket science, and yet, there are so many morons on this planet that even if (when?) Bergoglio starts to sacrifice babies on the altar, they will still try to say he really is a Pope.

Nevertheless, this constant having to explain that 2+2 is still 4, has always been 4 and so on, gives the enemies of truth and God, the latitude to say “Aha! It was never 4, you guys only stated that in 1451! This means it was always 3.5!”

And once again, because the average person really is best to just be silent and do as his VALID priest says, a LOT of confusion and lies and infiltration of the Church began to become possible.

In fact, the Satanists (in their Legions of names, be it Illuminati, Freemasons, Carbonari, Golden Dawn, Skull and Crossbones, etc, etc, etc, ad nauseam) began to infiltrate the Church with Satanists, homosexuals, pedophiles and communists (see Bella Dodd and many other Papal encyclicals, most notably by Pious X) in earnest from the late 1770s. And by 1958 had finally managed to make so complete an infiltration that the first of so far an unbroken chain of false Popes was “elected” Angelo Roncalli. And the Church has been absent a Pope and absent ANY valid clergy in the Vatican today.

Vatican II are 16 documents which ALL contain direct reversal of positions the real Catholic Church always had unchanged for 2 millennia. What the Satanists claim were “changes” are of two sorts:

1. Clarifications of what should already have been obvious to any Catholic because it always was the case. For example: the papal encyclical of Pope Paul the IV, Cum-Ex Apostolate Officio, summarised (and not abrogated) in Canon 188 part 4 of the Code of Canon Law of 1917, which basically states that heretics are not Catholics and a heretic pope is not a Pope, and when this abandonment of the faith is done publicly, regardless of rank, no one needs to say anything officially, nor make a ruling etc. that person is a heretic and should forever be treated as one by all Catholics.

2. Changes to ecclesiastical rules or laws, which is entirely permitted, because these are not divine laws. So for example a rule wa introduced you need 70 cardinals to elect a Pope. This is not a “forever rule” it became necessary as the Church became global in size. But in the current situations, there doesn’t even exist ANY valid Cardinals, and yet, neither did Cardinals exist in the year 250 AD, and the people voting for a Pope were sometimes not even clergy. And it is a dogmatic principle of Catholicism that the truth is immutable, so any divine rule that was true in the past cannot be changed in the future, and vice-versa. The only rules that CAN and HAVE changed are human rules. But a conclave of remaining valid clergy (Only 1958 TOTALIST Sedevacantists are fully and correctly Catholic in their theology) could happen tomorrow to elect a newly valid Pope. Because Sedevacantists number probably a million or two at most (but have HUGE numbers of sympathisers and our numbers keep growing) this would not be wise and the enemy would immediately shout with all the power of their wealth and mass media that this is a ridiculous act by a few crazy people. Not too dissimilar from what the Roman Empire did to the first few actual Catholics, but they are not crucifying us and setting us on fire (yet).

So, in reality, the real rules of the church that matter (divine law) has not changed at all in 2 millennia. And the entirety of these rules were finally put down in ONE document that took years to compile because it required the vetting of some 40,000 documents in total (and maybe several thousands more) to ensure that no aspect of the rulings of all the popes and doctors of the Church expressed in various writings from the start of the Church to 1917 was in any kind of conflict or contradicted each other. In short, the Code of Canon Law of 1917, is the most vetted document humanity has ever created, and was put together by two valid popes (Pious X and Benedict XV) and a college of Cardinals, to ensure no error in it. So, it has the indelible stamp of infallibility, which the magisterium of the Church, as per dogmatic Catholic belief, has.

In short, ALL the rules of the Church and Catholicism can be found in this document and the documents produced by the valid Popes from 1917 to 1958 as official pronouncements ex-cathedra (from the chair of Peter, that is, a Pope can be a completely flawed man, but when he issues a decree officially from his position as Pope of Faith and Morals, we Catholic believe that pronouncement will be supernaturally protected from error, not because the Pope is infallible per se, but because Jesus promised He will always be with us, so a valid Pope cannot pronounce a heretical document.)

Now… according to the CoC of 1917, Roncalli, and all the other impostors became heretics by producing, promoting and promulgating the heretical Vatican II documents. In short, the ONLY actual Catholic clergy left are those that reject everyone who promoted and did not refute Vatican II and all its heresy.

Anyone claiming to be “Catholic clergy” who does not reject all of Vatican II and its fake “Popes” is absolutely NOT a Catholic, never mind validly ordained clergy.

Right… if you have followed that, we now have reached the issue about sedeprivationism vs sedevacantism, which, ultimately, as it turns out, is just the latest Satanic attack against the last remaining Catholics.

A last point before we get into the autistic level details (what, you thought the above was convoluted? Wait, you sweet innocent!): Some lost souls, like Ann Bernhardt, pretend that Ratzi the Nazi was a valid Pope, which is of course absurd as he was one of the main architects of Vatican II. Nevertheless these confused souls, illogical morons, or knowing deceivers, whichever the case may be individually, all “believe” that as Ratzi was the “Pope” when he died, because Bergy-the-oleous is clearly a Satanist from all he does, they too suddenly became Sedevacantists. But these are 2023 “Sedevacantists” (when Ratzi went to finally meet his master in Hell), which are, at best, just another deceived mass of well meaning (but erroneous) Catholics.

So, to be clear, when I say Sedevacantists, I am always referring to ACTUAL Sedevacantist, that is, those who recognise we have been without a valid Pope since the 9th of October of 1958; the day Pope Pious XII died.

Now contemplate this little image if you’re thinking Bergy-the-Oleous is still “Pope” instead of the Satanic defiler of the Church he is.

Sede vs Sede

Now we have reached a point that has been brewing behind the scenes for several years.

If you paid attention to the introduction, it should be obvious that the situation with Catholicism today is as follows:

1. A HUGE number of nominal Catholics that are almost entirely ignorant of these details and believe themselves to be Catholics in good faith and are increasingly becoming despondent, disillusioned, let down, distraught, and even leaving Catholicism because the constant heresy of the Pedophile Protector Jorge Bergoglio, pretender to the Throne of Peter, are so outrageous that no sane man can think he really is a Catholic of any sort, never mind a Pope. I mean, the placing of a demonic symbol of a baby-eating demon (Pachamama) on the altar of Christ during supposed Holy Mass, and then doing the ritual to that same demon in the Vatican with a bunch of Cardinals and Bishops, is kind of a clue. If you are deaf, dumb, blind, and have the IQ of a lobotomised rat on crack. To be clear these people ARE catholics, but they have been fooled massively and are in error. However, if they now have read this far, they now have an obligation to educate themselves on these matters or else possibly become guilty of a mortal level sin of sloth. Because we’re not talking about leaving some dishes undone here. We are talking about not taking the time to learn the truth about your supposed faith and thus allegiance to God and Jesus Christ and the Truth above all.

2. A large number of INVALID and FAKE “Catholic” Clergy. These impostors are in the first place NOT validly ordained, because the ritual for ordination was changed and thus made invalid, and in any case, heretics cannot ordain valid clergy. So these are all just impostors in “Catholic” clothing. And even if a few of them might be well-meaning ignorants, then they are at best, criminally incompetent. because being a “priest” and being unaware of these things is like saying you’re an engineer but have no clue what a bending moment is. Sorry buddy, if you really don’t know there is no damned way you should EVER be let near a construction site, or, in their case, the supposed robes of a clergyman. But for the most part these people are absolutely knowing and conscious deceivers, as demonstrated by the homosexual orgies in the Vatican (Coccopalmieri etc.), the scandals of child abuse that have skyrocketed since the 1960s (and even earlier because the infiltration had been ongoing for a long time), and the continued heresies these freaks keep pushing.

3. A small number of still VALID Sedevacantist clergy, that, however, as we have been in an interregnum since 1958 (from the Latin “between realms” the period when one Pope dies and before another valid one is elected) have no jurisdictional authority at all. Because all jurisdictional authority derives from the pope. So in essence, while valid Priests and Bishops can continue to dispense the sacraments, perform Holy Mass, and Bishops can ordain Priests and other Bishops,² but there are no dioceses, and no Bishop nor priest has any authority over a specific territory, congregation, etc. In essence, all Bishops and Priests become first and foremost dispensers of sacraments. And of course, they can keep teaching and doing their duties, but no layman is obligated by anything other than his own sense of what is right and true and his conscience to give his or her loyalty or obedience to any of them, beyond that of not behaving in a way that contravenes Catholicism. What I mean by this is that NO ONE, No Bishop, no Priest has the right to tell a group of lay people “You can’t discuss theology amongst yourselves".” Or, “You can’t take sacraments from THAT guy!” (pointing to another valid clergyman). This point is EXTREMELY IMPORTANT to keep in mind for a little later.

4. Laypeople that are Sedevacantists, are aware of these issues and attend only valid masses given by valid clergy. And herein lies the snake.

Within the Sedevacantist movement, keeping in mind that no Bishop nor priest has any more power than any other. And none have any Jurisdiction over anything, because it all stems from, and is assigned by, the Pope and only a VALID POPE can do that. Again, this is an extremely important point to remember.

Now, the thing about Catholicism is that it is ONE True Church, undivided. So, while the mouth-breathing and drooling retarded protestants, devious Novus Orcians, Eastern Schisatics and other gnostics all want to pretend Sedevacatists are just like protestants because they don’t recognise the Pope, the truth, of course is simply that we don’t recognise a wild otter as the Pope either. And Bergy-the-oleous and Ratzi the Nazi, and Wojtla the Pole, and Luciani the murdered would-be Vatican Banker Investigator, and Roncalli the Freemason, and Montini the handmaiden to Satan, along with all their imps, are no more Catholic than a wild otter either. And possibly considerably less so, in fact. So yeah, we don’t recognise ANY of them as clergy of Catholicism.

I mention that because, while it is true that Catholics are one, this does not mean there aren’t open debates about various theological things. So, if you are Catholic you absolutely must believe in the Trinity and say that conversion to Catholicism (or confirmation to it) must be done of your own free will without coercion, same with marriage and so on, but there are other things that can be thought of slightly different from different people, and here now enters the sulphuric smoke of what the deceivers love… Any tiny doubt, any discrepancy, any honest inquiry, becomes for them, a way to infiltrate and parasitically bend, and twist the truth so as to confuse, deceive, and deny both innocents and faithful alike into error.

So, let us now enter into the difference between what is known as the Totalist position of sedevacantism (aka correct Catholicism) and the sedeprivationist position of sedevacantism (aka flawed Catholicism).

The basic difference is that father Gerard de Lauriers, a theologian of note, came up with the theory of Cassiciacum (it was first published in the French magazine by that name). In my opinion, it was a way to explain to those clergy who may not have been immediately prone to say “Wait a minute, Satan, this Vatican II stuff is ALL HERESY!” and throw mounting off the Papal thrown and preferably off the balcony into St. Peter’s square, you know, to send a bit of a message to the other Freemasons infesting the Vatican. It was a polite way of saying “Look guys, maybe you believed he was really a Pope, maybe you guys really are not Satanists too and you just made a mistake, but once you read the Vatican II documents and the totally heretical changes to the Mass (which is not permitted, as per the eternal Papal Encyclical Quo Primum), surely you can see he really isn’t and we should do something about it?”

In a nutshell, and yes, it is accurate, the Thesis (as I will call it from now on) is a long treatise that delves into philosophy, Aristotelian logic and so on, but in essence tries to say that a Pope can be a “Pope” from the “material” (Physical) aspect, but fail to be a real(TM) Pope “spiritually” is he doesn’t behave like one. Now, this is absolute nonsense and completely illogical, as well as going against basic logic it also goes agains Catholic dogma. And while I believe Father (and later Bishop) De Luriers had good intentions… well, sometimes the best efforts of mice and men still means good intentions lead straight to Hell eventually.

First of all, there is absolutely no way anyone can definitively say what anyone else’s “material” or “spiritual” intent is. In Catholicism we have two levels of knowledge concerning a human being and his “fitness” in relation to God:

an External forum and an Internal forum

The external forum is what we can all see, hear and know by the use of our senses. So, if someone acts pertinaciously and publicly in defection of the faith, we MUST judge him to be a heretic. This is not as if a priest makes a mistake at mass, or teaches something in genuine error and then when corrected figures it out and corrects himself. This is the persistent denial of Catholic Dogma by people who are supposed to be the protectors of it.

As for the internal forum, that is between each man and woman and God. only He truly knows what is really going on inside them.

But that is NOT our concern. Our concern as Catholics is to:

a) Obey the infallible magisterium of the Church (eg CoC 1917), and

b) call out heresy wherever we see it as obvious and clear. And nothing can be clearer than Vatican II, since those 16 documents upturn 2,000 years of dogma with total heresy, and were published in the most notorious fashion possible since they are supposed to be for the whole world. And as Cum-Ex Apostolate officio clearly says, anyone who behaves as heretic must be treated as a heretic, and anyone that knowingly receives a heretic as if he was not one, becomes a heretic too.

This is really basic, and simple logic.

Canon 188 part 4 is absolutely clear:

Canon 188.

Ob tacitam renuntiationem ab ipso iure admissam quaelibet officia vacant ipso facto et sine ulla declaratione, si clericus:

4º A fide catholica publice defecerit;

Any office becomes vacant upon the fact and without any declaration by tacit resignation recognized by the law itself if a cleric:

4.° Publicly defects from the Catholic faith;

Note the important points:

UPON THE FACT - Their actions alone make it so.

WITHOUT ANY DECLARATION - NO ONE needs to make any pronouncement, judgement, investigation, nothing, literally no one needs to do anything at all to make this heretic finally be a heretic officially. it’s done. the fact itself does it, and…

BY TACIT RESIGNATION - That is, again, no one need say anything or do anything, the instant resignation of that heretic’s position is caused by…

THE LAW ITSELF - The entire conviction and judgement is done by the law itself, this rule itself. No judge, no tribunal, no congregation of cardinals, or anything else is required.

Just as if you sacrifice a baby on the altar, this means you are absolutely not a Catholic and it’s not anything that ever needs to be discussed or argued about. the law is clear an unambiguous, and the logic is such a 5 year old child gets it.

There is no mention of material/spiritual duality or weird separation of these things in some amorphous idea that has zero basis in Catholic dogma, basic logic, or Canon Law.

In essence, such a thesis is really basic itself on some version (not even necessarily correct) of Aristotelian “logic” and possibly a gnostic element of “duality”.

The way that the seminarians, priests, and Bishops that follow the Sedeprivationist Thesis defend this illogical, nonsensical idea by essentially appealing to “charity”. Which in many cases is certainly true charity in their heart, but this “giving the benefit of the doubt” is an absolute deadly error.

The Danger of Sedeprivationism

Because Sedeprivationists are essentially saying that not only the “Pope” but also all the fake Novus Ordo clergy are “materially” valid but “spiritually” invalid, potentially, all Bergolgio and his Satanic imps have to do, is say:

“Oh yeah, by the way guys, the sedes (without saying which ones) were right, Vatican II is really bad stuff, but hey it was only a “conciliar” council so, blah, blah, anyway, ok guys, we agree, Vatican II was bad. We all repent and we’re gonna be the good guys ok? Not getting caught raping little kids while we sort cocaine off each other’s asses anymore. Alright? we all good, cool. Now come to our (invalid, fake, sacrilegious) Mass and be good Catholics!”

And at this point what do the nominally sedeprivationist clergy gonna do? After all, their “idea” has come true, the “Pope” repented, and now all is well! Right?

Except…

NO!

Because from Cum-Ex Apostolate Officio (note especially the bold part):

• (ii) that, moreover, they shall be unfit and incapable in respect of these things and that they shall be held to be backsliders and subverted in every way, just as if they had previously abjured heresy of this kind in public trial; that they shall never at any time be able to be restored, returned, reinstated or rehabilitated to their former status or Cathedral, Metropolitan, Patriarchal and Primatial Churches, or the Cardinalate, or other honour, any other dignity, greater or lesser, any right to vote, active or passive, or authority, or Monasteries and benefices, or Countships, Baronies, Marquisates, Dukedoms, Kingships and positions of Imperial power; but rather that they shall be abandoned to the judgement of the secular power to be punished after due consideration, unless there should appear in them signs of true penitence and the fruits of worthy repentance, and, by the kindness and clemency of the See itself, they shall have been sentenced to sequestration in any Monastery or other religious house in order to perform perpetual penance upon the bread of sorrow and the water of affliction;

• (iii) that all such individuals also shall be held, treated and reputed as such by everyone, of whatsoever status, grade, order, condition or pre-eminence he may be and whatsoever excellence may be his, even Episcopal, Archiepiscopal, Patriarchal and Primatial or other greater Ecclesiastical dignity and even the honour of the Cardinalate, or secular, even the authority of Count, Baron, Marquis, Duke, King or Emperor, and as such must be avoided and must be deprived of the sympathy of all natural kindess.

In short, once you have been a heretic, you simply CANNOT EVER be rehabilitated and you will have authority over precisely NO ONE. Even if your repentance is accepted as valid, the very BEST you can hope for is to be locked away in a monastery to remain in perpetual penance until you drop dead.

It really can’t be made clearer than that.

But now, with Sedeprivationism, we have again, a snake entering the Church, and there are already rumblings of some sedeprivationist Bishops or Priest making some funny noises about maybe someone like Vigano could convince a few Cardinals and other Bishops to “repent” just like he did, and then vote in a “real” Pope this time. And then everyone can clap.

No. As I stated already in 2020 in my book Reclaiming the Catholic Church, at which time I was trying to redeem the word sedeprivationist,³ I nevertheless stated that Vigano was a heretic, and that even if he were elected Pope tomorrow, he would just still be a fake Pope and a heretic. And even if he truly did repent and denounce not just Vatican II but all the false Popes (which to my understanding he still has not done, he still considers them “valid” just like the SSPX, and other supposed “traditionalists”) by inviolable Catholic Dogma, and hence infallible and divine law, he should have authority over precisely NO ONE. Ever.

But, as I have repeatedly stated since, in any case, Vigano is a snake, and always has been. Vigano has a Phd in Canon Law and he received this long before the fake “new” canon law of 1983, created by the Satanists in the Novus Orco for the express purpose of trying to “delete”the last and real code of canon law that Catholicism ever needed, that of 1917, meaning his Phd is precisely in Canon law of 1917, that is, the REAL Canon Law. Which means it is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE, for him to NOT know that all the fake Popes and himself too, are not even catholics. They are Satanists, impostors and at BEST heretics. And kept silent for over 50 years, and NOW he pretends to be all for the “real” Church. But we have already seen a heretic like him, at best, should be locked away in a monastery in penance, what business does he have pretending he is anything but a heretic? None.

HOWEVER, we already have at least one Sedeprivationist bishop and possibly others, and possibly sedeprivationist clergy too, that appear to be starting the rumours or posing the idea that well, if only Vigano repented, as he did (did he? then why does he not denounce all the fake Popes as fake, and in any case, even if he does… monastery. Perpetual penance. Fin.) and his buddy cardinals did the same, and Bergy bites the dust, maybe they can just cause a “revolution” in the Church. That is: a fake takeover by one group of Satanists to replace another group of Satanists, in order to better fool the masses, who are starting to hear about Sedevacantists and 1958 Sedevacantists in particular, and starting to understand what the Totalist position is, and starting to ask more questions, and starting to become sedevacantists and getting communities together, and producing lots of children, and living like actual Catholics.

So at this point, we need to ask:

Can we trust any sedeprivationist clergy to do the right thing and protect the church?

THAT is the question.

And many people reading this (because believe me, little as my reach is, it eventually gets there, because sedevacantists search incessantly for the truth) who are sedes of one type or another will be deeply offended by this question.

For a number of reasons:

1. Sedeprivationist clergy are still valid clergy, whatever their errors may be.

2. There are undoubtedly very honest, good, innocent priests and possibly even a bishop or two who are genuine and have too been fooled by a lot of words, and their overabundance of “charity” in giving the Satanists a totally unwarranted and erroneous “benefit of the doubt”. I say let’s call it niceness, though, not charity, because real charity can include the shooting someone in the face to put them out of their misery, and in my view, these type of priests and bishops are all the types who would hold the suffering guy’s hand to the end and deliver last rites (which is fine, no one expects or needs them to be like me, God forbid) but far too nice to do such a sometimes needed thing. And THAT, paradoxically is the problem. I am no one special, I am not clergy, I am just a layman and a very imperfect one at that (genuinely, this is not false modesty) but if and when a real crusade begins, I’m the guy you want at the command of your troops, or in your foxhole. And surely I need good people behind me, because so busy might I get in the battle, I may well forget to do the right thing and say a Hail Mary over the fallen enemies I would trample by the hundreds given half a chance. The fact these good men exist in the ranks of the sedeprivationists is not in doubt by me, but neither is the fact that they are in error with respect to the validity of the thesis.

3. Humans get attached to their ideas and few of them are the ones who can turn on a time once their idea has been demonstrated to be wrong. So even if someone following a sedeprivationist clergyman started to get some doubts, it’s unlikely they would begin to rock the boat too much, and when some “rude bastard” like me comes storming in upsetting applecarts and making waves for fishing boats and whipping everyone into a theological frenzy, they react like wounded animals and tend to attack the messenger instead of the culprits.

4. Some, regardless of what they are, are always brainwashed in one way or other. Be they Clown World believers or the most devout Catholics.

In any case, the answer to the question, regardless of how anyone feels about it, is clearly no. We cannot trust them. Because they are holding on to a nonsensical and invalid, and completely outdated theory that is now obvious has no basis in fact. And it this thesis, and this thesis alone, that might (falsely) “redeem” the Viganos of the Satanic Novus Orco cult, and thus reduce the numbers of real Catholics even further.

The reality is that there is even the potential that perhaps one or more of the sedeprivationist clergy are actually consciously aiming for this. Whether under misguided good intentions or intentional evil devious ones, only God knows, but certainly, one could see how what Rodney Stark calls a clergyman of Power, say a Bishop, who is more concerned with establishing greater and grander Churches and seminaries and perhaps glorifying himself as the leader of the saviours of the real Church, might just feel that if he manages to convince the Viganos of the world to denounce Bergoglio, hey, maybe he can become the next Pope, or if not, at least he can be part of the “saviours” of the Church and his influence and power will increase. And potentially he may well be so poorly educated in Canon Law, Catholicism, reality and truth, that his avarice, his greed for power, blinds him to the truth, and maybe in his heart of hearts he believes it’s a good thing (honestly I find this implausible, again, you cannot be a Bishop and not consciously know these things).

But in any case, whether misguided or intentionally trying to further destroy the remnant of the real Catholic Church, such a Bishop, would absolutely be furthering the goals of the devil and the other devils currently squatting like Gargoyles in the Vatican.

How to Identify Problematic Sedeprivationist Clergy

In the first place, you can immediately conclude that ANY sedeprivationist clergy is in error with regard to the thesis, and as such, even if honest and good men, to be first of all made aware of these issues and then see how they react.

But that aside, we can immediately tell if any clergy is abusing their power if they act in total contravention of canon law.

For example:

1. Do they claim to have authority where none exists (because we are in an interregnum)? If yes, they are talking nonsense, should be immediately called out on it and be asked to correct their error. In private first, as the bible commands, with a few friends or colleagues, preferably other clergy, if any will be so brave, in a second instance, and finally publicly and openly if they still do not reverse their error.

2. Do they deny the sacraments to the faithful on the basis of either the thesis or their error in 1 above? If yes they are now also breaking divine law and are committing a serious error and sin against the faithful.

3. How do they answer the question of a heretic supposedly never being allowed to return to a position of ANY authority in the Church? Other than by falsely claiming that Cum Ex Apostolate officio is “abrogated”⁴ or that “well some guy somewhere was allowed at some point so it must be okay.” Any previous error that may have been committed is not a sanction to repay it. What arguments do they have against this? (Pro-tip: none exist, only waffling).

4. Do they bar would-be seminarians from studying at their seminary unless they adopt the erroneous Thesis? If yes, then again, they are perverting the path of would be good clergy, but forcing onto them an erroneous belief system in a false theology.

So, if your Bishop has done any of these things, and continues to defend the Thesis with nonsensical appeals to “we need a judgment” or “no one can judge the Pope” (we are not, first he is not the pope, and secondly the infallible magisterium of the Church in the form of CoC 1917 does so by the law itself.), you need to realise that he is NOT protecting the church, and valid Bishop though he may be, he absolutely does NOT deserve your respect at a human level. he needs to correct himself, repent and heal himself and become a FAR better custodian of the church before he really opens his mouth on anything else. Valid Bishop though he may be.

Why deprive him of all human respect, even if you acknowledge (as I do) the validity of his orders? Again, let me point out how heretics are to be treated, as per Cum Ex Apostolate officio:

(iii) that all such individuals also shall be held, treated and reputed as such by everyone, of whatsoever status, grade, order, condition or pre-eminence he may be and whatsoever excellence may be his, even Episcopal, Archiepiscopal, Patriarchal and Primatial or other greater Ecclesiastical dignity and even the honour of the Cardinalate, or secular, even the authority of Count, Baron, Marquis, Duke, King or Emperor, and as such must be avoided and must be deprived of the sympathy of all natural kindess

See that emphasised phrase? Now, any valid clergy that refuses sacraments, under pretence of needing to be heeded as if they have jurisdiction, or refuses say to allow would be seminarians to study at their seminary unless they adopt the Thesis, or refuses sacraments to Catholics that do not adhere to the Thesis, are not (yet) full blow heretics, but they absolutely are bad for the church and should be called on it, and removing any human respect from them is the first step to give them a little taste of what becoming a heretic further down the line might feel like.

Also, it removes their power over the congregation they are slowly but surely leading to Hell.

Lastly, you need to consider the possibility they are infiltrators too, or bought out by their own greed and lust for power. Unfortunately you can never let your guard down, the enemies of the church are Legion, and this time of darkness has been prophesied by many Catholic Saints through the ages and by our lady of La Salette and Fatima (despite the many attempts to deviate, change, and confuse the actual events as they took place).

Conclusions

This long post is merely a first salvo against those Bishops and clergy that know very well who they are. I was aware of their errors at least seven years ago, and I pointed out these errors openly to the congregations they affected. I also offered such a Bishop a chance to correct himself privately, and offered that if he did so I would immediately apologise for my calling out his erroneous behaviour and respect him as the valid bishop he is but also as a theologian. His response was to tell me I could no longer receive sacraments from him. Supposedly because on my blog I had the mage of a naked ex-girlfriend in the gallery. A picture posted there many years before I ever became catholic, and with the total approval and acceptance of the woman in question. Besides, she is tastefully posed and there are more pornographic paintings and sculptures by well-known patrons of the Catholic Church when it was still Catholic. The implication of his “banning” me, being none of “his” priests, trained in his seminary would likely offer them to me either, which of course was NOT the case, because any clergy knows that without Jurisdiction, no Bishop can impose such a rule on any clergy. And in any case his reason for denying me sacraments was rooted solely in the fact that I pointed out the authority he was claiming to have over a group of faithful catholics was non-existent. My blog wasn’t going to change, because I have never been in the habit of being a hypocrite or changing my history to suit the present moment. in fact, many, many people have come to Catholicism proper (1958 sedevacantism of the totalist position) precisely because in BELIEVE! I don’t mince my words nor deny who I was and how I came to become a Catholic (with no one being more surprised by it than me).

After his email telling me I was banned from receiving sacraments from him I replied, that very well, he had made his choice. And now we would see what would transpire over the years to come. This was in November of 2019. In the intervening five and a half years, the emails and comments and messages and rumours from Catholics as far apart as Australia, the USA, the UK, mainland Europe and so on, began to trickle in. I was not the only one who had noticed this behaviour. Nor was I the only one who had seen the grab for power and the attempt to spread and infiltrate the Thesis into all sedevacantist circles.

Unbeknownst to me, there were others that rejected the Thesis and also had far stronger motives for doing so, and a lot more context on the players involved and the history behind their actions as well as the history of Sedevacantism from as far back as the 1950s.

With the recent death of Father Anthony Cekada and Bishop Daniel Dolan however, a lot of the Totalist “fighters” lost their impetus, and the Thesis side has continued to advance.

Now think ahead, regardless of how you feel about the people involved, one path clearly leads to eventual perdition, and the other does not. So… what are you going to do?

Keep silent and keep your head down, and make no waves? Like you grandfather or great-grandfather, and your parents before you while the Church was being infested and corroded by parasites?

Or are you going to speak up and point a finger and say: “You! Change. Fix this. Admit your error and turn back while you still can, or else say you will not and prove who you really serve.”

Is it necessary to be as confrontational as this post? As I tend to be?

No. Surely not.

BUT… do NOT be weak. DO NOT be silent.

You can be as well-educated and as polite and erudite as you like. Certainly these are virtues, of which I am not a great owner, and you can surely present your case better than me, but just as steadfastly. But without a doubt, it is now time to find out if you are a Catholic man, who serves Jesus Christ, the truth, and God, regardless of the cost, or if you are a mouse. One that may well soon inhabit a false Church.

Only you can decide. Study, confirm and verify what I write here so crudely. By all means. But once you know, and don’t take too long, if you are a man, act.

May God’s Grace fill your heart and mind, may He protect you and guide you.

All glory is to and for God alone.

Let His Will be done.

1. During Mass, the name of the current valid Pope is spoken along with the relevant prayer. If there is no valid Pope this name is omitted, because to include the name of a Satanist in the place where should be the name of a Vicar of Christ is absolute blasphemy. Non Una Cum is Latin for NOT One With. Masses that are not Non Una Cum, are called Una Cum masses, and DO join the name of the Satanic impostor Jorge Bergoglio with the Holy mass. Any such mass is a blasphemy and should not be participated in by observant Catholics.

2. During an interregnum, Bishops can ordain other Bishops and priests, and the ordination is assumed to be valid. When a valid Pope is finally elected however, he has retroactive power of veto, meaning he can say: “Actually no, Mr. so and so is NOT a Bishop!” (Or priest etc.) In which case Mr. so and so, and anything he did, is instantly rendered null and void. If the Pope says nothing though (as is usually the case) then, because Canon Law is based on Roman Law, the rule of silent assent applies. Which means, if you say nothing you agree. So the Pope’s silence on ordinations that took place before his election mean that the ordinations were valid.

3. Etymologically, the seat of Peter is not strictly speaking empty, which is what sedevacantist means (sede vacante - empty chair) it is occupied by an impostor preventing the use of it by a valid pope so sede privation, that is the privation (removal, impossibility) of the proper use of the chair (Throne) of Peter. So I was already trying to use the deceiver’s own methods against them by re-appropriating the name to mean that we are exactly the same as totalist sedevacantists, in that we reject the thesis today, because it makes no sense and with the benefit of hindsight we can see it’s totally nonsensical even if it was almost certainly done with a view to try and give some weak bishops a way out of a dilemma (which should never be required because they are supposed to be willing to die for Christ on the spot far more than we laity… and yet…).

4. From Cum Ex Apostolate Officio, a papal bull issued by Pope Paul IV on February 15th 1559:

8. [The provisions of this Our Constitution, which is to remain valid in perpetuity are to take effect] notwithstanding any Constitutions, Apostolic Ordinations, privileges, indults or Apostolic Letters, whether they be to these same Bishops, Archbishops, Patriarchs, Primates and Cardinals or to any others, and whatsoever may be their import and form, and with whatsoever sub-clauses or decrees they may have been granted, even "motu proprio" and by certain knowledge, from the fulness of the Apostolic power or even consistorially or otherwise howsoever; and even if they have been repeatedly approved and renewed,have been included in the corpus of the Law or strengthened by any capital conclaves whatsoever (even by oath) or by Apostolic confirmation or by anysoever other endorsements or if they were legislated by ourself. By this present document instead of by express mention, We specially and expressly derogate the provisions of all these by appropriate deletion and word-for-word substitution, so that these may otherwise remain in force.

AND:

10. No one at all, therefore, may infringe this document of our approbation, re-introduction, sanction, statute and derogation of wills and decrees, or by rash presumption contradict it. If anyone, however, should presume to attempt this, let him know that he is destined to incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the blessed Apostles, Peter and Paul.

Given in Rome at Saint Peter's in the year of the Incarnation of the Lord 1559, 15th February, in the fourth year of our Pontificate.

AND further, note that the code of 1917 summarises this decree in code 188 part 4, because Roman Law is purely logical and really all that is said in CEAO can be said in the two sentences that compose canon law code 188 part 4, but note that in any case, code 188.4 REFERENCES Cum Ex Apostolate Officio. So it remains in full force, as it always has both before and after Pope Paul IV, because basic logic that child gets doesn’t change either. Neither does the truth of God.