Special Report! Salza & Siscoe Call Archbishop Lefebvre A Heretic!
By: Eric Gajewski & Fr. Kramer
By implicating Fr Kramer a heretic these two birdbrains have likewise implicated Archbishop Lefebvre a heretic as well.
Wait till you see the Dimond like Brother hypocrisy of these two...you simply wont believe it...
Birds of a feather flock together. This picture says it all...
USURPATION OF ECCLESIASTICAL FUNCTION (CANON 1389)
John Salza has not backed off from his sacrilegious slanders in the least: he is using Sisco as his mouthpiece. Notice Siscoe's words, "we recognize you as being outside of the Church due to your public sin of heresy, even though the Church has not yet declared you to be a heretic" — the key word being, «WE». The condemnatory opinion against me stated in Siscoe's message is expressly the opinion of both Siscoe and Salza.
Below is the actual text of the email of Siscoe's latest outburst, which manifests their sacrilegious diabolical rage that has taken hold of them since I sent them my latest article on Defection from the Faith. Here's the text of it:
«Kramer, (Doesnt want to call Father Kramer a priest anymore)
«Here's what you don't understand: You have publicly defected from the faith by leaving the Church. You are now a public heretic. Period. You are no longer a Catholic priest (since you are no longer a member of the Catholic Church). Not only have you left the Church, but you now declare it to be a false Church (just like other ex-Catholics). All throughout our book, we make the distinction between a Catholic who merely professes a heretical doctrine and someone, such as yourself, who has openly left the Church.
«Your false understanding of the Conciliar Church is what has led you into your heresy.
«If you want help seeing your errors, let me know and I will help you. That is true charity on my part. WWIII is probably very close and your particular judgment could happen much sooner than you think. You don't want to go to your judgement as a public enemy of the Church, which is what you are at the moment. Hopefully you will humble yourself, repent of all your public crimes against the Faith, and beg God for the light to see your grave errors. I'll keep prayer that you do so.»
Salza & Siscoe are now entrenched in the blindness of their fundamentalist error and thus refuse to understand that the great apostasy foretold in scripture, and (according to Cardinal Ciappi) in the Third Secret of Fatima, is now taking place. In my Reply to Salza & Siscoe Part III, I showed what eminent theologians and ecclesiastical writers explained about the great apostasy, demonstrating that my own opinion coincides exactly with that of the approved theologians and writers. Salza & Siscoe have chosen to simply disregard what I have written, and continue to blindly accuse me of heresy without any theological basis -- but my doctrine has already been examined by the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and was not found to be heretical.
In Ch. 5 of Book I of The Suicide of Altering the Faith in the Liturgy, first published in 1995, I wrote:
«The Conciliar Church[196]is not a renewed Catholic Church, but rather it is a Reformed Church[197] — a Church that has, by means of heretical Conciliar doctrines and schismatic reformed liturgy, undergone a transformistic evolution ... a metamorphosis that has effected the fulfillment of the Sixteenth Century Reformers’ dream: Protestant Rome. Father Hubert Jedin, one of the premier
historians of the modern era, already pointed out in 1968, that a new Protestant Reformation is taking place in the Church:
«We know that today the inner process of schism, the formation of a “Confession” (denomination), lasted not years, but decades. Melanchton and Calvin claimed to be “Catholic” until the end of their lives while the adherents of the old faith were calumniated as “Papists.”*»
In the Conclusion of Book II, I wrote:
«The whited sepulchers that constitute the majority of the Conciliar hierarchy simply do not wish to abandon their new religion, or even admit that it is a new religion.[63] This is why they do not see any state of necessity in the Church. Like the Lutherans and Anglicans, the hierarchs of the Conciliar Church see no need to return to Catholic Tradition. They believe in religious liberty, they believe in Ecumenism, they believe that one can be saved by another religion — they do not believe in the Old Religion into which most of them were baptized before the Council. They have lost the Faith.»
In the Conclusion to Book I, I wrote:
«The Conciliar Church has embarked on a course of its own destruction. The words of Paul VI to the Lombard Seminary bear eloquent witness to that undeniable yet desperately denied reality. The zealots of the Novus Ordo never tire of saying that the Holy Spirit guides the Church, like the ancient Israelites who ignored the warnings of the prophets, saying “The Temple, The Temple” — yet the Temple was destroyed. Our Blessed Saviour’s promise that the gates of hell will never prevail against the Church will avail them nothing, for it was not of their church that He spoke.»
«The churches of northern Africa departed from the orthodox tradition of Catholicism and were swept away in the tide of Islam. A church that breaks away from tradition is a branch that breaks away from the tree of life, and is therefore destined to perish. Such is the inevitable destiny that awaits the Conciliar Church — It declared its own death sentence when it broke with Tradition. Our Lord’s promise, “I am with you always, even unto the end of the world” is directed only to those who remain faithful to Tradition. His promise remains with them even though they be few in numbers.»
In the Foreword of the book I wrote:
«Fundamentally new concepts of tradition and magisterium combined with a new liturgy have established a trend in the Church — a trend which has brought about a transformation of the formerly unmistakably recognisable Catholic Church into the evolving Church of the new Reformation. Unless that trend will have been checked and reversed, only a remnant of the former religion shall remain — a small, scattered but vital remnant of Catholicism surrounded by the colossus of Roman Protestantism.»
In the same book I quoted a portion of Ch. 3 of the Commonitory of the ancient Father, St. Vincent of Lèrins, who eerily foretells the apostasy taking place in the Church today, and he prescribed the solution to be followed by Catholics:
«What then will a Catholic Christian do, if a small portion of the Church have cut itself off from the communion of the universal faith? What, surely, but prefer the soundness of the whole body to the unsoundness of a pestilent and corrupt member? What, if some novel contagion seek to infect not merely an insignificant portion of the Church, but the whole? Then it will be his care to cleave to antiquity, which at this day cannot possibly be seduced by any fraud of novelty.»
So, what Salza & Siscoe judge to be my "heresy" is nothing new. I have been writing and preaching these things since the late 80s. In early 1995, what eventually became The suicide of Altering the Faith in the Liturgy was first published in Manila in book form. (Later that year my writings were sent by the Bishops Conference to Rome for examination.) Salza read my book and found nothing wrong with it —he even wrote an article largely based on what I wrote in the book. (http://www.cfnews.org/page10/page66/salza_novus_ordo.html) We spoke about the matter when we were still on friendly terms, and he consulted with me on various doctrinal points. He did not consider my doctrine heretical at that time.
He consulted with me on doctrinal points while he was writing his book, True or False Pope, and we remained on friendly terms. It was only when I publicly differed with him on a point of doctrine, that he furiously turned against me and started accusing me of heresy. This is what I wrote, and to which he responded with a four part series of articles accusing me of heresy, accusing me of being out of my mind, and heaping contempt on me with denigrating and demeaning attributions:
«Salza thinks it is a heresy to hold that the Church will be reduced to a small number, and revert to the catacombs, and for a short time become invisible. If Salza's doctrine were right, then the ancient Fathers, and all the eminent authorities cited by Cardinal Manning were wrong. Cardinal Manning's position is supported by the unanimous consent of the Fathers.»
That was all I said -- a mild criticism of his opinion, and he replied by directing sacrilegious contempt against me, and accusing me of heresy. I wrote and propagated my article in defence of my doctrinal position. Salza & Siscoe have responded by setting themselves up as a self-appointed vigilante Inquisition -- acting like a tribunal which pronounces its verdict of private judgment against me for heresy; declaring me to be a public enemy of the Church! And THEY are the ones who falsely accuse me in their website article of adhering to the Protestant doctrine of Private Judgement against the public judgment of the Church.
The Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) sent my writings to Rome to be examined by the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), and the Pontifical Commission for the Authentic Interpretation of the Code of Canon Law. This was announced in a notification by the Secretary of the CBCP, Bishop Nestor Cariño, which appeared on page one of the nation's most widely distributed daily newspaper, the Manila Bulletin on 1 August, 1995.
Since 1995 - 1996, my doctrinal writings have been officially examined by the competent authorities of the Holy See. Salza is an attorney. He knows what that means. I mentioned the fact that my writings had bern sent to Rome for examination on page 117 of my above mentioned book. He read my book. He cannot be ignorant of the fact that my case was sent to Rome for examination two decades ago.
In 1996, I personally went to Rome to enquire about the status of the official inquiry being conducted about my writings. An official of the department that examines English language writings at the CDF, a priest with a North American accent named Fr. Brown, met with me and discussed my case with me. I handed over to him some further writings of mine that I had published some months after the inquiry had begun. In the course of the discussion, the CDF official stated categorically that the dicastery had made no judgment against me.
As an attorney, John Salza knows perfectly well that he has absolutely no right to pronounce a private judgment on a doctrinal matter in which he is not only academically not competent, but was actually sent to Rome to be judged by the competent dicastery. That Salza & Siscoe pronounce me to be a heretical on a matter that was submitted by the Philippine bishops to Rome for judgment, is a gravely sinful act of usurpation of ecclesiastical function; and is a punishable crime according to the Code of Canon Law:
«Can. 1389 §1. A person who abuses an ecclesiastical power or function is to be punished according to the gravity of the act or omission, not excluding privation of office, unless a law or precept has already established the penalty for this abuse.»
«§2. A person who through culpable negligence illegitimately places or omits an act of ecclesiastical power, ministry, or function with harm to another is to be punished with a just penalty.»
Salza & Siscoe are fully aware that they are guilty gravely culpable crime of usurpation of ecclesiastical function when they pronounce their solemn judgment against me: This is what they posted on their website:
«we can cite St. Thomas who explains that just as it pertains to the proper authorities to write the law, so too does it pertain to them to interpret it and apply it to individual cases. The following is from the Summa:
“Since judgment should be pronounced according to the written law, as stated above, he that pronounces judgment, interprets, in a way, the letter of the law, by applying it to some particular case. Now since it belongs to the same authority to interpret and to make a law, just as a law cannot be made except by public authority, so neither can a judgment be pronounced except by public authority, which extends over those who are subject to the community.”[3]
Furthermore, the Angelic Doctor goes on to explain that it is unlawful for a person to render a judgment he has no authority to make, noting that those who do such a thin are guilty of the unjust act of “judgment by usurpation.”
“Judgment is lawful in so far as it is an act of justice. Now it follows from what has been stated above (1, ad 1,3) that three conditions are requisite for a judgment to be an act of justice: first, that it proceed from the inclination of justice; secondly, that it come from one who is in authority; thirdly, that it be pronounced according to the right ruling of prudence. If any one of these be lacking, the judgment will be faulty and unlawful. First, when it is contrary to the rectitude of justice, and then it is called ‘perverted’ or ‘unjust’: secondly, when a man judges about matters wherein he has no authority, and this is called judgment ‘by usurpation’…”»
They demonstrate that they know perfectly well that it is a crime for them to usurp the ecclesiastical function of judgment in doctrinal matters, but do not hesitate to commit the crime in a highly visible, public manner.
Eric Gajewski:
Salza & Siscoe Call Archbishop Lefebvre A Heretic!
Report given 10-18-16 (aprx 1hr 20 minutes)
Taken from Fr. Kramer: Salza & Siscoe are now entrenched in the blindness of their fundamentalist error and thus refuse to understand that the great apostasy foretold in scripture, and (according to Cardinal Ciappi) in the Third Secret of Fatima, is now taking place.
Salza and Siscoe feed on each other's Megalomania (Narcissistic Personality disorder); blind to the fact that they have discredited themselves in the minds of many; and retain a following comprised only of those who are too fearful to break out of their Modernist cage. They are both legends in their own (and each other's) minds.
TCK: I had removed and blocked Salza from all correspondence awhile back. There is only so much narcissism and error you can handle without just cutting loose from the heretic as Scripture states. Yet, out of nowhere "Siscoe the Great" emails me as if I wanted to hear from him. These two have seriously gone off the deep end as many of their own are now denouncing them and keeping from them as I have been getting mail on the matter. Furthermore, Salza has also indicated on my radio show that there "maybe" heresy in Vatican II? Does this sound like hardline position of Archbishop Lefebvre or Fr. Hesse talking? Or a pseudo trad aiding the current destruction of the SSPX with this altered view on Vatican II? Money talks.... books and conferences have to sell folks... such is the pseudo trad way.
By stating Fr. Kramer is a heretic for his misunderstanding of the Conciliar Church they actually damn Archbishop Lefebvre himself a heretic for stating EXACTLY the same thing... reiterating what Lefebvre, Fr. Hesse, and myself say as well. The only real protestants and heretics are these two theological clowns who have no business in attempting to present themselves as formal theologians for the Church as you will see in this EYE OPENING expose of their illogicality and further attempt to solidify their own "Magesterium of Moronicness".
Archbishop Lefebvre
Salza a Masonic Shill? You decide....According to Salza & Siscoe Lefebvre is a heretic (by way of what they have said to Fr. Kramer)! These false traditionalist heretics NEVER cease to amaze me. Listen in to this latest special report
Special Report! Salza & Siscoe Call Archbishop Lefebvre A Heretic!
