Fr. Kramer: Salza remains obstinate in heresy ....

Fr. Kramer: Salza remains obstinate in heresy ....

Salza & Siscoe explicitly profess the heresy that the "crime" of heresy, but not the SIN of heresy, severs one from the body of the Church suapte natura. Now Salza says, "The nature of the sin of heresy severs one from the Soul of the Church by its very nature"; whereas Pius XII in Mystici Corporis teaches that that the sin of heresy, "by its very nature separates a man from the Body of the Church". Heresy is in its nature a sin, but in its nature, it is not a crime. Since heresy is in its nature a sin, if it is public, this sin, "by its very nature separates a man from the Body of the Church" ("suapte natura hominem ab Ecclesiae Corpore separet"). Does Salza profess this truth of faith? NO, he does not. Salza obstinately denies this revealed truth which must be believed with divine and Catholic faith -- he adamantly refuses to profess it. Salza professes many other truths related to this manifest dogma of the universal and ordinary magisterium; but refuses to profess this manifest dogma itself, namely, that the public sin of pertinacious denial or doubt of any revealed truth that must be believed with divine and Catholic faith by its very nature separates one from the body of the Church.

Alert! I have received a Warning from Robert Siscoe. RadTrad Thomist is Coming Up in the World!

Alert! I have received a Warning from Robert Siscoe. RadTrad Thomist is Coming Up in the World! 

TCK:  I BLOCKED THESE TWO SUSPECTED MASONS (SALZA & SISCOE) LONG AGO. THEY REALLY DONT KNOW WHEN TO STOP. THESE TWO HERETICS JUST NEED TO GIVE UP...

DR. PETER CHOJNOWSKI

Here is Robert Siscoe's Warning to Me and My blunt Response:

Warning to Peter Chojnowski

Mr. Chojnowski,

You need to retract the following false statement that you just posted on your website: "If what Salza and Siscoe say is true concerning the need for specific ecclesiastical judgment in order [to] have someone ACTUALLY DEFECT FROM THE Catholic Church…"

 

Fr. Kramer Refutes Pseudo-"Scholars" Siscoe and Salza

Fr. Kramer Refutes Pseudo-"Scholars" Siscoe and Salza

Some people just dont know when to quit...

Fr. Kramer

Fr. Kramer, "They are deliberately lying and falsifying Catholic DOGMA. That's why I suspect they are BOTH Masons: They have a total CONTEMPT for dogma"

Salza & Siscoe LIE again: "Proving Fr. Kramer’s False Accusations and Straw Man Arguments":
《Fr. Kramer: “John Salza and Robert Siscoe are in heresy. Their entire doctrine on heresy and loss of office is based on their heretical proposition: ‘the sin of heresy alone does not sever one from the Church’.”

Heretics Salza & Siscoe Falsely Accuse Fr. Kramer

Heretics Salza & Siscoe Falsely Accuse Fr. Kramer 
Facebook 12-11-17

Fr. Kramer: "John Salza and Robert Siscoe declare on their website that Fr. Kramer gets all his theology from the internet -- and all his quotations of St. Robert Bellarmine are English translations from Sedevacantist websites! My 243 page manuscript has copious quotations from Bellarmine in his original latin, as well as quotations from many other eminent scholars in their original languages. Yet, Salza & Siscoe accuse me of "slander" for exposing their fraud and intellectual con-artistry.

John Salza, Remnant convict “former traditional Catholics”

John Salza, Remnant convict “former traditional Catholics”

Salza is a conciliarist heretic who thinks a Council can judge a Pope.  (In reality the Holy See can be judged by no one). Furthermore, he has labeled, those, who say, "the Conciliar Church is not Catholic", as heretics, even though Archbishop Lefebvre did so.  Oh my Salza, Siscoe and the Remnant still think their following Lefebvre!  There have been many saying Salza may still be a Mason.  It doesnt matter to me he simply teaches heresy and needs to be ignored.  Fr. Kramer has exposed the errors of Salza and Siscoe consistently and is even writing a book to expose the fraudulent theology of these two.  The Remnant remains clueless on this matter.

By:  Louie Verricchio

A number of readers have asked me to comment on a recent article written for the Remnant by John Salza concerning the status of the man known as Francis.

More than one person has even suggested that Mr. Salza is referring directly to me when he writes:

Unfortunately, those who are looking for a simple, quick and easy explanation for the current crisis are often deceived by these tactics, including even former traditional Catholics who have recently departed from the Church by becoming Pope Francis rejecters.

Siscoe Saga....

Siscoe Saga....

Fr. Kramer 

Siscoe, says "a traditional priest" (anonymous), "refuted" what he claims to be my "central argument" -- but con-artist Siscoe does not say what (according to him) is my "central argument" (!) So, the anonymous priest also allegedly "agrees" with Siscoe's unstated "refutation" of my unspecified "central argument"; and all this clownery which says ABSOLUTELY NOTHING proves that my unspecified "central argument" is an ERROR !!!
Siscoe, has said NOTHING -- yet he expects people to believe on blind faith that his UNSTATED ARGUMENT refutes my UNSPECIFIED "CENTRAL ARGUMENT". Siscoe is plainly hysterical.

ROBERT SISCOE ERRORS ON DIVORCE & REMARRIAGE IN CANON LAW & MAGISTERIUM

ROBERT SISCOE ERRORS ON DIVORCE & REMARRIAGE IN

CANON LAW & MAGISTERIUM

Fr. Paul Kramer B.Ph., S.T.B., M.Div., S.T.L. (Cand.)

I have read the relevant Latin texts of Celestine III, and of Innocent III. They were ruling on two different cases.

Celestine III ruled that the husband who defected from the faith out of hatred for his wife, thereby forfeited his matrimonial rights, so that the wife was not bound to return to her first husband, but was free to enter the monastic life, even with the husband opposed; and that the husband could marry the former infidel wife (the second wife), converted to the Catholic faith, only after thedeath of the first wife.

Fr. Kramer, "Siscoe's latest gaffe"

Fr. Kramer, "Siscoe's latest gaffe"

DOCUMENTS & LINKS INCLUDED

My reply:


Here is my comment on the article of Robert Siscoe which thus far, Michael Matt refuses to post (SHOCKER!):

I have read the relevant Latin texts of Celestine III, and of Innocent III. They were ruling on two different cases. Gregory (incorporating Celestine's ruling into Canon Law) ruled that the husband who defected from the faith out of hatred for his wife, thereby forfeited his matrimonial rights, so that the wife was not bound to return to her first husband, but was free to enter the monastic life, even with the husband opposed; and that the husband could marry the former infidel wife, converted to the Catholic faith, only after the death of the first wife.

Louie Verricchio Refutes Robert Siscoe

Point / Counterpoint 3: Verrecchio

SOURCE 

In his last installment, Robert did not address the point that I had raised concerning Canon 195 which begins:

“If by a decree of the competent authority, and not by the law itself, someone is removed from an office…”

Clearly, the law recognizes situations wherein one is “removed from an office by the law itself” as distinct from those wherein one is removed “by a decree.”

An Exposé of the Heresy of John Salza & Robert Siscoe Part III

Defection from the Faith & the Church - Faith , Heresy, and Loss of Office - An Exposé of the Heresy of John Salza & Robert Siscoe Part III

Fr. Paul Kramer B.Ph., S.T.B., M.Div., S.T.L. (Cand.)

THE FIVE OPINIONS ON A HERETICAL POPE

SECTION TWO

Breaks indicate footnotes applied...

Fr. Kramer exposes the Conciliarist heretics John Salza and Robert Siscoe yet again.  

 The eminent canonists Wernz and Vidal outline the five opinions1:
«Concerning this matter there are five Opinions of which the first denies the hypothesis upon which the entire question is based, namely that a Pope even as a private doctor can fall into heresy. This opinion although pious and probable cannot be said to be certain and common. For this reason the hypothesis is to be accepted and the question resolved. »

Fr. Kramer: LEST MY SILENCE BE CONSTRUED AS AN ADMISSION

LEST MY SILENCE BE CONSTRUED AS AN ADMISSION, I REPLY TO THE MORE OUTRAGEOUS OF THE LIES THAT SALZA & SISCOE SACRILEGIOUSLY SPEW AGAINST ME IN THEIR LATEST HIT PIECE

Video included...

The deceitful lying little boy holding to heresy is back at it and ready to take his buffoonery to new heights...

(The statements of Salza & Siscoe are in quotation marks. My comments follow.)

«Fr. Kramer began mouthing off about our book (which he has not read) on his Facebook page five months ago. No doubt he targeted our book because it is the definitive refutation of Sedevacantist theology, which he has adopted wholesale. »

In reality, I expressed disagreement with two erroneous propositions, 1) That the Church can judge a pope; and, 2) That the Church will not be greatly reduced in numbers during the apocalyptic time of severe persecution, tribulation, and apostasy. I have never made any criticism of their book, since I have not read it, and I do not intend to spend good money on a book authored by men who, in their articles, interviews and posts, manifest themselves to be theologically incompetent and legalistic fundamentalists.

An Exposé of the Heresy of John Salza & Robert Siscoe Part III

Defection from the Faith & the Church - Faith , Heresy, and Loss of Office - An Exposé of the Heresy of John Salza & Robert Siscoe Part III

Fr. Paul Kramer B.Ph., S.T.B., M.Div., S.T.L. (Cand.) 

THE FIVE OPINIONS ON A HERETICAL POPE

SECTION I – HERETICS

In addressing the question of the possibility of a heretical pope, and if possible, could such a pope be deposed or judged by the Church, one must first distinguish the various senses in which the term “heretic” has been employed by ecclesiastical writers. Giuseppe de Luca1 explains that the term «heresy» (αἴρεσις) which denotes a choice, selection, election, or a preference for one position rather than another, was a term used in classical Greek; and in Alexandrian Greek it began to be typically applied to philosophical, political, and religious doctrines. 

TradCatKnight Radio, Defection from the Faith: Exposé of the Heresy of Salza & Siscoe

TradCatKnight Radio, Defection from the Faith: Exposé of the Heresy of Salza & Siscoe

Talk Given 12-7-16   (aprx 1hr 10 mins)

SUBSCRIBE to TradCatKnight for all the latest Endtime news and Radio shows! This is the most comprehensive and followed traditional Catholic apostolate worldwide.

Join me for the next hour or so wherein I cover Father Kramer's latest expose on Pseudo Traditionalist's John Salza and Robert Siscoe.  Father Kramer unmasks the notion that the Pope can be judged by the Church citing various Saints, Popes and Councils.   Francis is indeed an antipope as Fr.  Kramer and I have detailed for quite some time now.  Time is of the essence to understand this crisis and to get your souls prepared for the Great Storm Coming!

Salza & Siscoe: Liars & Heretics

Salza & Siscoe:  Liars & Heretics

Email Exchange between Fr. Kramer and "the sideshow" known as Siscoe and Salza

On the Salza/Siscoe website, Robert Siscoe suggests that I "fabricated out of thin air" a theologically erroneous quotation of John Salza:
"[H]e recently posted a “refutation” that contained an alleged quotation from John Salza that is not what he or I hold; and it is not what we argue in the book . John and I searched high and low for that alleged “quote” and it was nowh to be found, [...] Or did Fr. Kramer simply make up the quote out of thin air?"
Email exchange between myself and R. Siscoe:

(Video) Special Report! Salza & Siscoe Call Archbishop Lefebvre A Heretic!

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... 

First Fr. Kramer writes: THE SACRILEGIOUS CRIME OF JOHN SALZA AND ROBERT SISCOE

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:

An Exposé of the Heresy of John Salza & Robert Siscoe Part I

Defection from the Faith & the Church - Faith , Heresy, and Loss of Office - An Exposé of the Heresy of John Salza & Robert Siscoe Part I

Fr. Paul Kramer B.Ph., S.T.B., M.Div., S.T.L. (Cand.)

The sin of Heresy per se, like apostasy and schism, has the intrinsic effect of separating the heretic from the Church by itself, without any ecclesiastical censures; and is distinguished from other sins which do not by their very nature, separate the sinner from the body of the Church; and who, therefore, for grave offenses can only be separated from the Church by a sentence of excommunication incurred or inflicted by legitimate ecclesiastical authority. This is the infallible teaching of the universal magisterium of the Church which must be believed de fide divina et Catholica under pain of heresy, as is proven and demonstrated below.

Salza & Siscoe: Heretics Who Dont Know When To Quit

Salza & Siscoe: Heretics Who Dont Know When To Quit

Fr. Kramer (facebook 10-8-16)

I have professed the Church's traditional definition of the term, 'material heretic'. The two heretics and perpetrators of public sacrilage, JOHN SALZA and ROBERT SISCOE, profess the new, modern definition of the term, and say that the traditional Catholic definition of 'material heretic' is "perverted". Here is the traditional Catholic definition explained:

St. Robert Bellarmine's De Romano Pontifice: Salza & Siscoe Heresy

 St. Robert Bellarmine's De Romano Pontifice: Salza & Siscoe Heresy

Fr. Paul Kramer

Here is Chapter 30 of St. Robert Bellarmine's De Romano Pontifice. By a careful reading of this chapter one concludes that my understanding of it, (which is in unanimous agreement of it with the interpretation of all modern scholars), is the only orthodox solution to the question of a papal loss of office due to heresy. 

The Salza & Siscoe SideShow Continues...

Fr. Kramer: The Salza & Siscoe SideShow Continues...

John Salza & Robert Siscoe think they understand St. Robert Bellarmine better than the academically qualified and ecclesiastically approved authorities on Canon Law

Jus Canonicum by the Rev F X Wernz S.J. and the Rev P Vidal S.J. (1938) Chapter VII 

Fr. Kramer: Salza/Siscoe Continue To Ignore The Words Of BXVI

 Fr. Kramer: Salza/Siscoe Continue To Ignore The Words Of BXVI

Salza & Siscoe really need to go back to flipping burgers.  They have been making themselves look inept just like Fellay these days

 
From Salza & Siscoe's latest post is on the "resignation" of Pope Benedict, and my preliminary observation:
Salza/Siscoe:
"[I]f Benedict publicly stated that his intention was to resign the papacy, and if the entire Church understood him to mean that he was completely renouncing the papal office, would a defective intention, resulting from a doctrinal error (i.e., the belief that it is possible to change the nature of the papacy by splitting it in two) prevent God from severing the bond joining his person to the papacy? Or would God sever the bond uniting his person to the papal office in spite of the defective intention that is rooted in a doctrinal error?