As a result of Vox Day mentioning my earlier blog post challenge to nominal Catholics concerning the fact that we have only had antipopes since 1958, one of the commenters there brought up some supposed studied theologians who claim to have fully refuted the position they call Sedevacantism (but I call SedePrivationism for precision, since words matter). My post on the antipopes and the legal reasoning why is here and it is rooted in the fact that we, as obedient catholics, must believe the fake Popes are fake, and have been at the very least since 1963, for certain, because that is what the Code of Canon Law of 1917 necessarily states, which being put together by the Magisterium of the Church, we, as Catholics could never and should never had ignored when Vatican 2 raised its evil and apostate head from the darkness. Nor can we ignore it now. Remember that the only current and valid code of canon law is the one of 1917, since the one of 1983 was put together by the same impostors, non-clerics and non-catholics that usurped the Chair of Peter in the first place, and it was also specifically designed to try and invalidate the truth of the code of 1917 and obfuscate its clarity and precision.
Not having read or known anything about the two individuals mentioned by the commenter at VP calling himself MisesMat, who later emailed me and assured me both these gentlemen would be happy to debate me, in writing, I did a quick search for one the names that he mentioned and found Salza’s document online, which I reproduce below with my commentary. His words are in black and mine in red. Initially I started out thinking I’d give this guy the benefit of the doubt of being one of the many badly catechised Catholics that have been browbeaten into accepting an untenable position on the basis of emotions alone mostly and brainwashing from an early age, but as I progressed through the document it became absolutely obvious that John Salza is an intentional liar and deceiver of the worst sort, as will become apparent from the thorough evisceration performed on his lies below. Warning: It gets harsher as I go, but also funnier hopefully, so it’s not too boring I hope. In either case, boring or entertaining as it may be, it is important, because it more clearly demonstrates the tactics and lies these people will attempt to use on you (and have done so rather successfully since before they took over the papacy in 1958), so it is good for you to understand their strategy, because once you do, you can’t unseen it. Enjoy.
UPDATE:
If the below is too long for you to bother with, let me simply state that John Salza wrote the below in 2010, meaning he KNEW the issues of V2 were issues even before the Vicar of Pedophiles on Earth, Jorge Bergoglio took over. And, more importantly, he is a 32nd degree Freemasons. And Freemasons can’t be Catholics. Because Satanists can’t be Catholic so, yeah. the below is academic to a certain extent, but necessary anyway.
Ann Barnhardt’s error and how she just proved Sedeprivationism is correct
My imagined conversation with Ann Barnhardt after her podcast number 101:
“It’s funny how you spent several minutes shouting how if Ratzinger died and Bergoglio didn’t for 45 minutes that is “COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FROM THE 1958 SEDVACANTISTS!”
Why Ann? How?”
“Well… well… they are saying it’s 62 years!!”
“Yes, and?
Can you show me anything that puts a time limit on it?”
“No. But…..” (Sits down looking shell-shocked)
“Hmmm-hm. Thought so.
Welcome to SedePrivationsim Ann.
Would you like a glass of water to make you handle the shock?
Perhaps something stronger?
I have some awesome good tequila.”
“Shots you say?”
In her 101st podcast here, Ann (infuriatingly I might add) admits that Canon Law is what determines what the current situation of the Papacy is. This is true and correct. She goes on to bless St. Raymond of Penyafort, for having written the first draft sometime in the 13th Century and sing the praises of it since it lasted until 1917 and the Pio-Benedictine code, so far still so good. Then she also goes on to admit that the “code” of 1983 is a dumpster fire with flammable juice in it, again, so far so good, and then… then comes the infuriating part, she says that despite this the code of 1983 is the one we must use because “it’s the one we are under”.
No Ann. We are not.
Read more »
No related posts.
By G | 29 January 2020 | Posted in Social Commentary