|cookielawinfo-checbox-analytics||11 months||This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".|
|cookielawinfo-checbox-functional||11 months||The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".|
|cookielawinfo-checbox-others||11 months||This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.|
|cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary||11 months||This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".|
|cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance||11 months||This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".|
17 thoughts on “Archbishop Lenga: Bergoglio leads a Sect, not the Catholic Church”
So clear….so right…..one has to love Archbishop Lenga!
The voice of truth.
God bless Archbishop Lenga. He laid it out and makes everything simple. Dump Vatican II and the Novus Ordo. Return to the TLM. Unfortunately, too many Catholics believe the false teachings of the antipope. Five decades of dumbing down Church teachings is showing. More prelates and clergy need to repent and return to the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church! Mortal sin continues to darken the intellect of so many people. These people have everything to their heart’s content. But they have no Life in them. Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart is so wounded because so many souls will go to Hell. Queen of Heaven, pray for us!
But nobody talk about Benedict XVI that is still the Pope. Nobody talk about father Alessandro Minutella that is yelling this truth to the world from years. Bergoglio has never been elected legitimately and everyone just left alone Benedict XVI the real Pope. We have to speak the truth entirely as it is. We must come back to the real Catholic Church and his vicar of Christ, Benedict XVI and his real future successor that soon will come.
I’m not talking about Archbishop Lenga that even him in the past confirmed that Benedict XVI is the real Pope but to the others like Vigano &co, that they never respond to this argument.
Amen David! Though we are very grateful for the truth Archbishop Lenga speaks he not only fails to come out explicitly and declare that Benedict as the Divinely appointed head of the Church, but also misinterprets Christ’s teaching on the wheat and the tares. The field in which we are to sew the Gospel and in which we are NOT to pull up the tares IS NOT THE CHURCH, but the world, the societies, the nations Jesus knew would be discipled! To think that these apostates and destroyers of the faith should be tolerated in any position of authority in the Church is absolutely mind blowing! Some will attempt to defend this horrific error by saying that Christ accepted Judas as a Disciple. Judas, however was NEVER PART OF THE CHURCH. Today, he would be like a seminarian in training for the ministry, which if showing disqualification would never be ordained! Further, Archbishop Legna at least strongly implies that returning to the pre-Vatican Church would solve the Church’s problems.
This is all mind blowing to me to see how utterly confused our very best prelates still remain.
David, you are quite incorrect: Lenga has many times declared that Benedict XVI is the true pope. In fact he names him every time in the canon. Second, the parable of the wheat and tares in the Catholic church has been applied both to the Church and to the world, because in different matters, one must heed this same counsel of the Lord. Finally, Judas was pat of the Church. Christ baptised him and chose him as His apostle. He may have fallen from grace early on, but falling from grace does not always lead to apostasy. As for repairing the Church by returning to pre-Vatican II that is not a fringe idea by the common sentence of all conservative clergy with whom I have spoke in the last 40 years.
Brother, you say Abp. Lenga has declared that Benedict XVI is the true pope “many times”, but not one single video in the past 3 months where they have actually added English subtitles, has he ever mentioned this crucial truth. Who he does mention over and over again is Abp. Vigano along with the same talking points as him — and the description to Lenga’s channel links the two archbishops together. These videos with English subtitles (they saw fit to add them for a reason) are a prime opportunity to come out in defense of Pope Benedict XVI, and to tell the faithful the TRUTH — that Benedict is a prisoner in the Vatican and that he remains the one true Pope who is in need of our prayers (where is Lenga’s defense for what the world media has recently done to Pope Benedict?), and of course to tell us that it is necessary to adhere to the TRUE Pope. But for whatever reason, he is remiss to do so, and it has not gone unnoticed.
Charmaine, Archbishop Lenga has said it many times, so how many times does he half to say it to satisfy you?
Latest picture of Pope Benedict. https://twitter.com/UgonnaMario/status/1488262070680309765?t=MN2vSshFbJLMsTqjb8s3_g&s=19
Br. Alexis, Thank you for your response and thoughts and thank God for Abp. Legna who does indeed hold to the truth of Benedict’s continuing papacy, something I should have mentioned, even though he didn’t state it in this interview, thought he certainly implied it! But what really disturbs me most is the reserve and lack of passion with which even our best bishops speak! It’s as though they have resigned to the condition and there’s nothing they can do about it outside of prayer! That is a very disturbing error! Where’s from any of them any call for action like you Alex have called for?? Where’s the call for the laity to rise up to drive their faith denying apostate priests out of their parishes ?? Where are our good priests and laity denouncing their apostate bishops and cutting off all ties to them as Titus 3:10; 1 Cor. 5:9-11; 2 Thess.3:6, 4-15; Romans 6:17; and 2 John 7, 10-11 absolutely requires?? Bishop Sheen did not act or speak in such a weakly spinless milk toast manner and he was very respected by good Protestants!
But on two other points: How can one say that Judas was part of the Church when the Church was born on Pentecost? The New Covenant could only be initiated by the coming of the Holy Spirit to dwell within those who received the Crucified and Resurrected Christ as Savior and King of their lives. It was this gift of the Holy Spirit that brought New Birth, whereby we became “Sons of God,” which finally opened the gates of Heaven to us and the OT saints waiting in Paradise/Abraham’s Bosom. There was no New Birth before Christ presented His Blood to the Father for our salvation and then sent the Holy Spirit to Re-Birth us. Jesus said this did not come with John’s baptism but would be a Birth “of the Spirit” not yet given (St. John 3:5) and which would allow us to enter “the Kingdom.” There was no Church of Christ, no Kingdom of God possessed by anyone until Pentecost.
Concerning the thought that merely returning to the pre-Vatican Church will save the Church or even be a necessary part of it: The corruption and collapse of the faith within the hierarchy of Church took place long before Vatican II. Things had gotten so bad in 1878 that the evil masonic Cdl. Mariano Rampolla was nearly elected pope, being stopped only by the intervention of the Emperor of Austria! Rampolla had such a strong following that Leo XIII felt forced to make (would you believe!) a place for him and his followers in the Church by making him Secretary of State in 1887! The reason for this evil capitulation was that Leo XIII claimed he did not want a schism in the Church! His action in fact tolerated the schism already there to merely avoid its public appearance! But the actual event that sealed the fate of the Church seems to have been 15 years earlier when in 1832 Gregory XVI went to the Rothschild bankers to borrow money to help pay for the Napoleonic War debt upon which a Rothschild was made head of the “Vatican Bank,” whose family has run it ever since! I cannot believe it was a mere coincidence that 14 years later, in the first year (1846) of the next pope (Pius IX), that our Holy Mother revealed that “Rome would lose the faith and become the Seat of Anti-christ.” What seems to have been totally forgotten by 1832 is that God will always provide what is needed for the Church without going to the Devil! What was totally forgotten is the great Divine blessings that followed the excommunication of Luther by Leo X in1521, which first replaced the 9 million Europeans who left the Church with 9 million converted Aztecs and then continued through the Muslim defeat in 1683 into the early 1700’s when a new test for the Church came upon it in the rise of Rationalism, free masonry, the French Revolution (1789-1814) and the threat of Napoleon. There will be no salvation from this mess in the Church (or the world) until “the choir” itself has the ability to publically admit its failures and gets itself back into true Christian Catholic harmony.
All the Fathers of the Church, and the Magisterium too, declare that Christ instituted Baptism before Pentecost, and indeed scripture says He taught the apostles to Baptise.
Our Lord did indeed commission His Disciples to baptize in water, and it was certainly done “in Jesus’ name.” (John 4:1-4) Thus it was a baptism to repentance, as was John’s, but ADDITIONALLY was a public witness to faith in, and commitment to Jesus Christ as the Redeemer that John had said was to come to Baptize them in the Holy Spirit. That John added this new faith requirement is proven by the difficulty that then arose among some of John’s baptism over Christ being the Messiah because of the extreme difference in Jesus’ approach to ministry. Thus, John’s baptism now became identical to the baptisms of the Disciples of Christ and thus became acceptable or adequate public witness believers in Christ for their later entrance into the New Covenant when the Holy Spirit was actually given, Baptizing them in the Spirit. Quite illuminating to this matter of these two pre Atonement water baptisms is what is found in Acts 18:24-19:6 about Apollos and other disciples of John in Ephesus, having been baptized only under the first of his two baptisms, a baptism that was no longer an adequate witness of Christian faith. Their baptism by John was before he began to make faith in Christ part of his baptism because neither Apollos or those of Ephesus new Jesus was the Messiah and had not received the Holy Spirit! Upon receiving these full Christian truths they were baptized by water and then received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. So unless I am missing something here, this does not conflict with the teaching of the Church Fathers but verifies their witness to a fully valid pre New Covenant, pre Church baptism that was acceptable by the Church.
Baptised in Jesus’ name, means under His authority. Christ institute the baptism in the Name of the Most Holy Trinity, that is, of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, with water, immersion. St. John the Baptist only asked an act of repentance of sins against the Law. I have never read that he baptised in the name of the Trinity, however. So his had the effect of a good confession for those who were repentent, ex opere operantis, but Christ’s ex opere operato.
Comments are closed.