Will be updated. Version 1.03 (~15. March 2024)
Luke and Alex
Here is my first full debate with Luke and Alex under their sedevacantist debate with Nick Santosuso (link), more than two months ago
Use arrows to navigate.
Alex
Here is a follow up debate and chat with Alex through Facebook messenger (just for a record) starting from 9th of January 2024. This had to be shortened, because originally it had around 100 screenshots.
Canon 1239 of 1917 Code: “1. Those who die without baptism are not to be accorded ecclesiastical burial. 2. Catechumens who through no fault of their own die without baptism are to be reckoned as baptized.”
The whole point they keep pushing is that Canon 1239 is infallible, as well as whole Code of Cannon Law 1917. Whilst claiming to reject BOD and saying only Baptism of Water saves (being very familiar with the material of Brother Dimonds). But the code itself is not infallible. It was promulgated to Latins only. More on that here: https://vaticancatholic.com/1917-code-of-canon-law/
They say (lie) that to die without baptism is actually to die with baptism. Right… total idiocy. Alex is adding stuff like „in sight of Church“ and Alex then accuses me (he is projecting) of adding things like Trent Horn, just because I said that it clearly suggests BOD, which it does. Even commentaries on this cannon admit, that this is example of Baptism of Desire for Catechumens.
They are heretics. Here is a short commentary from Facebook, with included reply by MHFM: link to fb post.
—
Bishop Gabriel Tetherow
In his recent video address (link) Bishop Gabriel Tetherow addressed and attacked MHFM, for they according to him „leave out message of mercy from Gospel“ and don’t bring therefore the whole Gospel truth, and bring false message according to him. He is saying they are using only fear tactics, and therefore corrupt Gospel truth. That is what he is basically saying.
But anyone familiar with MHFM knows, that they call people to conversion with kind words, often times with words like „God wants you to become Catholic“, they say such things „In Charity, you are not Catholic and you will not save your soul…“, etc. So his assertion is a flat out lie, mortal sin!
Little background story:
The reason why he does so – and says in his address that „they use emotion of fear“ and says „this is mark of effeminacy“ and so on – is because they (MHFM) told their followers to not go to his chapel, because for years he was publicly infamous and was known for ‚as the priest who had in possession child pornography‘ and ‚masturbated on pictures‘ of what he says now, were only ‚adults‘. He never publicly clarified this or made a press conference on such serious allegations, and he did let his name to be mudded. Nevertheless, he was even by Canon law (as we will see) by that fact infamous, and he should have cleared his name long time ago. Only recently he made confession in the video „I have blood of Christ on my hands“.
In my private email Bishop Tetherow admitted to me, that he did not consider it to be obligation to publicly clear his name, or make public correction and viewed his sacramental confession to be sufficient enough to be forgiven and clean. That is what he said in private conversation to me. However, such assertion fails: first he seemed to be completely unfamiliar on infamy and how code of Canon law treats this (I will get to this and cite some canons and principles – canons 2357, 2359), second, for a public sin a public remedy is required, such as in case of infamous sentencing. Note he was sentenced for illegal use of computer for masturbation on what he says were ‚adult pictures‘. Thirdly, if he wants to maintain position he has been absolved and that does it for him, then why call his confession by title „I have blood of Christ on my hands“ – which is a present simple tense?
So therefore, MHFM had all the right reason out of prudence, to not recommend him as a priest to go to. So therefore, Bishop Gabriel Tetherow should not throw fits, rants and tantrums in his sermons or addresses, that MHFM is „lacking mercy“, just because they did not recommend him. He should see this from the other perspective and stop behaving like a child.
Infamy
Catholic Encyclopedia (article on Infamy): „Infamy is loss of a good name. When this has been brought about by regular legal process, terminating in a conviction in a court of justice, no injury is done to the criminal by publishing the fact. The same thing can be said when the scandalous repute in which a person is held is matter of common knowledge. The canon law seems to require a pre-existing public opinion against an individual before the investigation in a judicial inquiry can be narrowed to any particular person. Infamy in the canonical sense is defined as the privation or lessening of one’s good name as the result of the bad rating which he has, even among prudent men. It constitutes an irregularity, i.e. a canonical impediment which prevents one being ordained or exercising such orders as he may have already received.
Infamy of law is contracted in one of three ways. Either the law itself attaches this juridical ineligibility and incapacity to the commission of certain crimes, or makes it contingent upon the decision of a judge, or finally connects it with the penalty imposed by him. This kind of infamy is incurred chiefly by those guilty of duelling (whether as principals or seconds), rape (as likewise those who co-operate in it), attempt to marry during the lifetime of the actual consort, heresy, real simony, etc. Infamy of law may be removed either by canonical purging or by application to the Holy See.“ [1]
1917 code of canon law:
2357
- Laity legitimately convicted of a delict against the sixth [commandment of the Decalogue] with a minor below the age of sixteen, or of debauchery, sodomy, incest, or pandering, are by that fact infamous, besides other penalties that the Ordinary decides should be inflicted.
2359
- If they engage in a delict against the sixth precept of the Decalogue with a minor below the age of sixteen, or engage in adultery, debauchery, bestiality, sodomy, pandering, incest with blood-relatives or affines in the first degree, they are suspended, declared infamous, and are deprived of any office, benefice, dignity, responsibility, if they have such, whatsoever, and in more serious cases, they are to be deposed.
As you can see. He was infamous and was not defending his name in public for many years, thus letting others to rely on articles about him.
A good name is better than great riches: and good favour is above silver and gold.
[Proverbs 22:1]
So to call MHFM effeminate, lacking mercy, using only emotions of fear and fear tactics, etc. is just a total lie. This results from spirit of pride. Furthermore, it was always practice of Church, that public sinners should spend life of penance and seldom would be given public ministry, depending on gravity of infamy. So to go out start seminary and make public ministry – which he does for two years already – is a mark of pride. He lacks humility, he is not Saint Augustine or St Paul or St Peter, he is one prideful overly ambitious Bishop.
His heresy
Introduction: Furthermore in his video-address ‚MHFM, with all due respect…‘, he invites MHFM, Sanborn‘ and Pivarunas‘ groups, himself, together, to put aside differences and start talking. However, he knows they are imposing non-Catholic heretics, but in his delusion he says „there is a hope for conversion“.
That is delusional. But in his address he did not mention conversion. And now I come to the main point. In the comment, one lady made following statement [AND REMEMBER: this is in context of him talking to invite Pivarunas, Sanborn and MHFM together]: „This is perfection. I have been told that going to certain Sedes (for the sacraments) will end in heartbreak and arguments, because they might believe an error that even holy SAINTS were confused about! I despise arguing and I understand that as long as the Mass is a Bergoglio-free zone, and that the priests do not desire to be in the Vatican II cult, and as long as the ordinations are valid — we should be GRATEFUL to GOD to have these sede chapels among us! Amen!!„
As a response Bishop Gabriel Tetherow wrote: „Agreed! God bless.“
That is heresy and endorsement of heretical chapels/groups. Those groups reject communion with „Feenyties“ , would call you a „non-Catholic“ or a „heretic“, because you accept John 3:5 as it is written. Here is a proof, from their own websites and chapels:
SANBORN: „ANYONE WHO ADHERES TO THE DOCTRINES OF FR. FEENEY IS BARRED FROM RECEIVING THE SACRAMENTS IN THIS CHAPEL“ – link
or CMRI. Link here, and screenshot bellow.
It is not an issue of unbaptized Catechumen (and they are wrong on that). They are in rebellion to and in a quest against Jesus Christ, because they don’t believe Christ is really necessary for salvation, and that pagans and unbelievers need to convert to Him and be baptized in order to get to heaven. So they are not Catholics. And misguided lady says „we should be grateful to God to have these sede chapels among us“, and Bp. Tetherow agrees. What heresy, what abomination.
These were my responses, that I will finish this with:
and in following note the emotionally driven, liar and heretic Alex. They are HERETICS!
Kristian Keller
tradicnykatolik.sk
[1] – https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08001a.htm