Sei sulla pagina 1di 11

Visit: vaticancatholic.

Can Catholics go anywhere to receive sacraments today?

Bro. Michael Dimond

-Is it ever permissible to go to a validly ordained priest for the sacraments who claims to be Catholic but prays in union with Benedict XVI or holds to some other heresy?-

Many people have asked the question: Does a person commit sin or cooperate in evil by being present at a traditional Mass or receiving sacraments from a priest at a church where Benedict XVI is prayed for as the pope?

The answer to that question is not an easy one, and we have written some other articles in the past on this difficult subject. The following is my opinion on the matter, and some common sense on this issue.

People often have disagreements and debates about whether someone is cooperating in evil by working for or being present at places where evils take place. For example, some time ago a person I know would buy groceries at a supermarket which prominently displayed the blasphemous book The Da Vinci Code at the checkout counter. This book denies the divinity of Jesus Christ and contains other blasphemies that dont need to be repeated. Essentially every supermarket today sells evil books and videos, and highly immodest magazines where you check out. Is it permissible to enter these places that display these evil things and expose people to evil without committing sin? Are you supporting or accepting evil by going there or by giving the store business? Can you get the food you need to sustain your physical health? The answer is that you can go to the store and buy the food you need without committing any sin. I believe that, on a certain level, this point relates to the issue of whether a person may go to certain churches to receive the sacraments where Benedict XVI is prayed for as the pope in order to receive the spiritual food which is necessary for your spiritual health. I will first answer some questions from those who believe you may not go to these churches for the Mass or the sacraments. I will later state my position on how a person could possibly attend these churches. I will also discuss whom I believe should be considered a notoriously heretical priest, as opposed to a heretical priest.


Some might phrase the question of going to these churches this way: If Benedict XVI is so clearly a heretic, how can a person go to churches where he is prayed for as the pope in the Mass? I would respond by saying that virtually every Mass that has been offered anywhere for the last century has been offered by a priest who prayed in union with a bishop who was clearly heretical. For example, more than fifty years ago, every single priest in the Boston area was praying for the arch-heretic Cardinal Richard Cushing, who boasted that he had never made one convert in his entire life. Cushing declared that the infallible Catholic dogma, Outside the Church There is No Salvation, is nonsense. He was also given the Jewish Freemasons Bnai Brith Man-of-the-Year award. Could you go to the Masses at the churches where Cushing was prayed for as the Cardinal of Boston? Was everyone bound under pain of mortal sin to avoid all the Masses in the Boston area during the 1940s and 1950s? No. If you didnt go, you would have been pretty much without Holy Communion for your whole life. A traditionalist priest named Fr. Anthony Cekada recently wrote an article about why he believes that a Catholic may not assist at a Mass where Benedict XVI is prayed for as the pope. But what gets lost in the discussion about whether Catholics may go to the Mass where Benedict XVI is prayed for as the pope is the fact that the very authors promoting and writing articles on this issue are themselves horrible heretics. The point I will attempt to demonstrate is that there isnt that much of a difference between the heretic Benedict XVI and the heretic Fr. Cekada. If you may go to a Mass which is offered by a heretic (which amounts to almost all Masses for the last century), then you may go to a place where a heretic prays for another heretic as the pope. Benedict XVI, Cekada, and almost all sedevacantist priests are unfortunately heretics

Most people who hold that no one may attend any una cum Masses believe that you may attend the Masses of other sedevacantist priests. But I would ask them: Why do you believe that you may go to a priest who is himself a heretic, as long as he doesnt pray for a heretic (Benedict XVI)? This brings me to my point about Fr. Cekada and other sedevacantists priests who say that you should not go to a Mass where the priest prays for Benedict XVI.

Benedict XVI, Fr. Cekada and almost all other sedevacantist priests are archheretics and even antichrists because they dont believe that Jesus Christ, His faith, and baptism are necessary for salvation. They wouldnt openly admit this, but they foster the idea that Jesus is not the only Savior. They basically all hold that men can be saved by their desire, blood or wish. The late Marcel Lefebvre said that men

can be saved by the practice of their religion, perhaps of what they understand in their religion. Catholic teaching states that the only way a person can be put into the state of justification (the state of grace) is by receiving the merit of Jesus Christs redemption in holy baptism. All who promote salvation for people in other ways (outside this one way) are promoting a false Christ of baptism of desire, salvation by invincible ignorance, etc. The bottom-line is that Benedict XVI, Cekada and virtually every priest in the world believe that an individual practicing and dying in a false religion can be saved. This is something that no canonized saint of the Church ever believed or promoted. Its a blatant denial of the dogma that without the Catholic faith you cannot be saved. In fact, almost all of the heresies that have been promoted by Vatican II and the last five antipopes deal with the denial of this dogma. Almost every priest for the last one hundred years (with almost no exceptions) believed that a Jew who rejects Jesus Christ can be saved while practicing Judaism. The difference between Cekada and Benedict XVI is that Cekada (and other sedevacantists priests) wouldnt promote Judaism or encourage the practice of Judaism or meet with Jews in ecumenical meetings. But the bottom-line is that Benedict XVI, Cekada and almost every priest today believe that individual Jews and others, who are practicing and dying in their false religions, can be saved. Therefore, theyre all horrible heretics. In fact, in the case of Cekada, he will not even let you receive the sacraments if you hold the position that to be saved you must be born again of water and the Holy Ghost. Both Benedict XVI, and virtually all the priests and bishops throughout the world are antichrists

Both Benedict XVI and the priests and bishops throughout the world who promote salvation for non-Catholics are antichrists. Benedict XVI is an antichrist to a greater degree; the others are to a lesser degree.

While Benedict XVI might be having another meeting with members of Protestant churches, the heretical sedevacantist priest might be busy at work writing a new article which will try to convince people that its heresy to believe that all men need to be baptized to be saved. Whose activity is worse? The fact is that basically every sedevacantist priest and Benedict XVI hold to the worst heresy that one could hold. They almost all believe that non-Catholics can be saved and that natural birth control may be used by couples to limit the size of their families. Ask yourself this question: is it worse to meet with members of false religions, or to believe that they can be saved while practicing their false religions? Many people (incorrectly) believe that by meeting and being friendly to members of false religions, Benedict XVI might encourage them to become Catholics. If nothing else, they believe that

they will hear some Catholic things or get a chance to hear more about the Catholic religion. Fr. Cekada begins his article with these words: The Grain of Incense. The reference to the grain of incense is of course meant to imply that to go to a Mass where the priest prays in union with Benedict XVI is equivalent to giving a grain of incense to a false god. Ironically, Fr. Cekada himself believes that people who practice a false religion in which incense is thrown to a false god can be saved. Not very long ago, Fr. Cekada stated in an audio sermon (which I listened to) that he has friends who are priests and pastors in the Novus Ordo. I wonder if Cekada has ever shared his article with his friends, in which he states that going to their Masses is a mortal sin and equivalent to throwing incense to a false god? I doubt it. Speaking about Benedict XVI, Cekada stated: they all place him (Benedict XVI) in the Church, where, as a heretic, he cannot be. He cannot be in the Church, according to Fr. Cekada? But Cekada believes that people who practice false religions can be in the Church somehow and be saved. I would like to find out how sure Cekada is that Benedict XVI is not inside the Church. It would also be interesting to ask the heretic Cekada and other sedevacantist priests if Benedict XVI and the priests who pray for him as the pope are definitely in a state of mortal sin and will definitely spend eternity in Hell if they continue on their path. You might be very surprised at how few, if any, will tell you that Benedict XVI, or the priests who believe he is pope, are definitely in mortal sin and on the road to Hell.

In fact, Cekada would have to believe that Benedict XVI might be in the Church. For he believes that a Jew who rejects Jesus Christ can be justified and united to the Church by an unconscious desire. This was confirmed in numerous conversations with him. If a Jew who rejects Christ Himself, the author of faith, can be inside the Church, according to Cekada, why cant Benedict XVI (who only rejects Christs dogmas) also be in good faith and inside the Church? Cekadas beliefs require him to admit that its possible.

Someone like Fr. Cekada is maybe only slightly better than Benedict XVI. In some ways, Cekada is more evil and dangerous than Benedict XVI. This is because Cekada is deceiving people who claim to be traditional Catholics, whereas Vatican II Catholics dont take their faith seriously. Yes, apostates like Cekada spend much time and thought on how you dont absolutely need baptism or Christ to be saved. They are the kind of heretics that would be telling missionaries that it isnt absolutely necessary to risk everything to convert and baptize people. They would say that men can be saved who are in invincible ignorance or who have some kind of desire for baptism. So, to have a faithless, apostate priest giving people advice on where people should go to Mass is not something real Catholics should look for.

Some other people, who can see that Cekada and the rest are heretics, hold the position that you shouldnt go to any priest who believes that people can be saved in other religions. Well, this would mean that you could not have received the sacraments almost anywhere for the last one hundred years. They conveniently ignore this fact. The unfortunate fact is that almost every priest has been believing and most catechisms have been teaching the worst heresy: that non-Catholics who practice false religions can go to Heaven. This has been taught or implied in almost every catechism since the late 1880s. These catechisms would also contradict this by declaring that the Sacrament of Baptism is necessary for salvation.

As you can see, there isnt a big difference between the sedevacantist priests today, the pre-Vatican II heretical priests, and the traditionalist priests who curre ntly believe Benedict XVI is the pope.

Some other people (although fewer in number) hold that you must not go to any churches today for the sacraments because some or many of the people going there are heretics. Well, that was the case before Vatican II. Most of the people in the pews from approximately 1900 to 1950 believed in salvation outside the Church. Were the Catholics who did not believe in any heresy praying with heretics if they showed up at church before Vatican II because many of the people in the pews (not to mention the priest) were already modernists and heretics? No.

Some of the aforementioned individuals take their false theology to its radically false conclusion and argue that no one may go to any Mass or receive sacraments at any church without first questioning every person in the church to make sure hes in agreement on every issue. Well, the Church has never once stated that this is an obligation of a person who is going to receive sacraments; nor has the Church ever once taught that a Catholic receiving a sacrament is responsible for the sacrilegious Communions that someone else in the church might make.

Some other people hold that you may not go to any of these churches because they are non-Catholic churches equivalent to Protestant or Eastern Orthodox churches. They think they have become non-Catholic churches by recognizing a manifest heretic and an antipope. If that were true, then they were all non-Catholic churches in the 1960s and 1970s during Padre Pios and Fr. Feeneys time because they recognized Paul VI (a manifest heretic and an antipope) as the pope. Were all the churches under Paul VI, which offered a traditional form of Mass, non5

Catholic churches and thus equivalent to Protestant or Eastern Orthodox churches? Obviously not. The notion is ridiculous.

Certainly the people and the priests who agreed with and/or obstinately defended the heresies of Vatican II, even at that time, put themselves outside the church as much as Protestants or Eastern Orthodox; but the building itself was categorically different from a notorious non-Catholic church by virtue of its celebration of a traditional Catholic liturgy and by virtue of its public profession that it holds all the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church.

Nevertheless, in trying to prove this point, some of these individuals fall into the most absurd positions. They wind up arguing that everyone above reason at every church since 1965 or even 1958 became a non-Catholic by virtue of going to a nonCatholic church. By such absurd conclusions, which anyone with any Catholic sense can see are ridiculous, they demonstrate that their premise that all of these churches are the equivalent of notorious non-Catholic churches, such as Protestant and Eastern Orthodox churches is false.

The attempted justifications which priests under Benedict XVI use

In his article, Fr. Cekada makes reference to the teaching of theologians that praying in union with a pope is what a Catholic priest must do. To fail to do so is to separate yourself from the Catholic Church. The priests who pray for Benedict XVI argue that they must pray for him to be faithful to Catholic teaching. They say that everything (in their opinion) seems to indicate that he is the pope; and therefore to not pray for him is not the right Catholic thing to do. As a side note - who the priest prays for in the Mass is a minor part of the Mass or liturgy.

Most of the priests are too cowardly to say anything about Benedict XVI publicly. Maybe some priests realize that once they begin to attack Benedict XVI, they will probably end up saying he is not the pope. Some priests who believe Benedict XVI is the pope might answer your question on the issue this way:

1) Catholics must believe that the man who is widely accepted as pope should be accepted as the valid pope. To determine that a claimant to the papacy is not

the pope is not a judgment that a Catholic has the authority to make, and certainly not one that he must make. It would be a rash and dangerous decision to decide that Benedict XVI is not the pope. I cant be held responsible if he is somehow not the pope. The safer position is to assume he is the pope.

2) Benedict XVI may be bad, evil or doing things that are harmful to the church, but this is something that a valid pope is capable of doing, according to Catholic teaching and theologians. Pope Martin V even stated that a true pope could be wicked and of the devil. Also, Benedict XVIs words and actions do not rise to the level of making him a formal heretic.

3) I have to pray for Benedict XVI as the pope in the Mass. To not do so would be to deny the dogma of the papacy, or the solemn teaching of Vatican I. I would then be like the Orthodox, who deny the supreme jurisdiction of the pope. It would be denying the Catholic faith.

4) The heresies from Benedict XVI are taken out of context and Benedict XVIs goal is really to convert these non-Catholics.

5) If these recent claimants to the papacy are not true popes, then there are no cardinals left (who in recent history have elected the pope) and we could never get another pope.

6) It would not be possible for God to allow the pope to become a heretic; it would mean the gates of Hell have prevailed against the Church.

In short, the priest claims to be holding the right Catholic position during this crisis, and using good Catholic common sense. These attempted justifications by priests who accept Benedict XVI are false and they are answered in our material. But the important thing to be considered here is that the priest is attempting to defend or justify his position by quoting what he deems to be Catholic teaching and good Catholic common sense on this issue. While this is not good enough for this priest to escape being a heretic, it is important from the standpoint of determining whether a person could receive sacraments from this priest.


My present position on this issue would be that a Catholic may go and receive the sacraments from a validly ordained priest who accepts Benedict XVI as the pope under the conditions explained below. My personal position on this issue, at this point in the apostasy, is that you are not going for the Mass. You are merely going to the church to receive Communion and confession. I have advised people to deliberately arrive at the Mass late because you are there merely to receive the sacraments and for nothing else. As far as praying with the people, I have told people that they should pray by themselves until Communion is given. When you see that the priest is about to give Communion, one could then go into the main part of the church to receive Communion.

To determine if a particular priest is an option for receiving Communion, you should call the priest and ask him the following questions:

1) Was he ordained in the eastern rite or in the traditional roman rite by a bishop who was consecrated in the traditional rite? If he says yes to either question, you are dealing with a validly ordained priest. If he answers that he was not ordained in the eastern rite or the traditional roman rite, then you are not dealing with a validly ordained priest, so you cannot go to him.

2) How does he view the modern-day ecumenical movement? Does he like the fact that Benedict XVI is visiting mosques, synagogues and praising false religions, or does he have a problem with it? The priest must express that he has some problems with this kind of ecumenism. If he doesnt have any problems with it and/or likes the kind of ecumenical activity that Benedict XVI is engaged in, then you cannot go to him for Holy Communion. Priests who either like ecumenism, or dont believe we should attempt to convert non-Catholics, or dont accept you as a Catholic for holding the correct teachings, should be considered notoriously heretical. (Heretical priests like Cekada, who condemn people who dont believe in baptism of desire, would also be off-limits for the latter reason.) Holy Communion should not be received from notoriously heretical priests.

3) Does he believe we should attempt to convert non-Catholics? The question is not whether he believes non-Catholics can be saved in their false religions, for almost every priest for the last 100 years has believed in that heresy. The question is whether he believes we should evangelize and

attempt to convert and lead people into the one true Catholic Church. If he says no, then you may not go to him for Holy Communion. If he says yes, then you may go to him for the sacraments (provided he meets the other conditions). As a side note on this issue, when a person deals with an eastern rite priest, you should specifically ask him about the members of the Orthodox religion. Many eastern rite priests have an especially soft spot in their hearts for these schismatics. One of the reasons for this is that the recent antipopes have been quite explicit in issuing directives which state that there is to be no proselytism of the Orthodox. The so -called leaders of the eastern rite churches have also been quite explicit in following the noconversion-for-the-Orthodox line.

4) You need to tell the priest that you believe that a person has to be a Catholic to be saved, and that you hold that Benedict XVI is a manifest heretic for many reasons and therefore is not the pope, according to the teachings of the Catholic Church. If he tells you that he doesnt bel ieve you are a Catholic for holding these positions, you cannot receive the sacraments from him. If he still respects you as a Catholic, even though he doesnt agree, you could receive the sacraments from him.


While we would say that the notoriously heretical priest may not be approached for Holy Communion, we believe that those priests who are notoriously heretical because they like ecumenism and praying with and respecting other religions may be approached for confession, if you cannot find any better options for confession within a reasonable distance.

If he is a notoriously heretical priest who doesnt think you are a Catholic because of what you believe, we would say you may only go to him for confession in danger of death.

When you go to a priest for confession, you do not have to begin the confession with the words: Forgive me father, for I have sinned. You can begin the confession with: It has been (insert time) since my last confession, I ask forgiveness for, then start your confession.


If you were attending the New Mass, you need to mention in confession that you attended a non-Catholic or Protestant service for many months or years. You need to mention that you supported heretical priests or groups. You will also need to reconfess any mortal sins that were confessed to invalidly ordained priests, or any Catholic dogmas that you denied. On our website, we also have the profession of faith from the Council of Trent. All who have been away from the traditional Catholic faith should make this profession before receiving sacraments.

How One Could Attend These Churches

While there isnt an obligation to go to any heretic to receive Communion, here is my personal opinion on how a person could go to a church to receive the sacraments where they believe and pray for Benedict XVI as pope. As stated earlier, at this point in the present apostasy, you are really not going for the Mass, but only to receive the sacraments.

If you decide to go to him to receive Communion and confession, I would not recommend going to the priests Mass on time. A person could arrive late, maybe about 10 minutes before Communion is given. It might even be better to go on Monday through Saturday, instead of on Sunday. There is no Sunday obligation to go to a heretic. Also, as we have stated many times before, no one may give donations to these heretical priests. If a person does support them, he or she commits a grave sin and is directly supporting a heretical priest and/or a heretical organization. A person should not pray with the other people at the Mass or liturgy. A person should say the rosary or other prayers privately by themselves and not join in with the prayers or singing of the others present.

When you go to these churches, many have clear glass windows when you enter in the back. A person could pray the rosary out there until they see Holy Communion is about to be distributed. If a person does go into the main part of the church, he or she should sit in the very back.

The only people who can fruitfully receive the sacraments are those who agree with what the Catholic Church teaches. Therefore, a person needs to be in full agreement with Catholic teaching on the following issues:



You agree that you must be a Catholic to be saved. You absolutely agree that anyone who is not a Catholic will sadly be lost forever.


You agree that Benedict XVI is a heretic, and therefore cannot be a true Catholic pope. You do not go to the New Mass.


If you are a married person, you dont use artificial or natural birth control (Natural Family Planning) to deliberately limit the size of your family.

The benefits of receiving Communion are obviously great, for it is to receive the body, blood, soul and divinity of God himself. Its the greatest action in which a person can take part during his brief earthly existence. The absolute power and graces derived from worthily receiving valid Communion is usually something that is not given much or any weight by those who dogmatically declare that you may not go to a Mass where Benedict XVI is prayed for as pope.

The truth is that Communion is the most necessary thing for a Catholic outside of baptism. We see this from the words of God Himself, Amen, amen, I say unto you, except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whosoever eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. (John 6) Jesus threatens us, by telling us th at we cannot have everlasting life unless we receive Him in communion. Our Lord swears to it. Therefore, if there is a validly ordained priest who meets the criteria mentioned earlier, a person may take advantage and receive the sacraments from him. If not, then a person has to stay home.