My Journey from Ultramontanism to Catholicism with Peter Kwasniewski

[@Onepeterfive]

If you have benefited from OnePeterFive, please become a monthly donor: onepeterfive.com/donate

[@emilyfriedl7042]

Most informative/catechetical discussion on the papacy I've heard in a looooong time. Keep it up!

[@Onepeterfive]

Thanks! Please support us onepeterfive.com/donate

[@M5guitar1]

This is one of the most eye opening and informative interviews that I've come across. It completely resolves many of the issues I have with this papacy which is riddled with error. I'd like to see what Catholic Answers has to say about this, however, I sense that they are steeped in hyper-montanism, i.e pope-splainin'.

[@Onepeterfive]

Thanks brother! Please help us: onepeterfive.com/donate

[@jamessalerno4234]

It is frustrating, as someone who converted and was very edified by Catholic Answers to see them claim things like there was “absolutely nothing contrary to the faith” in his actions participating in the “smudging” ceremony. Claiming that they’re praying to God the Father. They are not at all. Because they aren’t trinitarian. As if it’s not encouraging error. As if it’s AOK, even good. It’s sickening. And it doesn’t convert people or help souls.

[@TheLeonhamm]

This is Catholicism at work .. practically. Keep the Faith; tell the truth, shame the devil, and let the demons shriek. God bless. ;o)

[@Kyntai]

An excellent and well rounded discussion. Lots of things to think about.

[@Onepeterfive]

Thanks! Please support us onepeterfive.com/donate

[@ld2906]

Great interview. Thank you for your efforts and the integrity of your interrogation which would likely have amounted to a revealing of the dove amongst the pigeons. Sobering and good but disturbingly uncomfortable (for all the right reasons), for all the vanilla spiritual constructionists of the "traditionalist" mould.

[@kamilziemian995]

In this time of papale abuse it is easy to criticise ultromontanism. But, I'm afraid that we may as side effect forget about rightful prerogatives of pope and as result end up being ruled by corrupted comissions comprised of bishops and laity, not carring about pope at all. Nor for other corrupted comissions in country next door.

[@pslobodnik]

I agree. The alternative of spreading the authority to the bishops and theologians would be even more disastrous in today's world.

[@etcwhatever]

@@pslobodnik truth be told Francis is already doing that either way...

[@JJ-is7mn]

Blessed Karl is hosting podcasts now

[@Onepeterfive]

Of course!

[@njm1211]

This is quite tragic that so many people are willing to chuck Catholic teaching out the door to be able to tell themselves that the leaders of the Vatican II sect must undoubtedly be Catholic popes. I hope that Kwasniewski is only misguided and not trying to actively harm souls.

[@audoremus]

Can you explain what you refer to when you say “Catholic teaching”? I’m truly interested what teaching(s) would support your take on this.

[@njm1211]

@@audoremus Catholic Encyclopedia: "As our present purpose is to state what Ultramontanism is, it is beside our scope to expound the Catholic doctrine on the power of the Church and, in particular, of the pope, whether in spiritual or temporal matters, these subjects being treated elsewhere under their respective titles. It is sufficient here to indicate what our adversaries mean by Ultramontanism. For Catholics it would be superfluous to ask whether Ultramontanism and Catholicism are the same thing: assuredly, those who combat Ultramontanism are in fact combating Catholicism, even when they disclaim the desire to oppose it." Pope Pius XII: "The Pope has the divine promises; even in his human weaknesses, he is invincible and unshakable; he is the messenger of truth and justice, the principle of the unity of the Church; his voice denounces errors, idolatries, superstitions; he condemns iniquities; he makes charity and virtue loved." Pastor Aeternus: "And since the Roman Pontiff is at the head of the universal Church by the divine right of apostolic primacy, We teach and declare also that he is the supreme judge of the faithful, and that in all cases pertaining to ecclesiastical examination recourse can be had to his judgment; moreover, that the judgment of the Apostolic See, whose authority is not surpassed, is to be disclaimed by no one, nor is anyone permitted to pass judgment on its judgment. Therefore, they stray from the straight path of truth who affirm that it is permitted to appeal from the judgments of the Roman Pontiffs to an ecumenical Council, as to an authority higher than the Roman Pontiff." Pope Pius IX: "We congratulate you, therefore, on the fact that although you suffer, doubtless, at the defection of your brothers, separated from you by the breath of perfidious teaching, you are not troubled for all that, and are even being stimulated by their error to receive with greater willingness and to follow with more zeal not only the orders, but even all the directives of the Apostolic See; and by so doing you are certain that you cannot be deceived or betrayed." Bellarmine: "The Pope is the Teacher and Shepherd of the whole Church, thus, the whole Church is so bound to hear and follow him that if he would err, the whole Church would err. Now our adversaries respond that the Church ought to hear him so long as he teaches correctly, for God must be heard more than men. On the other hand, who will judge whether the Pope has taught rightly or not? For it is not for the sheep to judge whether the shepherd wanders off, not even and especially in those matters which are truly doubtful. Nor do Christian sheep have any greater judge or teacher to whom they might have recourse. As we showed above, from the whole Church one can appeal to the Pope yet, from him no one is able to appeal; therefore necessarily the whole Church will err if the Pontiff would err."

[@Onepeterfive]

Dear brother in Christ: we have stated clearly our position in this video. It appears that you have not watched it, otherwise you would not misrepresent our words in your comment. Please listen to the video and then speak like a Christian to your brethren in comments. With respect, Timothy.

[@Bob.W.]

Are they aware that the alarm is sounding about Francis changing Humanae Vitae? Heard Anthony Stine discuss it on his channel this morning.

[@Onepeterfive]

We discussed this on the video

[@LionHeartsDiscipleship]

What was the book by Kerwin? Oxford University Press?

[@corbenalley8382]

The balls of this man, just admit the Pope teaches a different gospel and the implications of that per scripture. Look up how ultramontanism is defined in Catholic dictionaries and theology manuals.

[@Onepeterfive]

We addressed this in the video

[@patriciamathews5975]

Francis admits he wants a different Church so the blinders of so many Catholics concerning the extreme, abusive Papal power is what Peter is portraying for us. Time to reject it and you need to press your Bishops to stand for the Faith, as handed down. Not as changed up.

[@corbenalley8382]

Ultramontanism = Catholicism. The Pope = Catholicism Who is this man called the pope if he's teaching a different religion and more often than not, not defending Catholicism and affirming his faith in it.

[@patriciamathews5975]

@@corbenalley8382 Corben, I am going to share a very meaningful encounter Christ gave me Years ago. I had strayed from Christ and the Church. By God's grace, I had a intense reconnection, a full "Divine Intervention" in my being. After much repentance, I heard a gentle but firm call: "Follow my commands." In order to do that I could not just listen to one priest/preacher/teacher, TV program, book, etc. I had to know Christ's commands. I've been studying and praying ever since. I know Jesus is not going to ask me when I meet Him face to face how well I followed such and such a Pope or doctrine. He will ask me if I followed His commands. The beauty of Christ's Divine Church is there is a great big cloud of witnesses we can consult. The Church has had false Shepherds in the past. Stick with the traditional magisterium, as handed down. Be sure it's Christ commands. That is where He never leaves us or forsakes us. 🙏

[@enslavedbytruth]

The Jesuits wouldn't need the 4th Vow if all the Faithful were bound by the same level obedience

[@chadhorton5879]

The First Vatican Council Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith, Dei Filius Pope Pius IX, 24 April 1870 A.D. “Wherefore, by divine and Catholic faith all those things are to be believed which are contained in the word of God as found in Scripture and tradition, and which are proposed by the Church as matters to be believed as divinely revealed, whether by her solemn judgment or in her ordinary and universal magisterium.” Cardinal Franzelin, Tractatus de Divina Traditione et Scriptura Cardinal Franzelin was one of the most trusted advisors to Pope Pius IX and one of the most eminent papal theologians at Vatican I...he would have understood exactly what Vatican I taught...here is what he explains: The Holy Apostolic See, to which the safeguarding of the deposit of faith and the attendant duty and office of feeding the universal Church for the salvation of souls have been divinely entrusted, can prescribe theological pronouncements - or even pronouncements to the extent they are connected with ones that are theological - as teachings to be followed, or it can censure them as teachings not to be followed, not solely with the intention of infallibly determining truth by a definitive pronouncement, but also necessarily and designedly apart from that aim, either without qualification or by way of limited supplements, to provide for the safety of Catholic doctrine (cf. Zaccaria, Antifebronius vindicatus, vol. II, diss. V, chap. 2, no. 1). Although infallible truth of doctrine may not be present in declarations of this kind (because, presumably, the intention of determining infallible truth is not present), nevertheless, infallible safety is present. I speak of both the objective safety of declared doctrine (either without qualification or by way of limited supplements, as mentioned) and the subjective safety of declared doctrine, insofar as it is safe for everyone to adopt it, and it is unsafe and impossible for anyone to refuse to adopt it without a violation of due submission towards the divinely established magisterium. (Cardinal John Baptist Franzelin, Tractatus de Divina Traditione et Scriptura, 2nd ed. [Rome: Ex Typ. S.C. de Propaganda Fide, 1875], Thesis XII, Principle VII; our translation; italics removed; underlining added. The entire work is available in English, translated by Ryan Grant, as On Divine Tradition [Sensus Traditionis Press, 2016].) Humani Generis On Modern Errors Pope Pius XII - August 12, 1950 20. “Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent, since in writing such Letters the Popes do not exercise the supreme power of their Magisterium. For these matters are taught with the Ordinary Magisterium (Magisterio Ordinario), of which it is true to say: “He who heareth you, heareth me…” (Lk. 10:16) Notice above in Humani Generis, Pope Pius XII infallibly teaches that: Encyclical Letters are the Ordinary Magisterium, "of which it is true to say: “He who heareth you, heareth Me…” (Lk. 10:16) So if we admit that Christ is infallible, Then we must admit that Encyclicals and the Ordinary Magisterium are infallible. Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi, June 29, 1943: 22. Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have been baptized and profess the true faith, and who have not been so unfortunate as to separate themselves from the unity of the Body, or been excluded by legitimate authority for grave faults committed. “For in one spirit” says the Apostle, “were we all baptized into one Body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free.” 17 As therefore in the true Christian community there is only one Body, one Spirit, one Lord, and one Baptism, so there can be only one faith. 18 And therefore if a man refuse to hear the Church let him be considered - so the Lord commands - as a heathen and a publican. 19 It follows that those are divided in faith or government cannot be living in the unity of such a Body, nor can they be living the life of its one Divine Spirit. 23. Nor must one imagine that the Body of the Church, just because it bears the name of Christ, is made up during the days of its earthly pilgrimage only of members conspicuous for their holiness, or that it consists only of those whom God has predestined to eternal happiness. it is owing to the Savior’s infinite mercy that place is allowed in His Mystical Body here below for those whom, of old, He did not exclude from the banquet. For not every offense, however grave it may be, is such as of its own nature to sever a man from the Body of the Church,as does schism or heresy or apostasy. 31. Just as at the first moment of the Incarnation the Son of the Eternal Father adorned with the fullness of the Holy Spirit the human nature which was substantially united to Him, that it might be a fitting instrument of the Divinity in the sanguinary work of the Redemption, so at the hour of His precious death He willed that His Church should be enriched with the abundant gifts of the Paraclete in order that in dispensing the divine fruits of the Redemption she might be, for the Incarnate Word, a powerful instrument that would never fail. For both the juridical mission of the Church, and the power to teach, govern and administer the Sacraments, derive their supernatural efficacy and force of the building up of the body of Christ from the fact that Jesus Christ, hanging on the Cross, opened up to His Church the fountain of those divine gifts, which prevent her from ever teaching false doctrine and enable her to rule them for the salvation of their souls through divinely enlightened pastors and to bestow on them an abundance of heavenly graces. Mortalium Animos, Encyclical by Pope Pius XI, 1928 “The Magisterium of the Church (“Ecclesia Magisterium”) which in the divine wisdom was constituted on earth in order that revealed doctrines might remain intact forever, and that they might be brought with ease and security to the knowledge of men, … is daily exercised [cotidie exercetur] through the Roman Pontiff and the Bishops who are in communion with him.” (Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, 1928) Note Well: The Teaching Authority (Magisterium) of the Church is exercised every day…not just in extraordinary circumstances, so there is no way to maintain that Vatican II and 63 years worth of Encyclicals and Catechisms from 1958-2021 weren’t the Magisterium of the Church…the Church’s Magisterium is incapable of teaching heresies…thus it is proof positive that John XXIII - Francis are NOT true Popes. “Besides this, in connection with things which must be believed, it is nowise licit to use that distinction which some have seen fit to introduce between those articles of faith which are fundamental and those which are not fundamental, as they say, as if the former are to be accepted by all, while the latter may be left to the free assent of the faithful: for the supernatural virtue of faith has a formal cause, namely the authority of God revealing, and this is patient of no such distinction. For this reason it is that all who are truly Christ’s believe, for example, the Conception of the Mother of God without stain of original sin with the same faith as they believe the mystery of the August Trinity, and the Incarnation of Our Lord just as they do the infallible teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, according to the sense in which it was defined by the Ecumenical Council of the Vatican. Are these truths not equally certain, or not equally to be believed, because the Church has solemnly sanctioned and defined them, some in one age and some in another, even in those times immediately before our own? Has not God revealed them all? For the teaching authority (magisterium) of the Church, which in the divine wisdom was constituted on earth in order that revealed doctrines might remain intact for ever, and that they might be brought with ease and security to the knowledge of men, and which is daily exercised through the Roman Pontiff and the Bishops who are in communion with him, has also the office of defining, when it sees fit, any truth with solemn rites and decrees, whenever this is necessary either to oppose the errors or the attacks of heretics, or more clearly and in greater detail to stamp the minds of the faithful with the articles of sacred doctrine which have been explained. But in the use of this extraordinary teaching authority (extraordinary magisterium) no newly invented matter is brought in, nor is anything new added to the number of those truths which are at least implicitly contained in the deposit of Revelation, divinely handed down to the Church: only those which are made clear which perhaps may still seem obscure to some, or that which some have previously called into question is declared to be of faith.”

[@enslavedbytruth]

It would be interesting to have a compilation of various opinions of Catholic laity throughout the last 500 yrs.

[@calenyulmaion]

I burst out laughing seeing Tim

[@catholicgabe2876]

I was actually surprised 😂

[@christophereagan9888]

Timothy! Nice 'stache!!

[@JohnFromAccounting]

It seems like a lot of ultramontanists converted or grew up during the JPII pontificate as a lot of the cultural revolution was ongoing. Pope Francis has been a blessing to dispel this error that was held by so many.

[@Onepeterfive]

Yes silver lining

[@M5guitar1]

Lemonade from a lemon...

[@pslobodnik]

This is a very difficult topic in my mind. I start with the premise that Christ did indeed give the pope supreme authority over His Church, which no Catholic can dispute. Sorry, but the way Vatican I defined it, under pain of anathema, that authority is not just doctrinal, but in regarding all discipline in the Church. We can argue about whether or not the bureaucratic inefficiency in the Vatican is a good or bad thing, but it has existed for centuries and does not diminish the pope's authority nor the allegiance we owe him. My point is, I don't have a problem with the "obsession" we have towards the papacy, because it is is a divine institution. I don't see any undue reverence in the sede gestatoria. Imagine if St Peter walked the earth: I would put him on a pedestal and listed to his every words. The difficulty is trying to square that with a pope (s) who clearly is on the wrong side and who is abusing his authority like anyone can. Of course you aren't bound by obedience to anyone who demands something immoral, but if I disobey him because of my own conscience, what separates me from a Lutheran? I think de Mattei probably makes the most sense to me, but I really struggle with it. Thanks for a good discussion either way.

[@aloyalcatholic5785]

Disagree. Imagine if St Peter walked the earth? What about when St Paul resisted him to his face? You might say how can you compare such and such situations today to the Bible, to which I would say, if it’s not the Bible for that purpose (to guide us when the Head Pastor goes astray), then what is it for exactly? It’s possible to love Peter as your spiritual father but also take issue with him on occasion.

[@chriskozik2573]

@Paul... "What separates me from a Lutheran?" Luther set up >his own teachings. That's opposite from >being faithful to Deposit of Faith and Morals AGAINST francis's publicly+ repeatedly rejecting and denying Faith and Morals (and that's separate from all his destructive acts against the Mass and Sacraments handed down from Apostolic times).... Francis literally denied and rejected GOD'S WORD IN SCRIPTURE AND SACRED TRADITION on the death penalty and the Ten Commandments; francis directly cast doubt on the sanctity of Mary, thereby incurring the condemnations of Pope Pius IX against anyone who publicly goes against the INFALLIBLE decree issued in Ineffabilis Deus; Francis officially in Amoris Laetitia disregarded and rejected the solemn teachings of Our Lord and His Church on divorce and adultery, and also on Sacrilege of allowing Communion be rec'd by those in such a state of grave sin, etc. No, there's no similarity between Luther and you: Luther rejected the Church's teachings and the papacy; you, on the other hand, are standing firm and faithful to the Church's teachings and the Office of the Papacy (not rejecting them) >against the direct attack/denial/rejection< by francis of the Deposit of Faith and Morals-and of Sacred Tradition in immemorial custom in the Mass and Sacraments. Our Lady Destroyer of All Heresies pray for us. St Joseph Patron of the Universal Church pray for us.

[@jy7383]

There have only been two new dogmas added in the last 150 or so years - --- the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption ---- Francis has NEVER done this. Even encyclicals are not necessarily dogmatic.

[@michaelcorleone5556]

You forgot infallibility.

[@kitstr]

Humanae vitae was 1967 or 68 not 76.

[@MartinvonTours11.11]

68

[@aloyalcatholic5785]

There isn’t a lot of market for this kind of thinking unfortunately in the post V2 church where there is so much invested in getting people to accept the Revolution. That being said, the Sede position is ultimately inadmissible

[@jacksonesq9992]

The truth is never inadmissible.

[@AJMacDonaldJr]

A doctrinally unsound pope?

[@aloyalcatholic5785]

Is going to be leading a Smudging ceremony soon in Edmonton AB to please natives there . Yes. Doctrinally unsound is the kind of putting it

[@koosvanzyl2605]

From bad to worse.

[@jacksonesq9992]

The Novus Ordo Watch site has already totally refuted Peter Kwasniewski and the “Recognize and Resist” position. Why do you pretend to be unaware of this? Is it because admitting the truth, and therefore that you’ve been catastrophically wrong, would hurt your business model?

[@timothywilliams1359]

I have read the so-called refutation over at Novus Ordo Watch and it is the usual sedevacantist nonsense. Pope Francis is a profoundly stupid man, and one whose faith is weak and polluted by the rotten ideas of the times in which he lives. He is also most likely quite morally corrupt, given the company he keeps and the sort of men he promotes. But he has not "commanded" anything contrary to the Faith. There is not a single, solemn, binding teaching of Bergoglio that is formally heretical. This is a pretty low standard for maintaining that he is the legitimate Pope, I grant you. But that is the only standard we Catholics have to work with. You sedevacantists are really just extreme papolaters. You demand a pope you can wholeheartedly venerate before you will recognize him as pope.

[@chriskozik2573]

@Jackson Esq... *Paul opposed Pope St. Peter ¹"to his face, because he stood condemned." Francis must be opposed when he acts against ²MORALS and the ³Deposit of Faith.* ¹The HOLY SPIRIT in Scripture (Gal. 2:11) strongly teaches that resisting and opposing the Vicar of Christ- title which, btw, Francis has officially rejected- IS necessary IF the Faith or Morals are endangered; that IS the universal and consistent teaching of the Church for this specific N.T. verse. Anyone who even hints that a pope may never be opposed and resisted directly and publicly >IS REJECTING, then, the revealed Word of GOD as universally taught by the Church for 2000 years. And for the record, unlike Peter or even bad popes in the past, Francis >is an ³evil man,< per the definition of Archbishop Fulton Sheen. This is immeasurably more serious and dangerous than if Francis merely were guilty of grave sin himself. A bad man, Sheen explained, is a person who does personal sin.... ³However, Sheen clearly pointed out that an >³evil man is one that causes or leads others to sin. And Jorge Bergoglio has done this publicly and repeatedly. ²I still remember listening to a father's pained voice as he recalled having to tell his daughter that the pope was wrong >and was teaching NOT what the Church has always taught. In fact, JorgeB dared to state that shacking up- "cohabitating couples" were in a marriage and >"having the grace of marriage."< (!!!) This was stated publicly WITH expert advisors near at hand, if needed. It seems that JorgeB thinks he knows better than the HOLY SPIRIT'S teachings in explicit verses in Scripture; better than the Apostles' handed down teachings In the Church for 2000 years; better than Jesus' Himself in instituting the Sacrament of Marriage and the Grace the Sacrament confers! The arrogance of JorgeB is exceeded only by the grave danger to MORALS that his insidious statement puts forward. And that's only one example. Evil Francis has, in effect, officially stated in Amoris Laetitia that divorced persons coupling together, ie. in adultery (no annulment), CAN RECEIVE the Eucharist. Shows what sacred value JorgeB places on the Body of the Lord in Communion- nada!- receiving the Body of the Lord UNWORTHILY is fine by JorgeB!

[@Onepeterfive]

Dear brother in Christ: (a) we are absolutely not persuaded by Novus Ordo Watch - nor are many others who have looked at it; (b) we give some basic reasons why we reject sedevacantism in this very video, which evidently you have not watched; (c) your final remark is slander and if you have a conscience you will edit it, and then confess it to a priest (if you can still find a validly ordained one, according to your premises). With respect, Timothy

[@jacksonesq9992]

@@Onepeterfive Both Peter Kwasniewski and the case for R&R have been so devastatingly and repeatedly refuted that rational minds suspect that you refuse to face this precisely because it would hurt your R&R business model, with Kwas as your star writer. You do not occupy the moral high ground. Spare us your sanctimonious posturing. Also see the following recent post on Novus Ordo Watch, which involves both you and Kwas: “Rethinking” the Papacy? A New Narrative for the Semi-Trads

[@aloyalcatholic5785]

@@jacksonesq9992 nothing of the sort has happened. If Sedevacantistism were true, we’d all be bound to be Eastern Orthodox or something else. It’s a non sequitur. The sede position is inadmissible. Not only would there not be a church today but it’s possible it ceased to exist centuries ago. Following it through to its logical conclusion forces one eventually to that point

[@thomasryan5394]

you should go with a handlebar mustache

[@OMBReviews]

Keep up the great work! Shave the stache and go for the full beard instead :)

[@Onepeterfive]

Haha

[@severianmonk7394]

Ignatius Loyola undoubtedly was not a saint and canonizations are undoubtedly not infallible.