Gerry Matatics is Touring the Country Preaching Against the "Vatican II Church"

[DNS]

See here. (This article was added to his site yesterday.)

Two things are clear from reading the article:

1. Gerry holds an extreme interpretation of “No Salvation Outside the Church.”
2. Gerry holds this view: “The “Vatican II Church” is not the Catholic Church (Christ’s true Church), but a clever counterfeit brought about by the nearly wholesale apostasy of the Catholic hierarchy into heresy and schism.” (Those are his exact words.)

Please remember that the moderators have, for the time, made sedevacantism a banned topic.

 

[aimee]

I find this sad…I so enjoyed a set of tapes he had out when he first came into the church…What happened to him

 

[Michael_Francis]

See here

. (This article was added to his site yesterday.)

Two things are clear from reading the article:

1. Gerry holds an extreme interpretation of “No Salvation Outside the Church.”
2. Gerry holds this view: “The “Vatican II Church” is not the Catholic Church (Christ’s true Church), but a clever counterfeit brought about by the nearly wholesale apostasy of the Catholic hierarchy into heresy and schism.” (Those are his exact words.)

** Please remember that the moderators have, for the time**** being****, made sedevacantism a banned topic.**Please be aware of what the Banned Topics Policy actually says.

21. Promoting

sedevacantism (i.e., adherence to or support for the premise that the Papacy is or has been vacant as a consequence of heresy or departure from the teachings of Christ or the Church)MF

 

[DNS]

Please be aware of what the Banned Topics Policy actually says.

Thanks, Michael, I hadn’t read that part. I’m a bit confused, however, because on the 3rd post here it says the following:

Banned Topic: Sedevacantism

---

For the foreseeable future, the moderation staff, in conjunction with the apologetics staff, has decided to ban the topic of sedevacantism (i.e., the theory that there can be at points in Church history no current valid pope). Any threads that open with the topic of sedevacantism will be deleted; any that drift into that topic will be locked.

There are several reasons for this decision, but the one that most concerns the moderation staff is that there have already been two highly contentious threads that have had to be locked. As it seems that it is the topic that is causing such rashness, the Catholic Answers Forums will forego discussing the topic for a while.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Is this no longer in force?

 

[Catholic_Dude]

See here. (This article was added to his site yesterday.)

Two things are clear from reading the article:

1. Gerry holds an extreme interpretation of “No Salvation Outside the Church.”
2. Gerry holds this view: “The “Vatican II Church” is not the Catholic Church (Christ’s true Church), but a clever counterfeit brought about by the nearly wholesale apostasy of the Catholic hierarchy into heresy and schism.” (Those are his exact words.)

Please remember that the moderators have, for the time, made sedevacantism a banned topic.

The interesting thing about these Sedes is that they unknowingly turn themselves into a sort of Final Apostle similar to what Luther did as if the fate of the Church were on their shoulders.

The sad part is hearing how they propose to fix the problem, one Sede was saying that there must be a retired Bishop somewhere in the world who was ordained before V2 and he is the only person on earth with valid holy orders. The solution was to track him down and start afresh.

 

[runandsew]

Wasn’t it Tertullian that they say “argued his way into the Church and argued his way out the back door”?

He spoke to Scott Hahn when Scott was thinking about becoming Catholic, maybe Scott should talk to him now.

You can take the convert out of Protestantism, but you can’t take Protestantism out of the convert.
(at least in this case)

 

[WanderAimlessly]

Wasn’t it Tertullian that they say “argued his way into the Church and argued his way out the back door”?

He spoke to Scott Hahn when Scott was thinking about becoming Catholic, maybe Scott should talk to him now.

You can take the convert out of Protestantism, but you can’t take Protestantism out of the convert.
(at least in this case)

ummm…exactly what are you saying?

 

[jmcrae]

I think what happened to Matatics was that he became a “Famous Apologist” before he was even Confirmed, yet - he had a certain idea of the Church in his head, but he never took the time to really sit back and experience it for real before he was already trying to defend it in the public arena.

I think new converts need to be in the Church for at least one year and take some time to grow in the faith, ask questions, and figure things out, before they take on any kind of a teaching ministry - particularly one so out in the public eye as that.

You can take the convert out of Protestantism, but you can’t take Protestantism out of the convert.

That’s a good point: as a Protestant convert myself, it’s a good reminder to me to always surround myself with good, faithful “cradle” Catholics who aren’t afraid to let me know when I’m going off the deep end, because, yeah - it happens more often than I care to admit.

 

[runandsew]

ummm…exactly what are you saying?

I really wasn’t saying too much, I just wonder when people convert from one denomination to another, are they finished converting, or are they still searching.

And I was also indirectly making a comment that maybe Jerry should submit to the authority of of the church, if he wants to be a part of it.

 

[Subrosa]

Wow!
Gerry seems to be so sure about what he is saying. The Vatican II church is not the true church? Does he suppose that he possesses some form of infallability? The only man that can claim that is the Pope, which, by the way, was pronounced at Vatican I.

Subosa

 

[chris_molter]

Here’s the big problem with folks like Matatics:

There is no “Vatican II Church”. There is the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. This is the Church of Vatican II, Vatican I, Trent, Nicea, Chalcedon, etc. Those “more-Catholic-than-thou” folks have moved into functional protestantism through their actions.

Coming from an Anglican background where we believed that the reformers separated themselves from the “Roman Church” because that body had fallen into serious heresy, it’s apparent to me that is what’s going on with these schismatic types. Of course, being a former Episcopalian, it’s also easy to see the blatant problems with the heretical “New Church” types as well.

The protection of the Holy Spirit applies only to the Church Catholic, that is, the successor of Peter and the Apostles in communion with him

 

[Genesis315]

I really don’t understand how people can be Feeneyites (the rigorist view of “no salvation outside the Church” that says water Baptism is absolutely necessary) when the Council of Trent specifically taught that desire meets the necessity of Baptism for salvation.

As for sedevancatists, they are just really, really confused and ignorant of Tradition, ecclesiastical law, Church governance, and Church history. It’ sad. While it is true that the Church today has many problems (name one century when it hasn’t), some with little faith have panicked and abandoned ship.

*"*They err greatly, therefore, who lose faith during the storm, wishing for themselves and the Church a permanent state of perfect tranquillity, universal prosperity, and practical, unanimous and uncontested recognition of her sacred authority."–St. Pius X

Matt. 8:23 And when he entered into the boat, his disciples followed him: 24 And behold a great tempest arose in the sea, so that the boat was covered with waves, but he was asleep. 25 And they came to him, and awaked him, saying: Lord, save us, we perish. 26 And Jesus saith to them: Why are you fearful, O ye of little faith? Then rising up he commanded the winds, and the sea, and there came a great calm.

 

[MrS]

He has received an open invitation to publically debate his points of view… and has yet to even acknowledge this.

Gerry is a lost soul right now… and doing nothing but damage to the Church he professes to love.

Pray for his conversion

 

[trth_skr]

All I can say about it.

Mark Wyatt
www.veritas-catholic.blogspot.com

 

[Michael_Francis]

Thanks, Michael, I hadn’t read that part. I’m a bit confused, however, because on the 3rd post here

it says the following:

Is this no longer in force?That is essentially what brought the policy into being. The policy has not changed but (so far) this thread has not promoted SV, and it will not or the post will be deleted and I will intervene. http://bestsmileys.com/cops/1.gif
MF

 

[CATHOLICHEAD]

gerrymatatics.org/index.php?id=190

Guess all his previous great debates defending the faith against Protestants really don’t matter anymore, Gerry flip flops his beliefs quite often. It seems this time he’s a full blown heretic for good.

How sad

 

[Catholic_Dude]

This quote is pretty funny:
I, therefore, object to the term “sedevacantist” on the grounds that it seems to require me to omnisciently assert that there is no valid pope anywhere in the world, something I am not competent to do. I prefer to content myself with the far more modest assertion that, whether or not some such pope might now or might in the future exist, I can be sure, by the strict application of Catholic principles to the current claimant, that Benedict XVI definitely cannot be the pope (see the syllogisms at the end of this essay).
Habemus Papam…Pope Gerry!

 

[jpusateri]

The stuff Gerry is hinging this on is the ordination of Joseph Ratzinger as bishop and that the “new” rite is invalid based upon the use of “governing Spirit” used in the rite is ambiguous. So therefore he isn’t a valid bishop and cannot be Pope.

Placing “governing Spirit” in the rite supposedly violates the rules of changing the rite.

The new text from here:

“So now pour out upon this chosen one that power
which is from you, the governing Spirit whom you
gave to your beloved Son, Jesus Christ, the Spirit given
by him to the holy apostles, who founded the Church
in every place to be your temple for the unceasing

glory and praise of your name.”1

Does anyone find the “governing Spirit” that 1) comes from someone whose Son is Jesus Christ, 2) was given to His apostles and 3) was given to the Church, ambiguous???

Okay, all Spirits that fit this description, please step forward…

 

[JKirkLVNV]

The stuff Gerry is hinging this on is the ordination of Joseph Ratzinger as bishop and that the “new” rite is invalid based upon the use of “governing Spirit” used in the rite is ambiguous. So therefore he isn’t a valid bishop and cannot be Pope.

Placing “governing Spirit” in the rite supposedly violates the rules of changing the rite.

The new text from here:
Does anyone find the “governing Spirit” that 1) comes from someone whose Son is Jesus Christ, 2) was given to His apostles and 3) was given to the Church, ambiguous???

Okay, all Spirits that fit this description, please step forward…

I think the premise is flawed from the get-go. The Council of Trent anathematized anyone who said that any of the rites or liturgies she proposed to the faithful might lead them to impiety (I assume invalidity is at the very least impiety). The Church cannot propose a defective or ineffective rite. Thus, the rite of episcopal ordination MUST do what the Church purports that it does: make a man a bishop, a holder of the fullness of the priesthood. If it didn’t, then the faithful have been mislead by the Church Herself and Christ has failed in His promise (which is impossible).

 

[Catholic_Dude]

I think the premise is flawed from the get-go. The Council of Trent anathematized anyone who said that any of the rites or liturgies she proposed to the faithful might lead them to impiety (I assume invalidity is at the very least impiety). The Church cannot propose a defective or ineffective rite. Thus, the rite of episcopal ordination MUST do what the Church purports that it does: make a man a bishop, a holder of the fullness of the priesthood. If it didn’t, then the faithful have been mislead by the Church Herself and Christ has failed in His promise (which is impossible).

Whats even more flawed is that the previous popes such as Bl. John XXIII were ordained the “old” way and yet Pope Gerry doesnt consider them valid popes.