The Pope's praxis and deciding whether it is helpful or not

One way the average Christopher and Christine Communicant can take the measure of a Pope's praxis is to use the definitional standard that can be found in the old Catholic Encyclopedia:

He is to be the principle of unity, of stability, and of increase. He is the principle of unity, since what is not joined to that foundation is no part of the Church; of stability, since it is the firmness of this foundation in virtue of which the Church remains unshaken by the storms which buffet her; of increase, since, if she grows, it is because new stones are laid on this foundation.

Remain a Faithful Catholic and avoid The Charybdis of Papolatry and the Scylla of Sedevacantism..

The binary choice presented by each soul deadening danger can be avoided by the faithful Christian Catholic only by clinging to the Barque of Peter for Jesus is, has always been, and always will be, the head of His Church no matter how skilled or incompetent is the helmsman of The Barque of Peter.

Odysseus and his gang did not have a Divine Promise his vessel would not become a wrecked ship, but we do; even if the helmsman seems intent on making a shipwreck of The Barque, he can't because The Holy Ghost will provide, at a minimum, a zephyr, sufficient in force, to keep it from running aground. 

The Charybdis of Papolatry will suck you down beneath the surface of rationality and as for the Scylla of Sedevacantism, who wants to watch them endlessly strike at the head of the Church on earth? 

You say this epic epoch of epicene ecclesiastical events is enough to drive you right 'round the bend? 

Well, Our Triune God willed that me and thee be alive at this very moment and so we must do as Jesus did in the farm of Gethsemane - we must drink the bitter chalice and not let it pass us by...

But, if you do run oft into a schism or sedevacantism you have run oft from having God try your Faith to see if it is as genuine as you imagine it to be - but you can not forever run oft from Jesus Christ for one day - and it may even be today - you will stand before the Judgment Seat of Christ to answer for your panicked perfidy in the face of God's trial. Good luck with that...

Why Eminent Men are permitted by God to become Authors of Novelties in the Church.

[27.] But some one will ask, How is it then, that certain excellent persons, and of position in the Church, are often permitted by God to preach novel doctrines to Catholics? A proper question, certainly, and one which ought to be very carefully and fully dealt with, but answered at the same time, not in reliance upon one's own ability, but by the authority of the divine Law, and by appeal to the Church's determination.

Let us listen, then, to Holy Moses, and let him teach us why learned men, and such as because of their knowledge are even called Prophets by the apostle, are sometimes permitted to put forth novel doctrines, which the Old Testament is wont, by way of allegory, to call strange gods, forasmuch as heretics pay the same sort of reverence to their notions that the Gentiles do to their gods.

 Blessed Moses, then, writes thus in Deuteronomy: If there arise among you a prophet or a dreamer of dreams, that is, one holding office as a Doctor in the Church, who is believed by his disciples or auditors to teach by revelation: well—what follows? and gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or the wonder come to pass whereof he spoke,— he is pointing to some eminent doctor, whose learning is such that his followers believe him not only to know things human, but, moreover, to foreknow things superhuman, such as, their disciples commonly boast, were Valentinus, Donatus, Photinus, Apollinaris, and the rest of that sort! What next? And shall say to you, Let us go after other gods, whom you know not, and serve them.What are those other gods but strange errors which you know not, that is, new and such as were never heard of before? And let us serve them; that is, Let us believe them, follow them. What last? You shall not hearken to the words of that prophet or dreamer of dreams. 

And why, I pray you, does not God forbid to be taught what God forbids to be heard? For the Lord, your God, tries you, to know  whether you love Him with all your heart and with all your soul. The reason is clearer than day why Divine Providence sometimes permits certain doctors of the Churches to preach new doctrines— That the Lord your God may try you; he says. And assuredly it is a great trial when one whom you believe to be a prophet, a disciple of prophets, a doctor and defender of the truth, whom you have folded to your breast with the utmost veneration and love, when such a one of a sudden secretly and furtively brings in noxious errors, which you can neither quickly detect, being held by the prestige of former authority, nor lightly think it right to condemn, being prevented by affection for your old master.

Many soi disant Trads could not honestly swear the Oath Against Modernism (2)

Many soi disant trads have had a spell cast on them by The Novus Ordo Witch and other Wicked Wiccans in the sedevacantist coven and the poor men who labor under sway of the spell are forever taking to the internet to denounce Pope and Council which makes them, objectively, of the same partisan party created by the Arch-demoniac Prototypical Protestant, Martin Luther, who also rejected Pope and Council during the execrable epic epoch when the wild boar was infesting Europe with his demented droppings.

(Is this too churlish?)

One would hope that sedes would abandon The Novus Ordo Witch and the other Wicked Wiccans of the Sedevacantist Coven and begin to rely upon real men, men like the faithful and erudite Thomistic Scholar, Mons. Brunero Gherardini, whose masculine courage stands in such illuminating contrast to the run oft to bitch and sulk in their calamitous coven cave crowd for he has maintained the Bonds of Unity while doing his level best to speak about and teach the fullness of truth in Tradition while also confronting, critiquing, and criticising that in Vatican Two (and the praxis of the prelature) which is not congruent or consistent with Tradition.

In any event, it is undeniable that the vast majority of the soi disant trads can not honestly swear the Oath Against Modernism even while they denounce the Church for abandoning it.

If, dear readers, you can not afford to buy this excellent book, here is a link to where one may discover more about this excellent and brilliant faithful Catholic and begin to learn there is far far more to Catholic Tradition than the Binary Bull Shit of the Bitch and Sulk crowd.

Msgr. Brunero Gherardini remains in the One True Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church; he maintains the Bonds of Unity in Worship, Doctrine, and Authority; he accepts that the Pope is Franciscus.  

Msgr. Brunero Gherardini is one to admire and imitate; he is a rock 

The Sedes are violets; that is, their rhetoric is florid and colorful, but they shrink from the fight. 

Who'n'hell admires them or desires to imitate them?

There is a sense in which they are like a rock - but it is not a good sense:

Matthew 13  Great Commentary of Cornelius a Lapide:

Verse 1- At that time, &c. Syriac, by the sea shore: When Christ, after His manner, had preached in the house, which He had hired for His dwelling in Capernaum, as I have said on c. iv. 13, He sent away the multitudes to attend to themselves and their affairs, and that He might refresh Himself and His disciples with rest and food. Bye and bye, since He knew that the multitudes were about to come to Him in such numbers that the house could not contain them, He went out to the wide, open shore of the Sea of Galilee; and there uttered the following parables. 

Verse 2- He went up into a ship: from whence, as from a pulpit, He preached to the people assembled on the shore. 

Verse 3- A sower went out to sow: Gr. ό σπείρων, i.e., sowing, Observe: Appositely are gospel doctrine and preaching compared to seed, and the harvest proceeding from it. For, as for the natural harvest there is need of seed, earth, sun, rain and wind, so also is there need of such things for the spiritual harvest. The seed is the word of God, or the gospel, and the preaching of it. The earth is the free will of all who hear. The sun is preventing grace, illuminating and inflaming the free will, that it may receive the Word of God so as from it to produce the fruits of charity and all virtues. The rain is grace, watering and promoting these good acts and motions of the free will. The winds are temptations which, by agitating them, cause them to take deeper root, and strengthen them. Lastly, there is need of patience, Gr. ύπομονὴ, i.e., endurance in the labours and troubles of ploughing, sowing, &c., and long waiting for the reward and fruit of the harvest. 

Observe: the end and scope of this parable is, that Christ would teach that He Himself is the Sower, the preacher of the gospel upon earth, that is to say, among men, but with different results among different people. For, first, not all who hear the gospel accept it; as seed, although sown in the earth, does not everywhere strike root in the earth.

 2. Not all who believe persevere in faith, but some fall away under temptation; like seed which sprouts in stony ground, quickly withers by the sun’s heat. 

3. Not all, who persevere in faith, bring forth the fruit of good works; just as thorns choke seed springing up well in otherwise good ground, and prevent it from bearing fruit. 

4. These things happen, not through the fault of the seed, i.e., of the doctrine, but of the earth. It is the fault of the hearers, and that in various ways. It is partly on account of the rocks, partly on account of the thorns. The rock is the flesh, the thorns are the world, the highway is the habit of a worldly and licentious life, where the birds of the air, that is the devils, like most eager and voracious devourers of souls, snatch away the doctrine that has been preached, from the mind and memory, whilst they draw off those who are by the wayside, i.e., men who are given up to the customs and business of the world, as well as those who are wandering, who are slothful and curious, from considering and penetrating into the doctrine heard, to their accustomed vanities. 

5. The seed in the good ground is that which those receive in a good heart, who begin to ruminate upon it, and profit by it; they are in the best way, who apply themselves with all their might, to arrive at perfection in virtue. 

6. Some seed bears less fruit, some greater, some the greatest. That is on account either of the greater sowing, i.e., preaching and illumination of spiritual things, and the assistance of grace, or on account of greater efforts and co-operation of free will with grace. This is the sum of the whole parable, from which it is easy to understand it in all its parts. I will handle them briefly, one by one. 

Moraliter: Let the preacher with Christ, who came forth from the house, even from heaven, impelled by the force of love, to the earth, go forth from the house of contemplation into the field of preaching, that what he has drank from God in prayer, he may pour forth upon the people, and preach, not so much by words, as by the example of a holy life. Again, he invokes God that what he speaks in the ear, God may speak in the heart. 

Verse 4- And as he sowed, some fell by the wayside, namely, on the path or boundary, conterminous with the field, which is constantly worn and trodden down by the feet of passengers, and is therefore unsuitable for the reception of seed, and exposes it naked, to be carried off by the birds. We see a gradation here, for from the unsuitable ground for seed, He rises gradually to the less unsuitable, to the more suitable, and the most suitable. The most unsuitable earth for seed is that by the wayside. The less suitable is the rocky ground. The more fit is the good ground which produces thorns. The most fit is that which is entirely good, rich, moist earth. Moreover, the way is a mind worn, and dried up by evil thoughts. Such a mind does not receive the doctrine of the gospel, which is contrary to its lusts; it does not perceive, nor understand it, because it is wholly intent upon fleshly allurements. Whence, says the Gloss, such are those, who neither are pricked by preaching, nor begin to do well. 

Verse 5- But other fell on stony ground, &c. This seed could not strike deep root, therefore it began to germinate and spring up before the proper time. For that which is quickly produced, quickly perishes. He adds the cause. 

Verse 6- When the sun was risen, they were scorched, Gr. ε̉καυματίσθη, i.e., were burnt up, both seeds and germs, by the burning heat of the sun. And because they had no root, they withered away. They had but a little earth, which was succeeded by the rock. Hence, partly from want of moisture, partly by the burning rays of the sun, they were dried up. The rock in this place, says Rabanus, means the hardness of an insolent mind, in which there is no deep mildness of an obedient soul. Whence, such are only pleased by the sweetness of the word, which they hear, and of heavenly promises for a short time; but they strike not the root of desire unto salvation. Therefore by the heat of the sun i.e., the fury of persecution, are they burnt up, through impatience, because their mind does not firmly cleave to the word of God, and they lose the greenness of faith, says the Interlinear. S. Chrysostom says, “With regard to souls, that which is rock, may become good ground, that which is wayside, not trodden down; and the thorns may be destroyed. Christ was speaking to all, even as if He were providing for the future, how He might declare what I ought to do, and have not done. Hereby He teaches His disciples not to be slothful.” 

Casting off the binary bonds of sedevacantism and ultramontism in true fidelity to Tradition...

Many soi disant Trads could not honestly swear the Oath Against Modernism (1)

The Oath Against Modernism


To be sworn to by all clergy, pastors, confessors, preachers, religious superiors, and professors in philosophical-theological seminaries.

I . . . . firmly embrace and accept each and every definition that has been set forth and declared by the unerring teaching authority of the Church, especially those principal truths which are directly opposed to the errors of this day.

One of the big problems that many of our evangelical brothers and sisters have with the Catholic Church is that it appears to have and endless number of traditions that seem to get in the way of the simple word of God in the Scriptures. In addition to this, Catholics uphold the Teaching authority of the Church (“Magisterium” being the Latin word for this) which seems to compete with the authority of the Bible. Interesting enough, though prior Church Councils such as Trent (16th century) had affirmed the importance of extra-biblical traditions and the teaching authority of the Church, no official document had ever really attempted to explain the exact nature of Tradition and Magisterium and how they relate to Scripture. The fathers of the Second Vatican Council, understanding the strategic importance of this issue, were determined to address all this in Dei Verbum, their Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation.  

Those soi disant traditionalists who reject Vatican Two entirely and/or describe it as a heretical council or merely a pastoral council * appear to have been blinded to the fact that the council produced legitimate developments of doctrine and this is one example.

And we know it is a legitimate development of Doctrine for at least two reasons:

1. It defined that which had heretofore not been officially defined by the Magisterium

2. Mons. Marcel Lefebvre signed this document and owing to the reality so many soi disant traditionalists consider him to be the apotheosis of Tradition, it means that Dei Verbum is perfectly a part of Tradition as a legitimate development of Doctrine.

Still, it remains a sad irony that those bemoaning the death of The Oath Against Modernism (ABS is in favor of its reinstitution) could not honestly swear the Oath because they reject the very first sentence of the Oath.

* There is not one thing wrong with a pastoral approach to anything but many soi disant trads have made of it a monstrous entity and, in another sad irony, it is they who have changed the definition of a perfectly acceptable word denoting a perfectly acceptable praxis and making it sound as though it were a form of Satanic Marxism.

A new ecumenical approach to Mahometans under consideration?

ABS has a source deep inside the Vatican who has alerted ABS to a new ecumenical approach to the Mahometans currently under assessment and discussion in the Curia.

ABS' contact, Fey K. Nuz, a lovely woman of questionable heritage, often emails ABS with the latest rumors, lies, and pipe dreams, and this one will steel the will of many Christian Catholic men who will likely respond with cries of ABOUT DAMN TIME and SHITTETH ME THOU, THIS CURIA?... and DEUS VULT!!!!!

Liberals are losing their religion

The subtext of all of the liberals wailing and florid moral outrage over Trump and his behavior really has to do with the truth that for the annointed media clerics of Commie Liberalism, politics is their religion and the new Pope of their religion is now Donald Trump and he is hurling anathemas at the clerics and they are slithering and hissing in protest. 

It really is that simple.

O, sure, they continue to lie; hell, man, they lie even in their self-defense of their lying...

We members of the media probably sound a little self-serving when we complain about constant attacks on press freedom.

Less than twenty words into her failed attempt to defend the media and she is already lying her ass off.

Americans complain about your LYING, not press freedom.

O, and she went to Princeton, bitch

Alert!! This is a modern college educated woman and so there is vulgarity in the vid:

The Jews own the media and they control discourse in America. Does the control tend to make them happy?


American Jews Lead the Happiest Lives

On average, Jews have higher levels of well-being than their counterparts of every other major faith in America, according to new data from the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index.
The index uses daily surveys that aim to measure the components of “the good life,” including health, happiness and access to basic needs like food and shelter. The latest results are based on more than 372,000 interviews conducted in 2009 and 2010, and control for major demographic and regional variables.
A previous analysis by Gallup had found that the very religious in general had higher levels of well-being than their less religious counterparts.
This latest parsing of the data finds that that is true across all major religious groups: very religious Catholics have higher levels of well-being than moderately religious or nonreligious Catholics, and so on. (Levels of religiosity are based on how often survey respondents report attending services and how important they perceive religion to be in their daily lives.) 
The same is true for American Jews: The most religious members of the Chosen People score highest on the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index ..

Nope, honey. Sorry. The Messias-Deniers USED to be the Chosen people but not anymore...

1 Peter 2:9

But you are a chosen generation, a kingly priesthood, a holy nation, a purchased people: that you may declare his virtues, who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

…the Catholic Church has always been accustomed to pray for the Jewish people, who were the depository of divine promises up until the arrival of Jesus Christ, notwithstanding their subsequent blindness, or rather, because of this very blindness. Moved by that charity, the Apostolic See has protected the same people from unjust ill-treatment, and just as it censures all hatred and enmity among people, so it altogether condemns in the highest degree possible hatred against the people once chosen by God, viz., the hatred that now is what is usually meant in common parlance by the term known generally as “anti-Semitism.”

By their fruits

By their fruits

 Do men gather? As grapes are not wont to be produced by or gathered off thorns, nor figs off thistles, so in like manner, no good or sweet fruit can be collected from heresy,or heretics, but only harsh and thorny fruit. This fruit is of two kinds—1. Of false doctrine; 2. Of bad morals and wickedness. Luther and Calvin have given examples in this age. For Luther teaches that vows are not binding upon the religious: that man does not possess free will, that he is the slave of necessity, that he must sin: that faith alone justifies: that good works have no merit before God. Calvin teaches that God is the author of evils: that Christ despaired on the Cross, that He felt the pains of hell, &c.; which things are downright blasphemy, and contrary to the natural law and to reason. Calvin also maintained that the Faith, by which he meant his own perversion of it, should be defended and propagated by force of arms, even by the slaughter of lawful princes and kings, of bishops, priests, and Catholics who opposed it. Whence we have heard of, and almost seen with our eyes in England, France, and Germany, so many murders, robberies, banishments of priests and Catholics, and a vast deluge of iniquity, and as it were a universal conflagration of goodness. We have seen the Blessed Sacraments profaned, the Holy Sacrifice abolished, vows broken, the saints contemned, churches burnt, the sacred canons set at nought, virgins violated, and all such like. For, as John Fisher, Bishop of Rochester, who, with Thomas More, was a glorious martyr in England under Henry VIII., truly says, “Lust is at once the mother and the child of heresy.” (Cornelius a Lapide)

Can any sentient man deny that virtually everything has continually grown worse during modernity in the world and in the One True Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church?

In music we men sound the depths of depravity plunging into ever greater depths and even popular music shows that the fruit of artistic expression has become decadent, debased, and discordant - hear the descent in just one song about fruit...

It can not be denied that in many areas of life we have suffered a severe and catastrophic decline in many measurables of cultural and spiritual life but one has to be careful about swallowing whole the idea that decadence, depravity, and execrable sin can be attributed to any Ecumenical Council as its fruit for we have seen such evil events before in epic execrable ecclesiastical epochs.

When the far worse situation of public pederasty by priests prevailed in the late 10th and early 11th centuries - so bad it required public admonishing by Saint Damien in his book, Gomorrah -was   that execrable ecclesiastical epoch attributable to The Fruits of The Fourth Ecumenical Council of Constantinople?

Satan may never be underestimated - nor even misunderestimated as Saint George said - but he must be given his due; he has used the matter available to him to render and wound The Body of Christ, tearing members away from it and "The Fruits" argument has been the low hanging fruit that many have angrily consumed and had their minds poisoned against His Church.

Yes, there can be no doubt that the world is evil and insane and we Christian Catholics will never have what some men where Blessed to have - The High Middle Ages but, behold: And He who sat on the throne, said: Behold, I make all things new. (Apoc. 21)

We can step away from the maddening crowds and step out of this execrable epic epoch and into a Holy Place to spend time time with Jesus and He will give you His peace if you are properly disposed for it and He will quicken your soul and revivify your life.

The fruits of Vatican Two argument beings  to fall apart once men realise the putative apotheosis of Tradition, Mons Lefebvre, signed all of the documents of Vatican Two which means they are capable of being reconciled with Tradition and those that are not will be discarded by Holy Mother Church - even though that may take some time.  Be faithful and patient and wait on The Lord.

The other alternative for those who reference the fruits of the Council is that Mons. Lefebvre was a heretic because he signed the documents of the council they think is heretical.

How can a heretic be the leader of a movement that will restore Tradition?


How to rhetorically sucker-punch our sede friends

There are not a few sedes who claim that Pope Francis is so evil and such a heretic that he does not have any authority over them (Well, the SSPX doesn't think he has authority over them either, but that is a matter for another day).

Not a few times ABS has asked a sede - If the Pope were the arm of Satan would he have authority over you?

Many sedes walk directly into that sucker punch set-up by answering wrongly because so few of them are aware of a surprising truth:

Bull of Pope Gregory XI, Against John Wycliffe

Gregory, bishop, servus servorum dei, to his beloved sons the Chancellor and University of Oxford, in the diocese of Lincoln, grace and apostolic benediction.

We are compelled to wonder and grieve that you, who, in consideration of the favors and privileges conceded to your University of Oxford by the apostolic see, and on account of your familiarity with the Scriptures, in whose sea you navigate, by the gift of God, with auspicious oar, you, who ought to be, as it were, warriors and champions of the orthodox faith, without which there is no salvation of souls, ---that you through a certain sloth and neglect allow tares to spring up amidst the pure wheat in the fields of your glorious University aforesaid; and what is still more pernicious, even continue to grow to maturity. And you are quite careless, as has been lately reported to us, as to the extirpation of these tares; with no little clouding of a bright name, danger to your souls, contempt of the Roman Church, and injury to the faith above mentioned. And what pains us the more, is that this increase of the tares aforesaid is known in Rome before the remedy of extirpation has been applied in England where they sprang up. By the insinuation of many, if they are indeed worthy of belief, deploring it deeply, it has come to our ears that John de Wycliffe, rector of the church of Lutterworth, in the diocese of Lincoln, Professor of the Sacred Scriptures (would that he were not also Master of Errors), has fallen into such a detestable madness that he does not hesitate to dogmatize and publicly preach, or rather vomit forth from the recesses of his breast, certain propositions and conclusions which are erroneous and false. He has cast himself also into the depravity of preaching heretical dogmas which strive to subvert and weaken the state of the whole church and even secular polity, some of which doctrines, in changed terms, it is true, seem to express the perverse opinions and unlearned learning of Marsilio of Padua of cursed memory, and of John of Jandun, whose book is extant, rejected and cursed by our predecessor, Pope John XXII, of happy memory. This he has done in the kingdom of England, lately glorious in its power and in the abundance of its resources, but more glorious still in the glistening piety of its faith, and in the distinction of its sacred learning; producing also many men illustrious for their exact knowledge of the Holy Scriptures, mature in the gravity of their character, conspicuous in devotion, defenders of the Catholic Church. He has polluted certain of the faithful of Christ by sprinkling them with these doctrines, and led them away from the right paths of the aforesaid faith to the brink of perdition.

Wherefore, since we are not willing, nay, indeed, ought not to be willing, that so deadly a pestilence should continue to exist with our connivance, a pestilence which, if it is not opposed in its beginnings, and torn out by the roots in its entirety, will be reached too late by medicines when it has infected very many with its contagion; we command your University with strict admonition, by the apostolic authority, in virtue of your sacred obedience, and under penalty of the deprivation of all the favors, indulgences, and privileges granted to you and your University by the said see, for the future not to permit to be asserted or proposed to any extent whatever, the opinions, conclusions, and propositions which are in variance with good morals and faith, even when those proposing strive to defend them under a certain fanciful wresting of words or of terms. Moreover, you are on our authority to arrest the said John, or cause him to be arrested and to send him under a trustworthy guard to our venerable brother, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Bishop of London, or to one of them.

Besides, if there should be, which God forbid, in your University, subject to your jurisdiction, opponents stained with these errors, and if they should obstinately persist in them, proceed vigorously and earnestly to a similar arrest and removal of them, and otherwise as shall seem good to you. Be vigilant to repair your negligence which you have hitherto shown in the premises, and so obtain our gratitude and favor, and that of the said see, besides the honor and reward of the divine recompense.

Given at Rome, at Santa Maria Maggiore, on the 31st of May, the sixth year of our pontificate. 

The Condemned Conclusions of John Wycliffe

1. That the material substance of bread and of wine remains, after the consecration, in the sacrament of the altar.

2. That the accidents do not remain without the subject, after the consecration, in the same sacrament.

3. That Christ is not in the sacrament of the altar identically, truly and really in his proper corporeal presence.

4. That if a bishop or priest lives in mortal sin he does not ordain, or consecrate, or baptize.

5. That if a man has been truly repentant, all external confession is superfluous to him or useless.

6. That it is not founded in the gospel that Christ instituted the mass.

7. That God ought to be obedient to the devil.

8. That if the pope is fore-ordained to destruction and a wicked man, and therefore a member of the devil, no power has been given to him over the faithful of Christ by any one, unless perhaps by the Emperor.

9. That since Urban VI, no one is to be acknowledged as pope; but all are to live, in the way of the Greeks, under their own laws.

10. To assert that it is against sacred scripture that men of the Church should have temporal possessions.

11. That no prelate ought to excommunicate any one unless he first knows that the man is excommunicated by God.

12. That a prelate thus excommunicating is thereby a heretic or excommunicate.

13. That a prelate excommunicating a clerk who has appealed to the king, or to a council of the kingdom, on that very account is a traitor to God, the king and the kingdom.

14. That those who neglect to preach, or to hear the word of God, or the gospel that is preached, because of the excommunication of men, are excommunicate, and in the day of judgment will be considered as traitors to God.

15. To assert that it is allowed to any one, whether a deacon or a priest, to preach the word of God, without the authority of the apostolic see, or of a Catholic bishop, or of some other which is sufficiently acknowledged.

16. To assert that no one is a civil lord, no one is a bishop, no one is a prelate, so long as he is in mortal sin.

17. That temporal lords may, at their own judgment, take away temporal goods from churchmen who are habitually delinquent; or that the people may, at their own judgment, correct delinquent lords.

18. That tithes are purely charity, and that parishoners may, on account of the sins of their curates, detain these and confer them on others at their will.

19. That special prayers applied to one person by prelates or religious persons, are of no more value to the same person than general prayers for others in a like position are to him.

20. That the very fact that any one enters upon any private religion whatever, renders him more unfitted and more incapable of observing the commandments of God.

21. That saints who have instituted any private religions whatever, as well of those having possessions as of mendicants, have sinned in thus instituting them.

22. That religious persons living in private religions are not of the Christian religion.

23. That friars should be required to gain their living by the labor of their hands and not by mendicancy.

24. That a person giving alms to friars, or to a preaching friar, is excommunicate; also the one receiving. 

ABS to his sede friends...