Gerry Matatics R.I.P

No, by R.I.P. I don’t mean that apologist Gerry Matatics is dead, but his brain seems to be. He now has admitted that he is both a sedevacantist and the most extreme version of a Feeeyite.

Matatics wrote an e-mail to the fake Benedictine “brothers” who run Most Holy Family Monastery. These are guys who say that even most traditionalists aren’t really Catholics. In the e-mail Matatics says that John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI have all been “manifest heretics,” and not a single one of them has been a real pope!

Matatics also says that unless you are water baptized and a member of the Catholic Church, you have no chance AT ALL to be saved. Sorry, Eastern Orthodox and Protestants and everybody else! He says there is no such thing as baptism of desire and that the Catechism is wrong about that.

The e-mail is at mostholyfamilymonastery.com/Gerry_Matatics.html

This is crazy! The guy has read himself right out of the Church and into a church of his own making.

I wonder if the traditionalists who used to promote him, such as The Remnant and Catholic Family News newspapers and writer Christopher Ferrara, will have the courage to come out now and condemn the positions Matatics has taken and to say that he is no longer a Catholic.

  1. I believe, and publicly teach, that the Catholic Church has always infallibly taught that because heretics are not members of the Catholic Church, they cannot validly hold office in the Church, according to divine law, and that, should they seem to hold such offices, the believing Catholic must conclude that their election to and possession of such offices is null and void. This would include, not only the manifest heretics John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, and John Paul II, but also the manifest heretic and present illicit and invalid occupant of the See of Peter, Benedict XVI, who has the further handicap (unlike his immediate four predecessors) of not even having been validly consecrated a bishop, which, in addition to all other considerations, makes it impossible for him to therefore function as Bishop of Rome.

Yes, I saw that too. I figured sooner or later he would have to just spit it out. The guys been off base for a very long time now. They are more than welcome to him. Good Ridence!

I chalk this up to never having given up the spirit of Protestantism while calling oneself a Catholic. It’s a real danger for converts from Protestantism, especially those who oh-so-cleverly thought their way into the Catholic Church. Instead of giving the credit for their conversion humbly to the Holy Spirit they harbor (usually in secret) the thought that they “saw the truth” and now are more Catholic than the pope.

I see a lot of that spirit on Catholic convert boards and it troubles me greatly. Mostly, those who were Bible thumpers before their conversion, “proofing” everything from Bible verses just can’t give up the temptation/the idea that they can find for themselves what “true” Christianity is. They think themselves into the Catholic Church and right out again, because it isn’t about humility or even truth, but about their own cleverness. I think it terribly sad. :frowning:

[quote=Della]I chalk this up to never having given up the spirit of Protestantism while calling oneself a Catholic. It’s a real danger for converts from Protestantism, especially those who oh-so-cleverly thought their way into the Catholic Church. Instead of giving the credit for their conversion humbly to the Holy Spirit they harbor (usually in secret) the thought that they “saw the truth” and now are more Catholic than the pope.

I see a lot of that spirit on Catholic convert boards and it troubles me greatly. Mostly, those who were Bible thumpers before their conversion, “proofing” everything from Bible verses just can’t give up the temptation/the idea that they can find for themselves what “true” Christianity is. They think themselves into the Catholic Church and right out again, because it isn’t about humility or even truth, but about their own cleverness. I think it terribly sad. :frowning:
[/quote]

BINGO! I see the same thing. It happens so often it is VERY sad and after a while, you can just about tell it will, by the way their ego inflates. :frowning:

Now, now, now, people.
Gerry Matatics is now merely in “imperfect” communion with the Catholic Church, since he no longer recognizes Rome. That is the “ecumenical” approach to people today. (Except, it seems, when it comes to Traditionalists).
I see a lot of venom aimed at Mr. Matatics from the posters above, and not one ounce of charity. If the man has fallen into error, it behooves us to pray fervently for him, not slam him.
God bless, Jaypeeto3

[quote=Della]I chalk this up to never having given up the spirit of Protestantism while calling oneself a Catholic. It’s a real danger for converts from Protestantism, especially those who oh-so-cleverly thought their way into the Catholic Church.
[/quote]

As a former Protestant that had to think my way into the Catholic Church, do not disparage the use of reason in the process. Without it I would not be Catholic.

I, however, have taken the opposite approach as GM. I love that I belong to a church in which I can have sure and reliable teaching. I would never presume to know mor e than the Church. It is regretable to another do so.

As far as “imperfect communion is concerned”, that too must be left to how church authorities interpret canon law. However, where the bishop of Rome is, there is the Catholic Church. And if one claims to be out of communion with the Bishop of Rome, how can he be in any sense in Communion with the Catholic Church?

I know that he doesn’t consider Benedict the Bishop or Rome, but since it is an objective fact that Benedict is the Pope, Matatics opinions are irrelevant.

Hi pnewton, how are you?
Re my above post and your reply, canon law has nothing to do with it. The Vatican today holds that every religion on the face of this earth is somehow in “imperfect” communion with the Catholic church. Everyone, that is, except Catholic Traditionalists. In saying that Matatics was in “imperfect” communion with Rome now, I was merely highlighting the hypocrisy and being justifiably sarcastic about it.

I agree with you that those outside of Communion with Rome are in fact in no communion with Rome. Unfortunately, Rome itself does not agree with that ---- except, again, unless we are talking about the Traditionalists.

Love, Jaypeeto3

[quote=Jaypeeto3]Now, now, now, people.
Gerry Matatics is now merely in “imperfect” communion with the Catholic Church, since he no longer recognizes Rome. That is the “ecumenical” approach to people today. (Except, it seems, when it comes to Traditionalists).
I see a lot of venom aimed at Mr. Matatics from the posters above, and not one ounce of charity. If the man has fallen into error, it behooves us to pray fervently for him, not slam him.
God bless, Jaypeeto3
[/quote]

You see venom… I have been a Traditionalist all of my life. If someone is a sinful twit, I belive it is chairtable to say so. Love the man I do…hate the sin. Too many so called Traditionalist would not know Tradition if they fell over it, and through their arrogance, they lead others into error. Mr Matatics fits the criteria for sever repramand and I shall NOT allow him to represent Holy Mother church, NOR insult the Prince’s of the successors of the Apostles. The very idea that he is a traditionlist is repulsive, to those who follow Christ and Holy Mother Church.

This venomous attack of Mr Matatics on the church deserves all the strong language of disgust and repudiation a True Catholic and Traditionaist wishs to express.And no Johnny come lately, is given a pass as far as I am concerned.

  1. I believe, and publicly teach, that the Catholic Church has always infallibly taught that because heretics are not members of the Catholic Church, they cannot validly hold office in the Church, according to divine law, and that, should they seem to hold such offices, the believing Catholic must conclude that their election to and possession of such offices is null and void. This would include, not only the manifest heretics John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, and John Paul II, but also the manifest heretic and present illicit and invalid occupant of the See of Peter, Benedict XVI, who has the further handicap (unlike his immediate four predecessors) of not even having been validly consecrated a bishop, which, in addition to all other considerations, makes it impossible for him to therefore function as Bishop of Rome.

Hi Maggieodae,
to be fair, Mr. Matatics is hardly a “Johnny Come Lately” to the Catholic faith. He has been a practicing Catholic for nearly twenty years, and a traditionalist for over ten years. I’m not saying I support his position, but the Church today fraternizes with every heretical Protestant church and every schismatical Eastern Orthodox church that exists, including those who vehemently denie even the rightful existence of the papal office. It is sheer hypocrisy for such ecumenists to then foam at the mouth at Catholic traditionalists, even those of who have taken an extreme position as Gerry Matatics has.
And there are many Catholic traditionalists, and their number is growing, who hold to Mr. Matatic’s recently-adopted position, and these are people who have been Catholic ALL their lives.
As for me, I’m a convert and attend what traditionalists would call a “novus ordo” parish. Nonetheless, when I see hypocrisy I call it by it’s name no matter whose toes I may step on. And as for Mr. Matatics, if he has fallen into error, he deserves our prayers, not our venom. At least he is at most “TOO” Catholic, not “not Catholic at all” like a great many who are nominally in full communion with Rome, such as the 70% or more catholics who disagree with the Real Presence, advocate the ordination of women, condone homosexuality, etc., etc., etc; according to recent surveys. Thanks for listening.
Love, Jaypeeto3

[quote=Jaypeeto3]Hi Maggieodae,
to be fair, Mr. Matatics is hardly a “Johnny Come Lately” to the Catholic faith. He has been a practicing Catholic for nearly twenty years, and a traditionalist for over ten years. I’m not saying I support his position, but the Church today fraternizes with every heretical Protestant church and every schismatical Eastern Orthodox church that exists, including those who vehemently denie even the rightful existence of the papal office. It is sheer hypocrisy for such ecumenists to then foam at the mouth at Catholic traditionalists, even those of who have taken an extreme position as Gerry Matatics has.
And there are many Catholic traditionalists, and their number is growing, who hold to Mr. Matatic’s recently-adopted position, and these are people who have been Catholic ALL their lives.
As for me, I’m a convert and attend what traditionalists would call a “novus ordo” parish. Nonetheless, when I see hypocrisy I call it by it’s name no matter whose toes I may step on. And as for Mr. Matatics, if he has fallen into error, he deserves our prayers, not our venom. At least he is at most “TOO” Catholic, not “not Catholic at all” like a great many who are nominally in full communion with Rome, such as the 70% or more catholics who disagree with the Real Presence, advocate the ordination of women, condone homosexuality, etc., etc., etc; according to recent surveys. Thanks for listening.
Love, Jaypeeto3
[/quote]

According to recent surveys? I do not live by surveys young man. I live by the truth and love of Christ. As a life long Catholic, I find it beyond the pale for those who come in and out, to bash something they know not and they fail miserbly in a Holy Tradition called Obeidience. And NO young Johny come lately is going to make me swallow dung, just to suit thier agenda. Matatics has spend 20 years being a nitwit…not a Catholic. There are many who call themselves Catholic, who are Judas Goats. That has been true in every age.

Hi Maggieodae,
THANK you for calling me a young man, you really made my day, cuz I’m 45 and feel every bit of it !!
Seriously, though, your last post was really vitriolic.
Matatics may be wrong, but he is not a nitwit. Have you ever heard him defend the Catholic faith against skilled protestant opponents like James White? If you have, you’d KNOW he is no nitwit. You should find out WHAT led him to the position he now holds and then patiently and kindly show him WHERE he is wrong and WHY. You might even win him over. That last post was really ugly and completely unbefitting a Christian.
Love, Jaypeeto3

[quote=Jaypeeto3]Hi Maggieodae,
THANK you for calling me a young man, you really made my day, cuz I’m 45 and feel every bit of it !!
Seriously, though, your last post was really vitriolic.
Matatics may be wrong, but he is not a nitwit. Have you ever heard him defend the Catholic faith against skilled protestant opponents like James White? If you have, you’d KNOW he is no nitwit. You should find out WHAT led him to the position he now holds and then patiently and kindly show him WHERE he is wrong and WHY. You might even win him over. That last post was really ugly and completely unbefitting a Christian.
Love, Jaypeeto3
[/quote]

Really…well let me put it this way…If Christ could call a spade a spade so can I. “Matatic’s is a White Washed tomb.” Tooie! :smiley: And at 45 your still young enough to be my kid, so don’t think I buy the 45 is old. :rotfl: Your still wet behind the ears…You are sincere, but sincerely wrong none the less. :whistle:

C’mon, folks. Off each other and back on the topic-charitably, of course.

Matatics is a brilliant apologist and I for one am saddened by his stance on the papacy and his departure from the Church.

Instead of slamming him, and one another, we should all pray for him.

I agree with you, bigdawg. We should pray for him.
These are confusing times in the church.
From Mr. Matatic’s statement quoted above, he mentions his view that Benedict XVI was never validly consecrated as a Bishop. This is the controversy over the validity of the New Ordination Rite of 1968. Pope Leo XIII declared Anglican Holy Orders INVALID in part, said Leo, because they STRUCK OUT from their new ordination rite every Catholic rite prayer which signified that the man being ordained was being ordained a sacrificing priest. That was the Anglican rite, and why the Vatican declared it invalid.
Well, the New Catholic rite of Ordination of 1968 ALSO struck out any and ALL references and prayers regarding a sacrificing priesthood. Thus, the reasoning goes, if that made the Anglican rite invalid, then it makes the 1968 Catholic rite invalid too.
Similiar striking out of all sacrificial references was done to the new Catholic rite for ordaining Bishops and the ENTIRE “form” for ordaining Bishops was completely changed in the 1968 new rite, which makes some people, including apparently Mr. Matatics, conclude that the New Rites are INvalid and hence, Ratzinger, being ordained a bishop in the new rite, was allegedly invalidly ordained and hence can’t be a valid pope since he allegedly wasn’t validly ordained a Bishop. I know of many people who are uneasy about the New Ordination rite, and I really wish the Vatican would issue some sort of detailed explanation why the exact same prayers and references were stricken out of our New Rite which were stricken out the Anglican rite of ordination which made Leo XIII declare Anglican orders null and void. Such a document from the Holy See would ease many consciences.
As for Mr. Matatics, he deserves our prayers and not our wrath because he really believes he is doing the right thing in God’s eyes. Love, Jaypeeto3

Originally Posted by Della
I chalk this up to never having given up the spirit of Protestantism while calling oneself a Catholic. It’s a real danger for converts from Protestantism, especially those who oh-so-cleverly thought their way into the Catholic Church.

As a former Protestant that had to think my way into the Catholic Church, do not disparage the use of reason in the process. Without it I would not be Catholic.

I’m a former Protestant who also had to think my way into the Church. :wink: C. S. Lewis began the process for me in the reason part of my conversion. My point is, that if anyone understands the danger of people who came into the Church via reason, you and I and others like us ought to know what a temptation it would be to think it was our own cleverness instead of the working of the Holy Spirit that truly brought about our conversions. It’s a pitfall that some fall into. And sadly, Gerry Matatics seems to have fallen into that pit. I don’t say that he is no longer a Christian, but his rejection of the Church’s authority puts him right back in the Protestant pool.

[quote=Della]Originally Posted by Della
I chalk this up to never having given up the spirit of Protestantism while calling oneself a Catholic. It’s a real danger for converts from Protestantism, especially those who oh-so-cleverly thought their way into the Catholic Church.

I’m a former Protestant who also had to think my way into the Church. :wink: C. S. Lewis began the process for me in the reason part of my conversion. My point is, that if anyone understands the danger of people who came into the Church via reason, you and I and others like us ought to know what a temptation it would be to think it was our own cleverness instead of the working of the Holy Spirit that truly brought about our conversions. It’s a pitfall that some fall into. And sadly, Gerry Matatics seems to have fallen into that pit. I don’t say that he is no longer a Christian, but his rejection of the Church’s authority puts him right back in the Protestant pool.
[/quote]

Well spoken Della,

With all Gerry has been saying and hinting at as of late, this doesn’t surprise me. I wonder if he believes us Vatican II / Novus Ordo Catholics are going to hell in a hand basket, along with Protestants, Orthodox, Jews, Muslims and all other non Catholics, or does the mass use of Limbo somehow work into his theology?

It would seem he never really got over the Protestant ethos of private interpretation, and in his case it would apply to Tradition as well. In other words, Scripture and Tradition without Magisterium. All Gerry has to do now is drop the big T and he will be on James White’s payroll.

So he has officially entered the murky waters of Sedevacantism, and of the Feeneyite variety no less, but as a Catholic I do wish him all the best. Though I just assume he comes back home, and if that day ever comes I for one will welcome him back with open arms.

R.I.P. Gerry:crying:

[quote=Tarcisius]No, by R.I.P. I don’t mean that apologist Gerry Matatics is dead, but his brain seems to be. He now has admitted that he is both a sedevacantist and the most extreme version of a Feeeyite.

Matatics wrote an e-mail to the fake Benedictine “brothers” who run Most Holy Family Monastery. These are guys who say that even most traditionalists aren’t really Catholics. In the e-mail Matatics says that John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI have all been “manifest heretics,” and not a single one of them has been a real pope!

Matatics also says that unless you are water baptized and a member of the Catholic Church, you have no chance AT ALL to be saved. Sorry, Eastern Orthodox and Protestants and everybody else! He says there is no such thing as baptism of desire and that the Catechism is wrong about that.

The e-mail is at mostholyfamilymonastery.com/Gerry_Matatics.html

This is crazy! The guy has read himself right out of the Church and into a church of his own making.

I wonder if the traditionalists who used to promote him, such as The Remnant and Catholic Family News newspapers and writer Christopher Ferrara, will have the courage to come out now and condemn the positions Matatics has taken and to say that he is no longer a Catholic.
[/quote]

He has become just as much of a heretic as Luther and Calvin and Zwingley.

[quote=Jaypeeto3]Now, now, now, people.
Gerry Matatics is now merely in “imperfect” communion with the Catholic Church, since he no longer recognizes Rome. That is the “ecumenical” approach to people today. (Except, it seems, when it comes to Traditionalists).
I see a lot of venom aimed at Mr. Matatics from the posters above, and not one ounce of charity. If the man has fallen into error, it behooves us to pray fervently for him, not slam him.
God bless, Jaypeeto3
[/quote]

I agree wholeheartedly. We must pray and show compasion, but he is still a heretic and is just as much a protestant as any fundamentalist or “born again” non-denominational. He has taken traditionalism far overboard.

Hmm. I just looked at all of Tarcisius’ postings and have come to the conclusion that the true identity of Tarcisius is . . .

none other than. . .

Karl Keating himself! :tsktsk:

Several things in Tarcisius’ postings and Karl’s e-letter gave him away:

1). Mentioning in an e-letter that Tarcisius was his favorite Saint as a boy

2). He lives near a big church that looks like an ugly barn

3). Him bringing to light some concerns about Scott Hahn’s theology.

4). Tarcisius’ and Karl’s writing styles are almost identical.

Now the thing I’m wondering-is Karl using other pseudonyms in other Catholic journals? :hmmm:

What about the New Oxford Review? I’ve heard him praise it several times and his name is on the list of contributing editors, but I’ve never seen an article with his name as author. . .
:hmmm:

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.