If you have followed our debate with Fr.
Kramer, and thought he could not discredit himself any more than he already
has, think again. As one person recently noted, it appears that Fr. Kramer has gone completely mad. , and is not operating
with his full mental faculties.
Fr. Kramer’s fixation on Pope Francis’ illegitimacy has reached the point that he now claims God "took" Fr. Guner for recognizing him as Pope. The following is Kramer’s posts in response to a Mr. Robert Sullivan:
Mr.
Sullivan:
Why would Fr. Gruner, only one week before his death, publicly call Francis,
Pope Francis, if he was 100% sure he was an Anti-Pope? Posted
August 9, 2016 at 1.01am.
Fr.
Kramer:
I don’t want to be too harsh in my judgment, but Fr. Gruner had one opinion,
but dissimulated about the
other -- … (Posted August 9, 2016 at 1.08am,
emphasis added).
Mr.
Sullivan:
? (Posted August 9, 2016 at 1.08am).
Fr.
Kramer: Yes, Robert Sullivan you heard me. I don’t want to say more in judgment.
Fr. Gruner
singlehandedly informed the whole world about the request of the consecration
of Russia. When that happens, the Church and the world will have a great debt
of gratitude to Fr. Gruner. Nevertheless, he
dissimulated about “Pope” Francis. He knew better, but still postured
as though Francis were the pope. God
intervened. I do not wish to take anything away from the
accomplishments of Fr. Gruner regarding the work for the consecration of Russia
– but in the divine scheme of things, he did not adjust to the changed
situation in the Church . . . (Posted
August 9, 2016 at 1.08am, emphases added).
Fr. Gruner
singlehandedly informed the whole world about the request of the consecration
of Russia. When that happens, the Church and the world will have a great debt
of gratitude to Fr. Gruner. Nevertheless, he
dissimulated about “Pope” Francis. He knew better, but still postured
as though Francis were the pope. God
intervened. I do not wish to take anything away from the
accomplishments of Fr. Gruner regarding the work for the consecration of Russia
– but in the divine scheme of things, he did not adjust to the changed
situation in the Church . . . (Posted
August 9, 2016 at 1.08am, emphases added).
Fr.
Kramer:
“Quod scripsi, scripsi [What I have written, I have written]. I
have no further comments to make about Fr. Gruner. …” (Posted, August 9, 2016)
John
Salza: Folks,
there you have it. According to Fr. Paul Kramer, God killed Fr. Gruner as a
punishment for publicly recognizing Francis as Pope. He was asked point blank
if this is what he meant and he did not deny it (“Quod scripsi, scripsi”). So
according to Fr. Kramer, God took the life of one of his most faithful priests,
loved beyond words by Jesus Christ and Our Lady, because this priest submitted
to the public judgment of Christ’s Church on who is Pope! Only a crazy person
would make such a statement, and do so publicly.
Let’s be clear about the implications of Fr. Kramer’s statement, even beyond
the judgments we can draw about his psychological state of mind. Kramer claims
that Fr. Gruner “dissimulated” (he says it two times) about Francis being Pope.
That is, he claims that Fr. Gruner did not really believe Francis was Pope, but
spoke and acted like he did believe he was Pope. In other words, by accusing
him of “dissimulation,” Fr. Kramer accuses Fr. Gruner of being a public
liar and a sinner.
As St. Thomas explains, “is it contrary to truth to employ signs of deeds or things to
signify the contrary of what is in oneself, and this is what is properly
denoted by dissimulation. Consequently dissimulation is properly a lie told by the signs of
outward deeds. Now it
matters not whether one lie in word or in any other way, as stated above (110,
1, Objection 2). Wherefore, since every lie is a sin, as stated above
(Question 110, Article 3), it follows that also all dissimulation is a sin.”[1] Again,
by accusing him of “dissimulation,” Fr. Kramer has accused Fr. Gruner of being
a public
liar and a sinner, since Fr. Gruner
allegedly “signified the contrary” of what was in himself, namely, he believed that
Francis was not the true Pope, even though “by the signs of outward deeds” Fr.
Gruner spoke and acted as if he believed Francis were the true Pope.
And note well the additional implications of Fr. Kramer’s accusation
against Fr. Gruner. Scripture condemns lying as it does other mortal sins which
merit eternal damnation. As the Catholic
Encyclopedia states, “In places almost innumerable Holy Scripture seems to condemn lying
as absolutely and unreservedly as it condemns murder and fornication.”
Indeed it does. In the Apocalypse, Christ Himself warns that liars will share
the same eternal fate as idolaters and other wicked sinners when He says: “But
the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murders, and
whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, they shall have their portion in the pool burning with fire and brimstone,
which is the second death” (Apoc. 21:8).[2]
Thus, by accusing Fr. Gruner of being a public liar, Kramer is suggesting that
Fr. Gruner, who persevered in his “lie” until death (a death Fr. Kramer claims
God inflicted on him for his “sin”), may indeed
be burning in hell.
For those who have followed our debate
with Fr. Kramer, you have learned that he is no theologian. However, he
certainly knows that dissimulation is a lie and thus “always a sin,”[3]
and that lying about grave matters is a mortal
sin meriting eternal punishment. As
even the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches, “Lying is the most direct
offense against the truth”[4]
and “By its very nature, lying is to be condemned.”[5]
Now, Fr. Gruner not only knew, but also preached to
the faithful of the absolute necessity of recognizing the true Pope and
submitting to his judgments in all things lawful. Fr. Gruner would often refer
to the Church’s dogmatic definition “that it is absolutely necessary for
salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.”[6] He
did so because he himself was falsely accused by his enemies of not being in subjection to the Popes for
pointing out their failures to consecrate Russia and reveal the Third Secret of
Fatima, and he wanted the faithful to understand the difference between being
“subject to the Roman Pontiff” while, at the same time, “resisting” his errors.
Thus, Fr. Gruner no doubt considered the
public acknowledgment and submission to the true Pope a most grave matter of salvation. Indeed, this is precisely why Fr.
Gruner taught the faithful that they must be both in submission to the Popes while also resisting their errors and omissions regarding the Message of
Fatima – so they could save their souls.
Consequently, it is certain that Fr. Gruner rejected Sedevacantism and the opinion
that one can declare, by his own private judgment, that the elected Pope is an
antipope, contrary to the public judgment of the Church. This also means that
Fr. Gruner rejected the erroneous
theology of Fr. Kramer.
Thus, if Fr. Gruner truly believed in his conscience that Francis
was not the Pope and interiorly resisted submission to him (as Kramer accuses
him), while teaching other people that Francis was in fact the true Pope and to
submit to him (which Fr. Gruner did teach), then Fr. Gruner would have been
guilty of “intentionally deceiving”[7]
the faithful on a matter of salvation, and thus guilty of mortal sin. This would be the case even though Fr.
Gruner’s external actions were in conformity to the truth, since the Catechism
teaches that “A human being must always obey the
certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he
would condemn himself.”[8]
And if Fr. Gruner persevered in this mortal sin until death, it follows that he
would now be suffering eternal punishments in hell.[9] Surely,
Fr. Kramer, theologian or not, knows that such a conclusion can be easily drawn
from his grave and public accusations against Fr. Gruner, which makes them all
the more reprehensible and revolting. And Kramer actually had the nerve to say
“I don’t want to be too harsh in my judgment.”
Fr. Gruner suffered more injustice, lies,
and calumny during his priestly life then most men would be able to endure. And,
now, even after his shocking and untimely death, he is still having his
reputation publicly attacked by the likes of Fr. Paul Leonard Kramer, who
claims that God struck him dead for being a public liar.
Fr. Paul Kramer should be
shunned and denounced by all Catholic faithful, at least until he
publicly retracts and repents of his malicious and reckless accusations against
one of the greatest and most influential Churchmen of the past century, the
Fatima priest, Fr. Nicholas Gruner. May God have mercy on Fr. Kramer.
[1] ST, II-II, q 111,
a. 1.
[3]
ST, II-II, q
111, a. 1.
[4] CCC 2483.
[5] CCC 2485.
[6] Pope Boniface’s Unam Sanctam (November 18, 1302).
[7] The Catechism says:
“A lie consists in speaking a
falsehood with the intention of deceiving. The Lord denounces lying as the work
of the devil…” (CCC 2482).
[8] CCC 1790.
[9]
St. Thomas
teaches that when dissimulation is in the form of hypocrisy, it is a “mortal
sin” when “it is contrary to the love of God or of his neighbor.” ST, II-II, q.
111, a. 4. St. Thomas explains that this would happen if the man simulated to
“obtain ecclesiastical preferment” or “any temporal good in which he fixes his
end.” Ibid.
