Earlier this month, yet another interview with Pope Francis appeared in a secular journal; namely, the Italian daily Corriere della Sera.
Just like the Holy Father’s previous media forays, this one also raises grave concerns for those who love the Church, with most of the dust-up in the present case concerning the pope’s attitude toward same-gender civil unions.
Catholic News Agency, which consistently labors to cast the Holy Father’s words in deeds in the most positive of all possible lights, provided the following translation.
The interviewer asked, “Many nations have regulated civil unions. Is it a path that the Church can understand? But up to what point?”
To which, Pope Francis answered:
Marriage is between a man and a woman. Secular states want to justify civil unions to regulate different situations of cohabitation, pushed by the demand to regulate economic aspects between persons, such as ensuring health care. It is about pacts of cohabitating of various natures, of which I wouldn’t know how to list the different ways. One needs to see the different cases and evaluate them in their variety.
Naturally, the mainstream media reported that the pope is open to the idea of same-sex civil unions, but CNA subsequently reported a clarification offered by Fr. Thomas Rosica, C.S.B., who serves as the English language assistant to Holy See Press Office.
As an aside, this is the same Fr. Rosica of Salt and Light Television who conducted a 2012 interview with former priest Gregory Baum, one of Canada’s most infamous heretics, during which he praised Baum as a great theologian.
“I’ve certainly admired very much your theology, your writings but also your love of the Church, your love of Christ, and you helped to keep alive not only the spirit of the Second Vatican Council, but also the authentic teaching of the Council … you remain a faithful, deeply devoted Catholic, love Jesus, the Church, the Eucharist,” Rosica told Baum, an ardent supporter of homosexual “marriage.”
Such is the character of the men hand-selected to represent the present pontificate.
In any event, Fr. Rosica stated:
Some journalists have interpreted the Pope’s words…to reflect an openness on the part of the Church to civil unions. Others have interpreted his words to be addressing the question of same-sex marriage.
Yes, the problem lies with those rascally journalists; the same with whom the Holy Father cannot seem to stop chatting. According to CNA:
Giving the original Italian version of the pontiff’s words on civil unions, Fr. Rosica provided his own personal translation, highlighting the importance of understanding that “’civil unions’” in Italy refer to people who are married by the state, outside of a religious context. The Pope did not choose to enter into debates about the delicate matter of gay civil unions.”
Really?
Let’s revisit the pope’s words. He began his response by speaking of marriage being “between a man and a woman.” Clearly, this is the basis for what follows when he then goes on to address, by way of contrast, “different situations of cohabitation.”
It would seem rather obvious, apart from checking one’s brain at the door, that the pope was speaking of arrangements involving either two men or two women. It is an insult to the intelligence of both the pope and the faithful to suggest that the Pontiff thought the interviewer was speaking about men and women cohabitating outside of marriage.
In any case, the real bombshell is what Fr. Rosica said next:
Pope Francis simply stated the issues and did not interfere with positions held by Episcopal Conferences in various countries dealing with the question of civil unions and same sex marriage,” the priest continued.
On the one hand, Fr. Rosica isn’t the least bit ashamed to stretch credulity in the process of doing pontifical damage control, on the other, he is speaking with pinpoint accuracy as it concerns the Holy Father’s unshakeable commitment to that irresistible source of post-conciliar authority, collegiality.
And this brings me to what is perhaps the most noteworthy, and yet widely overlooked, part of the pope’s interview wherein he fawned over the schismatic Orthodox, saying:
Orthodox theology is very rich. And I believe that they have great theologians at this moment. Their vision of the Church and of synodality is marvelous.
Though Fr. Rosica saw fit to conclude by warning, “We should not try to read more into the pope’s words that what has been stated in very general terms,” the Holy Father’s intent in this case is crystal clear.
Writing in that 50,000 word tome that Cardinal Burke still hasn’t quite figured out what to call, the Holy Father stated:
The Second Vatican Council stated that, like the ancient patriarchal Churches, episcopal conferences are in a position “to contribute in many and fruitful ways to the concrete realization of the collegial spirit”. Yet this desire has not been fully realized, since a juridical status of episcopal conferences which would see them as subjects of specific attributions, including genuine doctrinal authority, has not yet been sufficiently elaborated. Excessive centralization, rather than proving helpful, complicates the Church’s life and her missionary outreach. (Evangelii Gaudium 32)
It occurs to me that this may be one of the reasons Jorge Bergoglio was so quickly elected in the first place:
Perhaps the College of Cardinals, like a bunch of schoolchildren imagining how “marvelous” it would be if one of their own was made principal, collectively decided to place a man in the Chair of St. Peter who could be counted upon to join them in paying homage to collegiality; thereby democratizing the monarchy that Jesus established.
We’ll see just how far the pope is willing to go with this idea when the Synod of Bishops meets in October.
(Hint: I have in mind the push back to Cardinal Kasper’s remarks on divorced and civilly remarried Catholics, the same which the pope saw fit to praise; something I will address very soon.)
Far Left pols and Far Left clerics (sic!) become less distinguishable, save for the garb, by the day. I expect one of the reforms from the Council of 8 will be a new dicastery for “spin-ology.”
“Jay Carney, the Vatican Secretary of State for you on line 2…..”
“the Holy Father’s unshakeable commitment to that irresistible source of post-conciliar authority, collegiality.”
Let us remember wise and courageous Cardinal Ottaviani’s observation that there is only one instance in the gospels where the apostles acted collegially: “They all fled.”
Authentic Catholic spirituality is three things: Eucharistic, Marian, and doctrinal/dogmatic/Magisterial. Regarding the Marian category, the four dogma of Mary tell us who she is (Mother of God, Perpetual Virgin, Immaculata, Glorified Woman), and the three roles of Mary tell us what she does (Coredemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocate). These three roles have application to our spiritual lives. Coredemptrix: we are all called to be coredeemers, offering our sacrifices for the benefit of others as well as for our own sanctification; Mediatrix: we are called to be mediators of grace, tertiary mediators (St. Kolbe) praying for one another in the Mystical body; Advocate: we are all called to be advocates for one another, not only as intercessors for one another, but also in the spiritual dimension of assuming the vast job of speaking in defense of each other. Our Lady is the advocate; Satan is the accuser. If we want to be on the side of Mary we must always defend each other. As we know, this can be difficult. If necessary, we must try and discern which spirit is influencing the person or what mental or personal defect is involved and ask Our Lady for help. Quodcumque dixerit vobis facite. (John 2:5)
I’m sick of this nonsense that the Pope is ‘misunderstood’. The Catholic media acts as if he was Mumbles, the crook in the Dick Tracy comic strip. Mumbles, for those of you not in the know, is a criminal who’s speech is nearly unintelligible, because he, well, mumbled. When he spoke, people would ask, “What did he say?”. Then somebody else would have to interpret his slurred speech. Well, I think Pope Mum- er- Francis speaks clearly enough. It’s the Catholic media, apologetics mafia, and many bloggers who should know better, who don’t want to admit the plain truth of what he’s really saying. It’s not a matter of speech, it’s a matter of willfully refusing to understand what is actually being said.
It’s funny, when I talk, I make myself understood. I speak clearly. I know precisely what I want to say, and I say it.
… because “collegiality” works so wonderfully for the Orthodox Churches. Take for example the current situation in the Ukraine.
+ + +
AsiaNews reports:
http://www.asianews.it/news-en/Crimea-annexation-frightens-Patriarch-of-Moscow-30619.html
+ + +
Aspirations for autonomy have grown in recent years in Ukraine, which desires complete autocephaly and independence from [the Russian Orthodox Church in] Moscow. Moreover, the seat of Kiev is historically the original one, from which Moscow separated only in 1589. Currently, the Metropolitan of Kiev Vladimir Sabodan, almost eighty years old, is in bad health, and Kirill [Patriarch of Moscow] is raising some heartfelt prayers that the Lord preserve him for as long as possible: the election of a new Metropolitan right now would certainly be accompanied by strong demands for autonomy . The Vladimir’s vicar, Metropolitan Onufrij Berezovsky, originally pro-Russian, has increasingly been drawn towards the defense of the integrity of the Ukrainian state and its independent church, and the other bishops are even more explicit in this regard. The Moscow Church of obedience is beginning to appear to Ukrainians as the “Church occupier”, which could lend renewed authority to the independent Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Patriarch Filaret Denisenko, which may be greatly diminished, but is still large . Not to mention the extreme push for autonomy of the Greek – catholic Church led by Archbishop Sviatoslav Sevchuk , which has its stronghold in western Ukraine and which was the greatest supporter of the Majdan protests and the revolution taking place in Kiev.
Kirill is also afraid of losing his dominant position over the entire Orthodox communion, which in 2016 will meet at the Phanar for the great pan-Orthodox Council, the first in the entire history of Orthodoxy. Currently Moscow accounts for 70% of all Orthodox in the world. If its jurisdiction was halved, it might end up in the minority, and have the great success of the convocation of the Council of Constantinople come back to haunt it. This, in fact, may become the grave of Russian ambitions to lead the Christian world in opposition to (or at least on par) with the Pope of Rome. The great Russia, in annexing the small Crimea, instead of expanding will ultimately become smaller and smaller.
+ + +
OK. So maybe that wasn’t the best example of “collegiality”… sounds like they could use some sort of central authority like… naaaah
Yeah Michael, so that central authority can change their theology, Liturgy, calendar, sacraments, fasting rules, devotions, Church architecture, etc. I can’t see why they don’t want to rush to Rome’s central authority to fix their jurisdiction issue????
What a great comment, John of the Altar. Is that from a book you read or did it come from you?
Democracy and Collegiality (from No King but Caesar, by Hugh Akins)………
…..”Not just priests, nuns and the people, but the primates and princes of the Church have likewise been sold on the idea of an anti-hierarchical equality at all levels of ecclesial authority; in effect, a primacy of men over the divinely constituted papacy and magisterium in the governance of the Holy and Universal Church.
One of the documents enacted by the Council Fathers and given the papal stamp of approval by Paul VI, ‘De Ecclesia’, On the Church, says that the bishops collectively share with the pope in ruling the Church.
This teaching is in complete contradiction to the age-old doctrine, taught by Christ Himself, of the Primacy of Peter. The new and heretical concept of sharing in the governing of the Church is called collegiality, a most fashionable term these days, but it entails a totaly fraudulent sense of equality; a sense of common status, not just between bishops and the Pope but between priests and their bishops, and between the laity and their clergy, at least in spirit.
THE ERROR OF COLLEGIALITY IS DEMOCRACY AT WORK IN THE RANKS OF THE HIERARCHY. FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, IT SIGNIFIES ANOTHER TRIUMPH OF AMERICANISM OVER CATHOLICISM, AND CONTITUTES A DIRECT ASSAULT UPON THE MONOLITHIC STRUCTRE OF THE CHURCH, UPON THE PAPACY AND THE PRIESTHOOD.
On the error of collegiality Romano Amerio comments: “Even within the Church, the prestige of the Roman Pontiff has clearly declined. Because of the principle of collegiality, the episcopates have grown freer in their relations with Rome, and are no longer cathedras of the same doctrine. They no longer take their cue from the Head, but are autonomous organs which promote particular doctrines, impose erroneous catechisms (prohibiting the ancient ones, including the Tridentine and that of St. Pius X), allow errors to go unchecked rather than to anathematize them, and contradict the solemn teaching of the Pope (for example, Humanae Vitae, 1968) in public documents…..The creation of the bishops conferences has changed the structure of the ecclesial government, annihilating the power and responsibility of the individual bishops.”
“As Pope Pius XII was saying that the priest was inferior to Christ but superior to the people. The same holds true for popes, bishops, and for bishops and priests. The pope is inferior to Christ but superior to the bishops. The bishops are inferior to the pope but superior to the priests. There is no equality here in rank or dignity. Collegiality has fostered a serious diminution of exclusive and explicitly defined jurisdiction and hierarchical dignity at each of these respective levels of authority.”
Father William Welsh comments: “The First Vatican Council defined clearly that ‘the Roman Catholic Church is a monarchy. It is NOT a democracy’. And therefore there is nor right for anyone to question, with episcopal conferences and pastoral councils, the authority of the monarch. And who is the monarch? And who are the princes of the Church who have become presidents, representatives of the people, figureheads? The bishops are the princes of the Church, they have always been the princes of the Church. But no one know any longer what a prince is, so the people don’t know how to treat a prince, and these princes don’t know how to act like princes. And the pope? Does any one today in the Roman Catholic Church really know what the Holy Father is?……The Holy Father was taken from his throne, and ‘with the spirit of collegiality he was stripped of his sovereignty as a monarch!’ That is right, a monarch. He is a monarch….And he has the authority and the obligations of the monarchy to fulfill the will of Christ the King!”
Says Pope Gregory XVI: “……All who seek to disturb this order in any way, shake, as far as in them lies, the constitution of the Church” (Mirari vos).
Anen Roch Muggeridge’s account of the emergence of collegiality at Vatican II and its ensuing spread among upperechelon prelates contains sufficient merit to warrant our attention: “At the end of 1965 the bishops and their ‘periti’ came hom from ‘the New Pentecost’ spirit-filled, as they kept telling us. The bishops, reveling in their new feelings of the independence, grouped themselves into national and regional conferences, proceeded to set up dozens of commissions and sub-commissions with wide powers to write and administer the policies of the national churches…..and exceedingly important step for the futer succes fo the Revolution……In effect, the new bureaucracies of the national conferences have become ‘parallel hierarchies’, home-trown curias which run the national churches. Ironically, collegiality, in its spirit of Vatican II application, has destroyed the once very gret pre-Conciliar authority of the individual bishop on his own turf. Today bishops who are not ambitious politicians find themselves reduced to silence in a coerced consensus, which, as the Revolution gains strength, serves to guarantee the legitimacy of the parallel hierarchy” (The Desolate City……Revolution In the Catholic Church).
Priests, bishops, cardinals and Popes are not authorities in themselves, but have a higher authority to answer to……THE LAW OF CHRIST, in which they must be faithful stewards, proclaim the Gospel, shepherd their flock, safeguard the sheep against the wolves of sin and eror, and assure that their purity of Catholic Doctrine be handed on to the future generations without blemish. No matter what their position, no matter what their choice, no matter what their I.Q., no matter how many their degrees, they still, just like any other Catholic, owe their religious assent of soul to what is the teaching of the Holy Catholic Church, and have absolutely no authority to dismantle or preach against it.”
Thanks for the post, Louie: “Perhaps the College of Cardinals, like a bunch of schoolchildren imagining how “marvelous” it would be if one of their own was made principal, collectively decided to place a man in the Chair of St. Peter who could be counted upon to join them in paying homage to collegiality; thereby democratizing the monarchy that Jesus established.”
–
and they are playing up a storm in the vatican playground.
–
@Michael Leon – good link (I never did understand why the One Church thinks the mangled mass of mini ‘Christianities’ self-congratulating their self-made magisteriums is anything admirable). But Bergoglio clearly does, and that’s clearly where he wants the Church to be – a mangle mess colleges of bishops with their own magisteriums and gone the One, gone the True, gone the Holy – perhaps all they will remain is the Apostolic title. But sooner or later that will lose its certainty as well.
–
this pope who loves doubt = contrast with Benedict:
“Today having a clear faith based on the Creed of the Church is often labeled as fundamentalism. Whereas relativism, that is, letting oneself be ‘tossed here and there, carried about by every wind of doctrine”, seems the only attitude that can cope with modern times. We are building a dictatorship of relativism that does not recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one’s own ego and desires.’
–
@Steve D – ” it’s a matter of willfully refusing to understand what is actually being said.” totally agree.
Bergoglio praises doubt. This is what Paul VI said in 1972:
–
“By some fissure the smoke of satan has entered into the temple of God: there is doubt, uncertainty, problems, unrest. Doubt has enetered our consciences, and it has entered through the windows which were meant to have been opened to the light. This state of uncertainty reigns even in the Church. It was hoped that after the Council there would be a day of sunlight in the history of the Church. Instead, there came a day of clouds, of darkness, of groping, of uncertainty. How did this happen? We will confide Our thoughts to you: there has been interference from an adverse power: his name is the devil.”
–
Bergoglio seems to revel in creating doubt in consciences – openings whereby sin isn’t sin, and perfection is no longer perfection, where even fasting is no longer fasting, where devotion is an evil, and good faithful Catholics are not to be trusted. He promulgates doubt.
–
“We will confide Our thoughts to you: there has been interference from an adverse power: his name is the devil.”
@John of the Altar – I don’t agree that using good judgment puts one at odds with Our Lady.
–
1co.6.3 Know you not that we shall judge angels? how much more things of this world?
For me the most noteworthy yet widely overlooked part of the interview, as translated for Zenit, is the following comment (emphasis added):
“Three months after my election, I was submitted the topics for the Synod, and we decided to discuss what Jesus’ contribution is to contemporary man.”
The original reads:
“Tre mesi dopo la mia elezione mi sono stati sottoposti i temi per il Sinodo, si è proposto di discutere su quale fosse l’apporto di Gesù all’uomo contemporaneo. “
The Creed says of Our Lord, “by whom all things were made”. Our Lord’s “contribution” to contemporary man is man’s existence and everything he has. And everything he has is the Lord’s (cf. 1 Corinthians 10:26).
Until we have a pope whose habitual use of language, even when ad-libbing, would never allow him to invert the relationship between God and man; until we have a pope who exhorts the whole world to obey “the greatest and first commandment” (Matthew 22:37-39), I cannot see us ever feeling secure in his concern for love of neighbor, whether in a synod or elsewhere.
dear Dumb_ox,
precisely. {no pun intended !}
dear Pooh Bear,
me too-but you are an individual of good will. However, the current Supreme Pontiff—-well, I’m not going there in this conversation.
dear Saluto,
re: doubt. Would you agree with me, that the Pontiff’s reference to Our Lady possibly having let’s say—-“doubt,” —was an horrendous extrapolation from his doubt campaign?
dear James the Lesser,
I know, right? Seriously.
@Linda – good point. seems so obvious in hindsight.
@Dumb Ox – only a Judas could refer to Our Lord in such a way. the Pope elect doesn’t seem to have any supernatural faith.
Help me. I can’t quite figure out why does this man reminds me of Papa Bergoglio?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GGA1a4nyVs
heh heh heh–very good, Sean
Sean,
Often (but by no means always), Franky’s verbiage is as unintelligible as the fellow’s accent in the video you posted. good one. I know of at least one passage from Evangelii Gaudium where it is reported neither philosophers nor theologians can decipher the meaning of the verbose incomprehensible text. Who on earth proof-read EG? Cardinal Maradiaga perhaps?
Sometimes when Francis speaks, on the rare occasion he doesn’t confuse, he sounds like captain obvious to me. “Priests and Bishops should celebrate the Eucharist, pray and hear confessions” Wow! Really !? How profound!
Ganganelli March 26, 2014 2:38 pm
Rich,
–
I have only posted here under the name Ganganelli and Louie could verify that for you. I know it’s impossible for you to believe there are actually Catholics who love the Holy Father and are disgusted by anti-papal protestantism masquerading as “traditionalism” but there are many more of us than there are of you. Heck, if you took all the traditionalists in the world and put them in their own church it would be smaller than the Anglicans. LOL.
The above post was in response to my original post:
39.
Rich March 26, 2014 9:06 am
Too bad IP addresses weren’t listed with each post. A certain someone would be out of business on this site.
Notice how I never addressed anyone by name….I just made a simple comment….but yet one person, who wasn’t named whatsoever in my post, felt the need to respond.
The good people on this site know right from wrong…and that’s why they are here. I just wanted to point out that one person is doing his/her best to try and ruin the site with their defense of heretical nonsense. Yes, Ganganelli (or whatever) popes can speak heretically….and have been doing so for a long time now. Sadly, this world has been so conditioned to it that most can no longer differentiate between right and wrong anymore…..and Satan is loving it.
You wanna see poison, Kananka? How ’bout THIS poison??!!
http://tinyurl.com/m4vt4r7
The Vicar of Christ Yukking it up with an advocate of infanticide.
Sean—A picture is worth a thousand words! I could think of countless captions for this “photo op” but none of them would be printable. The Vicar of Christ meets the enemy of Christ. Both look like they’re having a grand ole time! Lord, have mercy! The Church is in Her passion!
Kananka……….your outburst is understandable, but let’s reverse your comment……..”does the unfaithful hierarchy, who is hostile to the Catholic Truths……….even know their faith?…….by their actions and heretical words, is it not obvious that they have lost their faith! How long will the faithful, the wicked world be deceived by the hierarchy that is looking for human praise, rather then in the most holy example, work for the sole end of pleasing God, of saving souls?
Are you that weak in your faith, that you do not hear the cries of millions of lost souls, do you even care?…….how many more millions Kananka will stir your heart?………… if this madness of the enemy of Faith is allowed to reign……….Miserere!
Christianity does not tolerate indifference! Jesus has come into this world to destroy the kingdom of Satan, and to establish the Kingdom of God! The triumph of the temporary power of evil should not disturb us, for we know He is the One and the Only Victor. Let us remember that, He warned us that the enemy of good is…….lying in wait. We ought to be on guard,
awake, and not in lethargy, lest Satan will conquer us too.
…..They the hierarchy, no longer believe to follow Christ to Calvary, no longer believe in holy martyrdom, to suffer for their faith, they have abandoned Our Lord on the Cross, almost as if they are ashamed of God beaten hanging miserably dead on the Cross………Was your sufferings for nothing Lord? …….was it all to give honor to ‘men’? The darkness in the Church is almost terrifying, so disfigured from the SIN WITHIN…….Miserere!
Dear Lord, the Shepherds no longer want to share Your Calvary, Your Cross! They are helping Your enemy to build evil ‘paradise’ on earth in full cooperation with Satan…….
O Glorious Saint Michael the Archangel, protect us from the snares of the evil enemy of God, of the faithful!
Our Lady of Fatima, ora pro nobis!
Catholic Militant: my brother has fallen away from the Faith. He remarked to me this morning, “Am I supposed to believe that the Catholic Church is serious about abortion when I see a picture like this? Would the Pope have been meeting with Obama if he advocated extermination camps for Jews? So how is his extermination of babies any different — IF the Pope really believes that abortion is murder?”
What am I supposed to tell my brother?
THAT’S why I’m becoming increasingly incensed by the drive-by shooters like Kananka who lecture us about poison.
People like kananka, and ganganelli, and sara, and all the rest are more than likely all the same person. Please…dont not entertain them.
Anyone who even comes CLOSE to adhering to the sickness Mr Bergoglio has thus far put forward is seriously putting their own immortality in jeopardy at this point. We acknowledge him as a pope, but that is all (and to be quite honest with you good people….even acknowledging him as the pope is going to become harder and harder to do if he has a lengthy papacy). Between the supposed canonizations about to occur, and this synod of bishops (whatever its called because I no longer pay this stuff any mind) a LOT of good Catholics (note that I don’t say “traditional” Catholics because that just lends the imposters credence….you are either Catholic or you aren’t no matter what you want to call yourself) are going to have a real crisis of what they believe to be true. Its a real mess and something that would not have even been contemplated prior to Vatican 2.
Sean-As far as I know, (I stand to be corrected), the only time Bishop of Rome Bergoglio spoke of abortion was when he accused pro-lifers of being “obsessed”. One of the first witnesses to the Incarnation was an unborn babe–St. John the Baptist who lept for joy in the womb of his mother, Elizabeth, at the visitation of Mary carrying the Christ Child in Her Womb. If this doesn’t speak of the sacredness of the unborn child, then I don’t know what does. Tell your brother to join us in prayer that the Catholic Church will return to Her glorious Traditions under a Pope who is truly Catholic. Tell him “We must stick togehter in the battle before us.” God bless!
Catholic Militant, to be fair… Francis has spoken against abortion. A simple Google search will show as much.
BTW, I am just being objective. Not a Francis apologist.
“…the delicate matter of homosexual civil unions.” [I will not abuse the English language, or my dignity, by using the word “gay”, as this cleric does, to describe such people.]
I had to read that twice before I realized what it was I was reading. What, pray, is “delicate” about this monstrous perversity?
Francis spoke against abortion (whatever)….and yet he refuses to denounce prominent US politicians (Kerry, polosi and biden being the main 3), including the son of a u-know-what president who he has just visited with, who support and condone it. Bergoglio….and I wont call him Francis as that belittles the great Saint’s name….is a disaster in every way possible when it comes to Catholicism. How DARE our Pope sit down with Obama….how DARE he spits on the Church like that!!
Louie….if you happen to read this comment: in addition to addressing the matter of civilly re-married divorcees, can you possibly address the disgrace that the Catholic annulment process has become as well? Too many people do not seem to understand that the current Church annulment has become nothing more than a Catholic “divorce” and is granted for basically anything. I have had people I know, who propose to be Catholic, tell me (while trying to hold back the laughter), how “easy it is, if you pay the money” to get an annulment.
That Salt + Light interview with Gregory Baum that Louie referenced is a jaw-dropper.
Don’t worry Rich, the Pope and Obama talked about the poor and inequality. You know, the two most important issues that affect the world today. Lord help us!
Since I’ve read the reports and the more I think about it….. the more angry I get. This man sat across the table from willful wickedness and betrayed Christ!! I am just flabbergasted.
Sodomidic is the word. Clarity is necessary , and the addressing of sin for what it is, that is true charity.
I’m sure Obama and Franky talked about the two most important issues facing the world today: the unemployed and the lonely elderly.
–
Miserere Domine!
Let us remain strong , encourage one another and cease to allow anything Bergoglio does surprise us. I fear, dear brethren, – and I say this with intense sadness-that the worst is yet to come.
Pray, pray much for the Pontiff.
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.
Archbishop Lefebvre, sound shepherd, pray for us.
James the Lesser
I wouldn’t be surprised if that was the main topic of conversation. The world worries so much about the human condition…..im waiting for someone to worry about getting to Heaven (anyday mr. bergoglio). Attaining salvation is the only purpose in any of our lives….but yet we as a populace continue to dwell on worldly matters which are totally inconsequential. The biggest mistake that we make, even good Catholics, is that we see what we attain on this earth as somehow being important. Nothing, other then the furtherance of our souls to Heaven….and the furtherance of other souls to Heaven…will matter. 80+ years vs eternity…its pretty simple as to what we should concentrate on. BUT AGAIN….there are many good men and woman who cannot understand this simple fact. Don’t worry so much about the poor having enough to eat as that is not important….worry about them being in the state of grace when they die.
James the Lesser
My last post was not at all directed at you…..I just need to vent once in a while, as I believe even good Catholics are slacking in their true purpose on this earth.
Rich, I didn’t take it as being directed at me. I agree with you. Linda, thank you for your tender words of encouragement.
I happened to see at least two video clips of the Pope’s meeting with the US President, and one of them just left me absolutely dumbfounded. He is alleged to have said to Obama “Don’t call me POPE. Call me Jorge Maria Bergoglio” This is taking the humility thing too far IMHO and to say this to Obama of all people just makes it worse. Of course they talked only about social justice issues naturally. What else can we expect? When he is he going to acknowledge he is the successor of Peter and Vicar of Christ and not the average Joe or in this case the regular George.
Sheena,
–
This is simply not true. During the exchanging of the gifts with Obama, he said he had a gift from him as the Pope and another one that was from him personally as “Jorge Bergoglio” . He NEVER told Obama to call him Jorge Maria Bergoglio. By the way Pope Benedict also exchanged gifts with Obama and Bush. Soon to be Saint John Paul 2nd did so with Clinton, Bush I, and Reagan. The Pope is the sovereign head of state and as such meets with with other heads of states. Even those who are pro-abortion like Obama, Bush, Merkel, Hollande, etc.
–
Also I loved the gift he gave to Obama; it was the Angel of Peace. A perfect gift for a president that has surrounded himself with neocon warmongers and drone kills muslims all over the world.
Louie- Mundabor did a good post on this. Supposedly the context for the article WAS civil unions that deal with men and women…those “shacking up” in Italy. It’s a very hot topic in Italy right now. I messaged Mundy about it, telling him that the US took his words to include sodomites…which is easily done. Mundy informed me that in Italy, it wasn’t taken that way. At the end of the day, though..the Pope’s words were ambiguous enough to make it seem like he was talking about sodomy…and he should know by now that articles done in Italy go global. I’m sorry to hear Fr. Rosica is in the press office. The Pope is surrounding himself with pro-sodomites and sodomites themselves. God bless~
@Wilson, the FI scandal (what Volpi did to them) has put the wind up the FSSP – I think if a Volpi came along to do to them what he did to the FI, FSSP wouldn’t lie down and take it as if it was God’s will to become door mats for VII nazis. Plus, what an absurdly sweeping statement “you will find that Radical Traditionalists are very poorly informed when it comes to Church history”, exactly who are you when you’re not at home to be pontificating so?
@Rich, pretty much everything you said, well said.
Wilson, you are very confused. It is the neo-Catholics and the sede vacatists who hold, in a sense, the same error – that a pope must be impeccable. Thus the one group believes everything a (poor) pope says and does must be defended whilst the other holds such a poor pope is not really a pope at all. It is the Traditionalists that have it right, and that treat the supreme pontiff as the Church always have. Thus did saints like St. Bridget and St. Therese of Avila sharply, and publicly, rebuke their popes – and that over matters of far less consequence than what we see today!
–
It is laughable to assert that it’s us Trads who don’t know Catholic history – we’re the ones who are aware the Church didn’t begin in 1965. We’re about the *only* ones reading encyclicals and (to a lesser extent) councils before 1960. You see, Wilson, a 5th grader could determine that the new, unofficial, non-binding orientation of false ecumenism and religious liberty are at odds with *actual* Church teaching.
–
It is further laughable that you do not understand the very nature of Vatican II, you who purpose to be so well-educated on things Catholic. The conciliar popes themselves – both of them – told us in the most direct terms that this council would be “pastoral” and that it would produce *no new teachings*. And no anathemas for that matter. And yes, in that regard, it is itself novel: there had never before been a single Catholic ecumenical council. And I both suspect and pray there will never be another one.
Tomisek, that was quite pathetic. First, you are clearly committing the sin of calumny here. Secondly, what you said is completely illogical: you cannot possibly know the hearts of those you’re impugning. Third, your entire “argument” is a subjective one: it is the classic logical error of ad hominem and absolutely not a drop beyond that.
–
Traditional Catholics are what all Catholics were before the revolutionary pastoral council of Vatican II, which, as the popes told us, did not bind any Catholic to any single teaching (or even anathema), period.
I don’t care about your ‘premises’ – you said Rad trads are not as well informed as yourself which, clearly is rubbish because all you can reference is your own ‘premise patch’. so what. Where is anybody who actually gets what Louie is about on this comment box anymore?
well, I know there are plenty of us, but the contention contingent just for the sake of contentiousness is boring, and plus, if you want to ‘teach’ something, be a bit more pithy because otherwise, it’s just, well, boring.
–
p.s. it’s really rude to drop by someone’s house and start slamming them with insults (much like the pope), so try and use a little restraint all you pot-stirrers out there.
moham – Christ is the Lord, the Way, the Truth and the Life, no one is saved unless they live in Christ and Christ lives in Him. p.s. moham was a sham, not a ‘prophet’, simply a product of Judeo-Christian heresy. plus, I thought we all knew by now that he is a figment of someone’s imagination.
So many trolls, so little time.
Keep writing Louie. Heck with ’em. You must be hitting their guilt nerve.
and, be careful, pot-stirrers, what do you think you are getting out of exploiting Louie’s generosity? There’s no free lunch – anywhere, for anyone.
–
Christus vincit, Christus Regnat, Christus imperat!
–
‘Before Abraham was, I Am’, says the Lord Jesus Christ.
–
also of Abraham, St John the Baptist said – who cares if you call yourselves sons of Abraham, God could raised up sons of Abraham from the very stones if He wanted.
–
@craig v – excellent point. He really must be hitting the nail on quite a few heads that were previously happy breathing sand.
1co.6.3 Know you not that we shall judge angels? how much more things of this world?
Here’s another one to add to the ‘friends of frankie’ list, first of all Rolling Stone, oh and Time, and the US pres, and the French Pres, oh and the UN, those lovely euthanizers, and the people at the advocate, and now the Benji Creme – demon lover extraordinaire:
Q. Do you know if Pope Francis is being impressed or inspired by a Master in his various speeches against greed, the powerful economic powers of the world, and against the pure form of capitalism that still is so attractive to many rich sections of society?
A. He is inspired by Maitreya. (the latest candidate for the Antichrist).
‘allah’ has been unhappy with me for a long time ham, luckily Christ is God. and I judge that if you keep this rubbish up there will have to be a moderator thing on this site and then you will have to find another pot to piss in.
May Our Lady crush the head of the serpent fueling these – don’t quite know what to call you.
–
Christus vincit, Christus Regnat, Christus imperat!
p.s. the southern poverty peeps, that’s what you are called. You guys really do get paid too much.
@Wilson, Tomisek: I know how so-called rad-trads view the participation by Francis in jewish and muslim rites, but I would like to know if they are right or wrong because I have a very strong opinion on it. If the opinion is wrong, I would view it as a great act of charity on your part to correct me.
In any case it has been documented that when he was Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Pope Francis participated in a Hanukkah service by wearing a kippah and lighting one of the candles of a menorah. Also when Archbishop, he recounted in a book that he attended a Rosh Hashanah service and prayed at that service. In addition, also when Archbishop, he participated in an Islamic burial rite for a deceased muslim. Further, as Pope, he organized several kosher meals for jewish friends and at one of them was said to have prayed along with the jews in attendance for unity. Are catholics to consider these acts as acts of apostasy, or are catholics free to follow his example and do each of these things without fear of grave mortal sin if the opportunity presents itself?
p.s. ‘scuse me, Louie for referencing infernalites on this site.
–
p.s. re the above quiz – the Pope has never been prefect of the CDF because when the Holy Office became the CDF, his authority was removed from the office.
@Rich – I agree. But when an infestation of demons decides take up residence somewhere that did not used to be so infested, what should one do?
–
it has seemed to have coincided with voris-gate. cmtv really didn’t have to go and plant that one, but they did.
I guess we could make a list of the double-double-toil-and-troublemakers and just censor them. if voris can censor the pope, and not censor himself in attacking his confreres, then i think censoring double-double-toil-and-troublemakers. There is a terrible method employed by vaticanistas when it comes to ‘removing’ people viewed as obstacles. it’s called the ‘exile of the ignored’, which is why I haven’t wanted to just go, ignore them, just in case some are genuine.
@Catholic Thinker. The Church generally has declared dogma if that which is understood to be correct is under attack, which means it should be that the perennial teaching on divorced and remarried is made dogmatic.
@a shame the infallible Mass was Paul the sixthed into exile.
Tomisek,
–
Can you elaborate on your claim that most traditionalists commit grave sexual sins behind closed doors? What evidence do you have for that?
–
I find this intriguing because I think the Holy Father HATES hypocrisy with a passion. And it is for this reason I think he doesn’t talk about homosexuality that much. If you are a person that is a TRADITIONALIST Catholic you should be much more concerned about pornography which is 99.9999999 percent heterosexual sodomy. Do you think he has the same information that you do?
@Rich – fair enough. I thought maybe it was worth the fight.
A Catholic Thinker
–
Congratulations on being the ONLY Catholic in the world that thinks like you.
–
First, the Eastern Schismatics are wrong. Our Lord himself said that a valid marriage is until death. Mercy is for those who sin and make a firm purpose to not sin again. The divorced and remarried have the intention of committing adultery with their new “spouse” so the Church has no authority to admit to communion those who are in an objective state of mortal sin. The Orthodox also allow contraception. Should we follow them there too?
Actually millions of Catholics think that Dogma and Doctrine ‘evolve’. So, another useless declaration. Whether or not that makes them uncatholic is certainly not something Frankie would pronounce on.
@Wilson: You state:
“Again, the answer is no, since the Pope was not praying to Allah in the muslim context or to God with the belief that Judaism is the correct religion. Rather, in he was present at those ceremonies praying to Christ, Mary and Trinity.”
(1) How do you know that? Can you read minds? The traditional view on such actions is that one joins in a religious rite as act of the will, and that prayer in common with a religious group evidences unity in belief with that group. Since no one can know the interior disposition of a person, the Church traditionally considered the action in the public sphere as evidencing an interior disposition.
Interestingly, the traditional Church view on this comports well with Occam’s razor – that the simplest explanation is the best. If you see someone praying with the jews in a jewish rite, he must be a jew. Any other explanation requires that you assume facts not known to you, e.g., the interior disposition of the person in question.
(2) You are effectively minimizing the possible scope of the fault of his actions. That is, you are arguing that if he was praying to Our Lord in the context of these services, than it is without fault. But it is not that simple. Even if he was praying to Our Lord in the context of these services, he is evidencing a heterodox belief that it is both permissible and possible to offer true worship to Our Lord in the company of those who deny his divinity. Further, as I understand it the Church has authorized rites through which faithful catholics can pray to the Almighty. It has not authorized Catholics to offer prayer to Our Lord through non-christian rites. So, his actions in joining in and participating in these rites may evidence a different, less obvious dissent from church teaching and/or authority. And again, you cannot assign this explanation to his actions because you cannot read minds.
3. Further, do you know what he prayed at these gatherings? Did he join in any of the jewish or muslim prayers? If he did, were the content of the prayers objectionable from a doctrinal standpoint? Did he participate in a prayer that denied the trinitarian nature of Our God?
As a matter of reason you have to admit that you cannot exclude these alternatives. The Church Hierarchy stands in the same position as we do to this day since no inquiry was ever made into his actions. I ask you another question, since you cannot exclude the possibility that he is an apostate or heretic, and that the simplest explanation is that he is an apostate or heretic, are you obligated to recognize him as a catholic and superior?
YOUR HANDLE CAN BE STOLEN ON THIS SITE, DON’T USE IT UNTIL LOUIE SORTS THIS OUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
YOUR HANDLE CAN BE STOLEN ON THIS SITE, DON’T USE IT UNTIL LOUIE SORTS THIS OUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
YOUR HANDLE CAN BE STOLEN ON THIS SITE, DON’T USE IT UNTIL LOUIE SORTS THIS OUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
SOMEONE WHO HAS STOLEN MY HANDLE WHICH MEANS ANYONE’S CAN BE STOLEN SO WHAT’S THE POINT.
AGAIN, GOD BLESS THE REAL PEOPLE HERE.
CHRISTUS VINCIT, CHRISTUS REGNAT, CHRISTUS IMPERAT!
WELL, SEE EVEN LOUIE’S NAME HAS BEEN CO-OPTED. I WILL PRAY FOR YOU WHOEVER YOU ARE, OR THEY ARE.
–
SOMEONE WHO HAS STOLEN MY HANDLE WHICH MEANS ANYONE’S CAN BE STOLEN SO WHAT’S THE POINT.
AGAIN, GOD BLESS THE REAL PEOPLE HERE.
CHRISTUS VINCIT, CHRISTUS REGNAT, CHRISTUS IMPERAT!
@Wilson: Before proceeding, I ask that you examine my items 1 – 3 and identify what elements you assent to or deny.
The Church teaching on how a formal rejection of the faith can be manifested is that it can be manifested by an act, e.g., joining in a non-catholic worship service. I believe that St. Thomas Aquinas taught that it would be an act of apostasy to pray at the tomb of Mohammed, for example.
Regarding not judging a pope that is a matter of church law and only applies if the Pope avoids heresy or apostasy. St. Robert said that a Pope who lapsed into apostasy or heresy would be subject to church discipline. By divine law heresy or apostasy ipso facto places one outside the church – and Pope Leo XIII said that it is ridiculous to believe that someone outside the church can command within the church.
Regarding his elevation some of the acts described above occurred before he became Pope. That raises another issue – if he was an apostate at that time his elevation was invalid.
Ex Apostolatus Officio goes through the traditional church teachings on these things. It says that the election of an apostate or heretic is invalid even if assented to by all of the Cardinals. Further, it authorizes the faithful to withhold obedience from a heretic or apostate so elevated.
Regarding his alleged devotion to Our Lady, this did not prevent him from making a scandalous speculation regarding her state of mind while standing at the foot of the cross during Our Lord’s crucifixion. The speculation called into question his understanding and even his knowledge of the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, i.e., that Our Lady was preserved from sin. I find it hard to believe that a person with a devotion to Our Lady would interiorly entertain his speculation, never mind give voice to it to all the faithful as supreme pontiff during Advent.
Regarding his devotion to the rosary, he has made several scandalous statements regarding the prayer on the occasions when he was informed that groups of the faithful had prayed many rosaries on his behalf.
Regarding his so-called orthodoxy in his statements, so what? Semi-faithful is an oxymoron. A faithful catholic has to hold everything the church teaches and follow all the disciplines it mandates, not just some of them. Further, his actions raise doubt. You yourself have already admitted that the faithful should not follow his example.
Regarding the fact that church discipline has been ignored in the past – that is a red herring. Two wrongs don’t make a right so they say.
SOMEONE HAS STOLEN MY HANDLE WHICH MEANS ANYONE’S CAN BE STOLEN.
GOD BLESS THE REAL PEOPLE HERE.
CHRISTUS VINCIT, CHRISTUS REGNAT, CHRISTUS IMPERAT!
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
SOMEONE HAS STOLEN MY HANDLE WHICH MEANS ANYONE’S CAN BE STOLEN.
GOD BLESS THE REAL PEOPLE HERE.
CHRISTUS VINCIT, CHRISTUS REGNAT, CHRISTUS IMPERAT!
—
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
COUNCIL OF TRENT
SESSION XIII
CANON XI.-lf any one saith, that faith alone is a sufficient preparation for receiving the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist; let him be anathema. And for fear lest so great a sacrament may be received unworthily, and so unto death and condemnation, this holy Synod ordains and declares, that sacramental confession, when a confessor may be had, is of necessity to be made beforehand, by those whose conscience is burthened with mortal sin, how contrite even soever they may think themselves. But if any one shall presume to teach, preach, or obstinately to assert, or even in public disputation to defend the contrary, he shall be thereupon excommunicated.
SOMEONE HAS STOLEN MY HANDLE WHICH MEANS ANYONE’S CAN BE STOLEN.
GOD BLESS THE REAL PEOPLE HERE.
CHRISTUS VINCIT, CHRISTUS REGNAT, CHRISTUS IMPERAT!
—
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
I-
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
SOMEONE HAS STOLEN MY HANDLE WHICH MEANS ANYONE’S CAN BE STOLEN.
GOD BLESS THE REAL PEOPLE HERE.
CHRISTUS VINCIT, CHRISTUS REGNAT, CHRISTUS IMPERAT!
—
–
–
–
–
–
I’VE LEFT LOUIE A MESSAGE, AND THOSE OF US FAMILIAR WITH THIS SITE KNOW WHAT LOUIE’S COMMENT POSTS LOOK LIKE.
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
SOMEONE HAS STOLEN MY HANDLE WHICH MEANS ANYONE’S CAN BE STOLEN.
GOD BLESS THE REAL PEOPLE HERE.
CHRISTUS VINCIT, CHRISTUS REGNAT, CHRISTUS IMPERAT!
—
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
– IF YOU DON’T CARE WILSON WHY DO YOU CARE?-
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
COUNCIL OF TRENT
SESSION XXIV
CANON VlI.-If any one saith, that the Church has erred, in that she hath taught, and doth teach, in accordance with the evangelical and apostolical doctrine, that the bond of matrimony cannot be dissolved on account of the adultery of one of the married parties; and that both, or even the innocent one who gave not occasion to the adultery, cannot contract another marriage, during the life-time of the other; and, that he is guilty of adultery, who, having put away the adulteress, shall take another wife, as also she, who, having put away the adulterer, shall take another husband; let him be anathema.
SOMEONE HAS STOLEN MY HANDLE WHICH MEANS ANYONE’S CAN BE STOLEN.
GOD BLESS THE REAL PEOPLE HERE.
CHRISTUS VINCIT, CHRISTUS REGNAT, CHRISTUS IMPERAT!
—
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
AND IF YOU, WILSON ARE NOT THE ONE WHO HAS USED THE PSEUDONYM SALUTO, THEN SOMEONE HAS, SO IF YOU HAVE ANY ETHICS (DON’T EXPECT MUCH MORALS FROM PEOPLE THESE DAYS) YOU WILL APPLAUD MY LITTLE CAMPAIGN.
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
SOMEONE HAS STOLEN MY HANDLE WHICH MEANS ANYONE’S CAN BE STOLEN.
GOD BLESS THE REAL PEOPLE HERE.
CHRISTUS VINCIT, CHRISTUS REGNAT, CHRISTUS IMPERAT!
—
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
SOMEONE HAS STOLEN MY HANDLE WHICH MEANS ANYONE’S CAN BE STOLEN.
GOD BLESS THE REAL PEOPLE HERE.
CHRISTUS VINCIT, CHRISTUS REGNAT, CHRISTUS IMPERAT!
—
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
SOMEONE HAS STOLEN MY HANDLE WHICH MEANS ANYONE’S CAN BE STOLEN.
GOD BLESS THE REAL PEOPLE HERE.
CHRISTUS VINCIT, CHRISTUS REGNAT, CHRISTUS IMPERAT!
—
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
FIRST VATICAN COUNCIL
SESSION III
CANON 4.3 If anyone says thatit is possible that at some time, given the advancement of knowledge, a sense may be assigned to the dogmas propounded by the church which is different from that which the church has understood and understands:let him be anathema.
SOMEONE HAS STOLEN MY HANDLE WHICH MEANS ANYONE’S CAN BE STOLEN.
GOD BLESS THE REAL PEOPLE HERE.
CHRISTUS VINCIT, CHRISTUS REGNAT, CHRISTUS IMPERAT!
—
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
WILSON I NEVER SAID SUCH A THING AND WOULD NOT – DUDE, i WILL PRAY FOR YOU, PRAY FOR ME, NOT A BLESSING BUT CONVERSION TO THE WAY, THE TRUTH AND THE LIFE, OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST.
where’s bubbles when you need her?
@wilson, my mother would never EVER say such a thing.
I should say ‘wilson’ since someone is including the handle ‘wilson’ in all this.
‘wilson’, you are not a disgrace, whatever your motives, just veryy veryyyy misguided. which can be disgraceful, but we are all a disgrace before the Cross of Our Lord.
Yes, dear Saluto, where IS Bubbles when we need her? For those who know me, you know those vulgarities were not coming from me.
p.s. whoever is stealing ‘saluto’, sounds like a bad movie title, I don’t really want there to be a plague on your house. After all your house isn’t responsible. But beyond that. will you give it a rest? No hard feelings?
God bless, Linda, before pseudo saluto starts up again, I’m off – just wanted to make sure I hadn’t developed a Mr Hyde.
–
Ave’s for you and yours and number 4.
Wilson = Ganganelli = Tomisek…
Wow! now he’s going to take the role of Pope and tell us not only what you should believe but what groups you should be in communion with.
I’m still here, Morissali, whoever you are. And no, Saluto, Linda are not the same person, although it’s possible that the others are, but while this is all sandpit dissemination until and IF the webmaster sorts it, I will conclude that yourself and pseudosaluto, who (thank God, some people on this site know well enough) will stand out like a duck in a thunderstorm. Quite a spectacle. ‘scuse me people but I HATE TREACHERY – JUDAS ‘went to his place’, and my all unrepentant traitors go to theirs!
–
yours in Christ, Saluto, who, by the way, pseudo-salutos and wilsons and whatevers (yep God has ya number), has been stuck in VII Land for many years now, but, having experienced the authenticity before hand and therefore knowing that there is more than VII Land, knows that the posts on this site aren’t whistling dixie, so to say.
–
‘scuse me, but having Sicilian blood, anyone who tries to ‘steal’ my identity, even if it is a pseudonym; it ain’t going to be a fluffy affair.
–
The Keep and the Vigil have been roused.
–
Nisi Dominus aedificaverit domum: in vanum laboraverunt qui aedificant eam.
Nisi Dominus custodierit civitatem: frustra vigilat qui custodit eam.
Vanum est vobis ante lucem surgere: surgite, postquam sederitis, qui manducatis panem doloris.
Cum dederit dilectis suis somnum: ecce hereditas Domini, filii merces, fructus ventris.
Sicut sagittae in manu potentis: ita filii excussorum.
Beatus vir, qui implevit desiderium suum ex ipsis: non confundetur cum loquetur inimicis suis in porta.
-saluto in exile.
–
this is kind of amusing if you have decided that drunken bands and drunken punters are not so interesting anymore.
but I must say, Harvesting the Fruit needs to get more militant against the enemy. CMTV take your money and give no quarter if you have an objection, even if they invite your opinion. I never emailed them once on their ‘la la la la la frankie hasn’t gone to hollywood’, stance, but when they emailed me wanting to know why I had decided to stop funding their attack on the Church; I said, ‘we have a bishop of rome, who won’t accept the title of Pope.’ We have a Bishop of Rome who has hemmed and hawed like an anglican on every necessary issue, and not only that, but spewed venom on the faithful and cmtv want make note of it publicly = on that fine. But to use that public shrinking violet as venom against their confreres – that’s a dark seed planted. and it is. in such a short space of time, Bishops have shuffled around their priests and made their masses even more fallible; Card-an-ulls left and right are proudly defecting from dogma. I think it’s a sign of the times. Even useless little pseudonyms of ‘peripheral’ blogs are fodder for attack. Heads up, Faithful. Just as Sister Lucy said, the Rosary and the Sign of the Cross will be all that is left for some. God prevent it being so for most.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmaXyvn4AdQ
–
Salve Regina
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xmaXyvn4AdQ
@Catholic Thinker,
–
“Gay marriage” and the sinfulness of “contraception” are merely a discipline??? Is this some kind of bad joke??? I’m not even going to debate about the evil of a sin that cries out to heaven for vengeance and caused God to innihilate Sodom and Gomorrah, but regarding contraception did you know Pius XII stated he could not change the teaching even if he wanted to because it forms part of natural law?
–
Some of the comments here are really starting to sound weird, heterodox and plainly heretic.
–
I have never been in favor of censorship of the comments in this blog (indeed I must say somewhat in embarrasment that I once loudly protested to Louie thinking that this was indeed the case) but perhaps Louie should rethink the policy in this matter… And if he does, certainly I will not be able to complain because I myself am advocating for this right now…
p.s. call it perverse curiosity, but what, satanicsaluto, do you get as some kick back from your gig? The us Pres is an abomination. whether the poor soul knows this is God’s business.
–
whatever your perceived, or likely completely unconsidered, end goal, the voice of this blog will continue because it engages with the Truth. the Truth doesn’t have any seeds of destruction in it.
–
Christus vincit, Christus regnat, Christus imperat!
–
I see. OK. I think this conversation is over now. Thank you!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36Y_ztEW1NE
Saluto – this is the REAL Catholic Thinker – some heterodox clown here started posting under my name.
This is my website:
http://www.acatholicthinker.net/
I think you’ll find I’m very much on your side.
How low will the neo-Catholics go?
Also, a correction from me (the, er, “real” Catholic Thinker) regarding what I posted above about St. Therese of Avila: I WAS WRONG. I was actually thinking of St. Catherine, and here is the quote:
–
St. Catherine: “Alas, Most Holy Father! At times obedience to you leads to eternal damnation.” (Letter to Pope Gregory IX in 1376)