CathInfo.com

Quote from: Yeti 9/24/2022, 2:15:59 PM

I see this in a lot of questions, and it's disturbing every time. I've seen people make up the idea that aborted babies are martyrs because they are killed in sacrifice to Satan. I think it's also why most indult-mindset people such as epiphany fiercely defend the fake modern marriage annulments while generally rejecting the other modernist innovations as heretical. I think it's also the main motivation behind Bennyvacantism, as well as the acceptance of the modernist rite of ordination/consecration. I suspect it's behind the popularity of Fr. Ripperger as well, since it tickles people's vanity to be told they're being physically attacked by demons like the great saints such as the Cure of Ars, St. Anthony of the Desert, or even Padre Pio. In the new church it's why people accepted when their "priest" told them they could use contraception; they knew perfectly well that was wrong and did it because they wanted to, not because their priest told them.

It makes me pretty pessimistic about most people in the Novus Ordo church, since people believe what is comfortable to believe, not what is taught them by the Church. That's why most people went along with the changes, because they made them comfortable in their sins. It's also why I consider people in the new church, generally speaking, to be in bad faith about their religion and not to be Catholics.

When have I ever said I have an "indult-mindset" and "fiercely defend the fake modern marriage annulments"?

I have done neither. 

While i do believe the 1917 code regarding annulments, which all Catholics are obliged to believe, i have never "defended the fake modern marriage annulments", fiercely or otherwise.

Nor have i ever said I support the indult mass.

It is unfortunate you try to put words into my mouth.

When have I ever said I have an "indult-mindset" and "fiercely defend the fake modern marriage annulments"?

I have done neither. 

While i do believe the 1917 code regarding annulments, which all Catholics are obliged to believe, i have never "defended the fake modern marriage annulments", fiercely or otherwise.

Nor have i ever said I support the indult mass.

It is unfortunate you try to put words into my mouth.

Is this a joke? Epiphany, every time the subject of modern marriage annulments comes up, and anyone here says the new annulments granted since Vatican II on grounds (such as immaturity) that were never considered grounds before Vatican II must be rejected and people must not consider them valid, you always jump in and start defending the validity of those same fake annulments, and claim that everyone must accept them.

I wasn't necessarily including you in my statement about indult-attendees. You seem to be pretty cagey about where you go to church, anyway, so I'll leave you out of this, but I was using the term as a clumsy way to speak collectively about the conservative wing of the Novus Ordo Church, which mostly comprises people who go to the indult. It is a disturbing trend to me to see that, while nearly all of them reject the new mass and sometimes the fake new sacraments and the errors of Vatican II, at the same time nearly all of them accept the modernist marriage annulments that are even more obviously absurd and anti-traditional than the Novus Ordo mass, and more clearly against everything the Church stood for before Vatican II.

To take a high-profile example I've seen recently, I tend to follow Ann Barnhardt's blog, who I believe goes to the indult. She herself has condemned the modern "bullshit marriage annulments" (she has her own set of technical theological terms ), she had a piece on her blog the other day about an FSSP priest who left the FSSP, to make a long story short, basically in protest over their closure of churches during the scamdemic and something else I can't recall now. My point is that Ann praised this man for being heterosɛҳuąƖ, and as proof of that she cited the fact that he has been married in the past and that marriage is now annulled, allowing him to become a priest. I thought this very strange, and looked around on the internet, and it turned out this man was married even had his marriage blessed by John Paul II himself (!!), and that same marriage is later annulled. How the "pope" can't perform a marriage correctly is a question I'll leave for others, but the point is that Ann liked this guy for standing up to the scamdemic, so she completely ignored the horrific scandal of him leaving his marriage through what she herself would call a "bullshit annulment" and ended up becoming a priest later on (invalidly ordained, but still a scandal). She accepted the scandal of the annulment out of wishful thinking, because she liked something else this guy was doing.