CathInfo.com

"...No, it doesn't. The ordinary and universal magisterium is infallible, and it has judged the new rites to be valid. That never happened for the truly condemned anglican rites...."

Pope Francis presented a few non-catholic teachings, so how can you honestly say that the Catholic Church magisterium is infallible. Plus, just read the obvious heresies from Vatican II docuмents.

Flee from the newChurch, read pre-Vatican II Doctrine. Modernism is a sin. 
So now the Modernists have public ceremonies blessing same s*x couples...!!?? In the old days, a priest would have opened the confessional door to these people, "Go, and sin no more..."


https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/docuмents/rc_ddf_doc_20231218_fiducia-supplicans_en.html
"...38.(..) At the same time, one should not prevent or prohibit the Church’s closeness to people in every situation in which they might seek God’s help through a simple blessing. In a brief prayer preceding this spontaneous blessing, the ordained minister could ask that the individuals have peace, health, a spirit of patience, dialogue, and mutual assistance—but also God’s light and strength to be able to fulfill his will completely.

39. In any case, precisely to avoid any form of confusion or scandal, when the prayer of blessing is requested by a couple in an irregular situation, even though it is expressed outside the rites prescribed by the liturgical books, this blessing should never be imparted in concurrence with the ceremonies of a civil union, and not even in connection with them. Nor can it be performed with any clothing, gestures, or words that are proper to a wedding.The same applies when the blessing is requested by a same-sex couple...."

[The Catholic Church tells us to admonish the sinner , out of charity. We are talking about public  sinners, causing scandal, sins calling for vengeance from God.  St. John goes so far as to instruct us as to not even say 'Hello" to these types.]

_______________
https://www.usccb.org/committees/ecuмenical-interreligious-affairs/vatican-council-and-papal-statements-islam
"...Let Christians, while witnessing to their own faith and way of life, acknowledge, preserve and encourage the spiritual and moral truths found among non-Christians, also their social life and culture.

“The Church has also a high regard for the Muslims. They worship God, who is one, living and subsistent, merciful and almighty, the Creator of heaven and earth (Cf. St. Gregory VII, Letter III, 21 to Anαzιr [Al-Nasir], King of Mauretania PL, 148.451A.), who has spoken to men. They strive to submit themselves without reserve to the hidden decrees of God,..."

*********************
This is a core corruption of Trad. Catholic doctrine. Vile interpretations. Rome has lost the Faith as +Lefebvre repeated 100s of times. Have a holy Lent!

Pope Francis presented a few non-catholic teachings, so how can you honestly say that the Catholic Church magisterium is infallible. Plus, just read the obvious heresies from Vatican II docuмents.


_______________
https://www.usccb.org/committees/ecuмenical-interreligious-affairs/vatican-council-and-papal-statements-islam
"...Let Christians, while witnessing to their own faith and way of life, acknowledge, preserve and encourage the spiritual and moral truths found among non-Christians, also their social life and culture.

“The Church has also a high regard for the Muslims. They worship God, who is one, living and subsistent, merciful and almighty, the Creator of heaven and earth (Cf. St. Gregory VII, Letter III, 21 to Anαzιr [Al-Nasir], King of Mauretania PL, 148.451A.), who has spoken to men. They strive to submit themselves without reserve to the hidden decrees of God,..."

*********************
This is a core corruption of Trad. Catholic doctrine. Vile interpretations. Rome has lost the Faith as +Lefebvre repeated 100s of times. Have a holy Lent!

Consider this as an Addendum to my initial post 
Re: St Gregory VII's letter, the following clarifies the context of why and when the letter was sent...to then conclude with the final Church teaching and condemnation of Islαm...near the end of this post. 
Modernists distort many teachings and events.

https://www.sspxasia.com/Docuмents/SiSiNoNo/2003_September/errors_of_vatican_II.htm

"...Finally, Nostra Aetate §3 seems to praise the Moslems and to present them as an example to Catholics because "they await the day of judgment when God will give each man his due after raising him up. Consequently, they prize the moral life and give worship to God especially through prayer, almsgiving and fasting." The article concludes:

Although in the course of the centuries many quarrels and hostilities have arisen between Christians and Moslems, this most sacred Synod urges all to forget the past and to strive sincerely for mutual understanding. On behalf of all mankind, let them make common cause of safeguarding and fostering social justice, moral values, peace, and freedom.

Historical facts are also overturned here, since the bloody, long, and cruel battles, faith against faith, that we have had to launch over the course of the centuries to repulse Islam's assault, are adroitly reduced to the size of simple "quarrels and hostilities." Passed over in silence are the abysmal differences that exist between Catholic and Moslem eschatology (the absence of a Beatific Vision, the luxury of paradise, the eternity of infernal punishments reserved only for infidels), as well as the abysmal differences between our and their conception of "moral life" and of "veneration": Islam is a religion which not only allows unacceptable moral structures, such as polygamy, with all of its corollaries, but also alleges to guarantee salvation simply by carrying out legalistic practices of worship: therefore, it is an exterior and legalist religion, even more so than Pharisaism, expressly condemned by our Lord (cf. Mt. 6:5).
All of this is passed over in silence in order to invite us into collaboration that is impossible for the simple reason that the meaning the Moslems give to the words "social justice," "peace," "freedom," etc., is merely that which can be drawn from the Koran or from the words and deeds of Mohammed, a meaning established over the course of the centuries by "orthodox" interpretation: an Islamic meaning totally different from our own. For example, Moslems do not understand peace in the way that the currently reigning Pope understands it. They do not believe that Moslems can live under infidels. This is why they divide the world into two parts, one where Islam rules (the house of Islam) and the rest of the world, necessarily an enemy unless it converts and submits (house of war), the rest of the world with whom the Islamic community believes itself to be perpetually at war. Therefore, for them, peace is not an end in itself that allows them to coexist with different nations and religions; it is only a means, imposed by circuмstances which oblige them to make truces with infidels. But the truce must have a limited duration; it must never exceed ten years; and every time they have the means, then war must be resumed. For the Moslem, this is a juridical, religious, and moral obligation. It is in force until the final, inevitable battle that results in the installation of a world Islamic State.
 
NOTE
The Council seems to justify its statement that "the Moslems adore with us the one true God, etc." by the quote contained in a note of personal gratitude sent by St. Gregory VII, Pope from 1073 to 1085, to Anαzιr, Emir of Mauritania. The Emir had been well disposed to oblige certain of the Pope's requests and had also been generous concerning some Christian whom he had taken prisoner. In this letter, the Pope stated that this act of "goodness" was "inspired by God," who commanded us to love our neighbor, and specifically asks "from us and you...that we believe in and confess the same God, although by different modes (licet diverso modo), that we praise and venerate each day the Creator of the ages and master of this world" (PL, 148, 451 A). How can such a statement be explained? The answer: by that era's ignorance regarding the religion founded by  Moh ammed.

   At the time of St. Gregory VII, the Koran had not yet been translated into Latin. This is why basic aspects of its "credo" were not understood. It was known that the Moslems, those fierce enemies of Christianity, who suddenly emerged from the Arabian desert in 633 with a conquering violence, would sometimes demonstrate a certain respect for Jesus, but only as a prophet, and for the Virgin Mary; that they believed in one God, in the inspired nature of Sacred Scripture, in the Judgment and in a future life. Consequently, they could have been taken for an heretical Christian sect ("the Mohammedan sect"), an equivocation that was held for a long time since, at the beginning of the 14th century, Dante placed Mohammed in hell among heretics and schismatics (Hell, XVIII, V. 31 ff.).
It is in this context that the praise privately addressed to the Emir by Gregory VII ought to be seen: praise for someone held to be a heretic who, on this occasion, had behaved charitably, as if the true God, in whom he thought he believed, had touched his heart. Thus, in effect, one can speak of a heretic who believes in the same God as ours, but in a different way. Nevertheless, St. Gregory VII's praise of the Emir did not prevent him from defending, in a perfectly coherent way, the idea of an expedition launched from all of the Christian countries against the Moslems, in order to help Eastern Christianity when it was threatened with extinction. This idea was carried out shortly after his death with the first crusade, preached by Urban II.

   The first Latin translation of the Koran did not take place until 1143, fifty-eight years after the death of St. Gregory VII, by the Englishman Robert de Chester for the Abbot of Cluny, Peter the Venerable, who added a strong refutation of the Islamic creed. Actually, this translation was a summary of the Koran, and remained the only translation for many centuries, until the critical and complete version was done by Fr. Marracci in 1698. In the first half of the 15th century, the Cardinal of Cusa set the stage for this first translation by writing his famous Cribatio Alcorani, a critical study of the Koran. This preceded by a few years the Bull issued in October 1458 by Pius II (Aeneas Sylvius Piccolomini) for the purpose of launching a crusade (which was never carried out) against the Turks who surged into the Balkans after having seized Constantinople. In this Bull, the Pope referred to the Moslems as disciples of the "false prophet Mohammed," a definition that he reasserted on September 12, 1459, in a remarkable speech in the Mantua Cathedral, where the Diet charged with approving the crusade was convoked. In this speech, he referred again to Mohammed as an impostor; he also said that if the Sultan Mehmed were not stopped, after subjugating all of the Western princes, he would then "destroy the Gospel of Christ and impose the law of his false prophet on the entire world."³ Therefore, this speech rectified the former perception and constituted the Pontifical teaching's clear and strong condemnation of Islam and its prophet. Once and for all, it eliminated the equivocation which had defined Islam as a Christian "heresy."

Something similar happened to me, wierd: This elderly woman looked at me when I was in a drugstore, and within 10 seconds, she was teaching me that true religion flows from our interior !!!

Hey! she must have read this:
...In his 1907 encyclical

Pascendi Dominici Gregis, Pope St. Pius X condemned Modernism as the "synthesis of all heresies," identifying its core mechanism as "vital immanence". Modernists argued that faith is not a rational reception of objective, external revelation, but a subjective sentiment originating entirely within the human consciousness and personal experience....