Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: The Problem with Fuentes  (Read 383904 times)

0 Members and 50 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: The Problem with Fuentes
« Reply #60 on: December 06, 2025, 08:03:01 PM »

If someone attends non-Catholic religious services as a practice of their faith, then they do not profess the true Faith. Putting aside whether or not the NO priest is even a real priest, there would be no remission of sins there because he is unrepentantly participating in non-Catholic religious services. Someone who attends the non-Catholic NO mass and then dies without having repented of that sin is damned. I don't take pleasure in saying this as I've known many NOers, but 50/50 doesn't cut it..and it never has. You are either Catholic or you are not. A single grain of incense to the pagan gods is an act of apostasy


What do you say if the person from no fault of his own and who had been subjected to nothing but bad catechesis since the age of reason attended the NO Mass without realizing the nature of what he was attending or perhaps not even knowing that there ever had been a traditional Latin Mass and went there in his mind to faithfully honor the Lord's Day and lead a just life and did not fall into any subjective state of mortal sin.? If he died while attending the NO Mass would he in your opinion automatically go to hell for dying outside the Catholic Church?

Re: The Problem with Fuentes
« Reply #61 on: December 06, 2025, 08:49:36 PM »
The 16 Vatican II docuмents started to be promulgated on 12/4/63 and ended on 12/7/65 with the NO Mass being promulgated on 4/3/69 and first implemented on 11/30/69.  Obviously, a time of great confusion and shattered catechesis with many, if not most,  in the above time frame and succeeding years not even realizing that the Church was being utterly hijacked by a ruinous praxis.  They were being told by those "in authority" that it was a new springtime.

You say that the Conciliar Church came in to being "at least 65 years ago."  That would be in 1960 before Vatican II even started.
Yes, my mistake! I meant at least 60, i.e. ~1965

What do you say if the person from no fault of his own and who had been subjected to nothing but bad catechesis since the age of reason attended the NO Mass without realizing the nature of what he was attending or perhaps not even knowing that there ever had been a traditional Latin Mass and went there in his mind to faithfully honor the Lord's Day and lead a just life and did not fall into any subjective state of mortal sin.? If he died while attending the NO Mass would he in your opinion automatically go to hell for dying outside the Catholic Church?
Why has anyone at all who was in the Conciliar Church rejected it, and begun to profess the true Catholic Faith? Because God offered them the grace to do so, and they accepted that grace. I believe that anyone of good will, who earnestly seeks the truth, will be granted the graces necessary to reject the V2 sect and enter the Catholic Church. Our Lord calls, you either do or do not answer

Quote
Pope Leo XII, Ubi Primum (# 14), May 5, 1824:
“It is impossible for the most true God, who is Truth itself, the best, the wisest Provider, and the Rewarder of good men, to approve all sects who profess false teachings which are often inconsistent with one another and contradictory, and to confer eternal rewards on their members… by divine faith we hold one Lord, one faith, one baptism… This is why we profess that there is no salvation outside the Church.”


Offline Mark 79

  • Supporter
Re: The Problem with Fuentes
« Reply #62 on: December 13, 2025, 10:53:37 AM »

Re: The Problem with Fuentes
« Reply #63 on: December 13, 2025, 12:43:37 PM »
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15375021/Nick-Fuentes-anger-management-pepper-spray-Marla-Rose.html
She described herself as “ furious” and “ wanted him to know there were consequences for speaking” and nick is the one to get arrested. I guess if a fat Jєωιѕн woman shows up at your house furious and starts doxing you there is nothing you can do about it. You just deal with the “ consequences”. What ever they may be, like a guy showing up with a gun one month later. 🤷‍♂️ sounds legit.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: The Problem with Fuentes
« Reply #64 on: December 13, 2025, 03:43:02 PM »
I think Fuentes is controlled opposition, and he probably overreacted a bit here, especially when he pushed her down ... BUT

... it's quite clear this woman decided to become her own paparazza.  She admittedly had been taking videos of his house for several minutes before walking up to the door.  She wasn't just randomly going up to the door to ask if he had a cup of sugar she could borrow for a recipe.  She was effectively stalking him, violating his privacy (by taking video of his home, which could in theory capture things inside, which is where the line gets drawn), and trepassing ... going onto his property without authorization to take video to post online.

Let's say you had some other type of celebrity, say, Mel Gibson, and he saw some woman taking video of his house for some time, and then she goes up to his door (camera still rolling), and rings the doorbell.  I don't think anybody would fault him for opening the door and engaging pepper spray.  These people have no business there harrassing them, violating their privacy, and ... how do you know that they're not actually coming up there with evil intent?  What if it's some obsessed fan, or, in the case of Fuentes, somebody who hates him for his "Anti-Semitism".  Could she be armed?  You just never know.  If I tried doing this to some big name, whether an actor, or a politician, etc. ... I'd consider myself lucky if had gotten out of there with my life, that they hadn't blown me away, worried about my intentions.