Author Topic: Benedicts Great Deception (Read 8194 times)

curiouscatholic23 · « **on:** November 24, 2011, 03:01:33 PM »

One of the things I just cannot comprehend is how some conservative neo-cath/FSSP-Moto/ CAF/even some SSPXers are flat out deceived by Benedict XVI thinking he is a "conservative" because he allows the TLM, YET THESE SAME PEOPLE COMPLETELY IGNORE THE PUPBLIC HERESIES/ACTS OF APOSTASY THAT BENEDICT XVI HAS DONE INCLUDING:

-Bizarre statement on condoms two years ago

-Stating that we no longer need to pray for the Jєωs in the "missionary sense of the word"

-Assisi 3 last week where Benedict allowed a vodoo with doctor to address the "assembly" in the home of St. Francis of Assisi.

I just can't understand how so many people are deceived by this man. He is clearly a heretic/apostate, yet so many trads think he is the greatest thing since sliced bread. How does Benedict maintain this deception so well, and it seems like only a small percentage of SSPXers/sedes realize how dangerous and evil this man is?

Telesphorus · « **Reply #1 on:** November 24, 2011, 03:23:12 PM »

Quote from: curiouscatholic23

One of the things I just cannot comprehend is how some conservative neo-cath/FSSP-Moto/ CAF/even some SSPXers are flat out deceived by Benedict XVI thinking he is a "conservative" because he allows the TLM, YET THESE SAME PEOPLE COMPLETELY IGNORE THE PUPBLIC HERESIES/ACTS OF APOSTASY THAT BENEDICT XVI HAS DONE INCLUDING:

-Bizarre statement on condoms two years ago

-Stating that we no longer need to pray for the Jєωs in the "missionary sense of the word"

-Assisi 3 last week where Benedict allowed a vodoo with doctor to address the "assembly" in the home of St. Francis of Assisi.

I just can't understand how so many people are deceived by this man. He is clearly a heretic/apostate, yet so many trads think he is the greatest thing since sliced bread. How does Benedict maintain this deception so well, and it seems like only a small percentage of SSPXers/sedes realize how dangerous and evil this man is?

They've been raised to be so ecuмenically minded and ignorant of the teachings of religions like Judaism that they no longer have a Catholic view of salvation. People will believe contradictory things if it's comfortable. That's how modernism thrives and remains undetected by simple folk.

Santo Subito · « **Reply #2 on:** November 24, 2011, 03:38:20 PM »

Quote from: curiouscatholic23

-Bizarre statement on condoms two years ago

-Stating that we no longer need to pray for the Jєωs in the "missionary sense of the word"

These are both private opinions we are free to disagree with.

Quote

-Assisi 3 last week where Benedict allowed a vodoo with doctor to address the "assembly" in the home of St. Francis of Assisi.

Provide evidence of this. First time I'm hearing it.

curiouscatholic23 · « **Reply #3 on:** November 24, 2011, 03:48:12 PM »

http://veneremurcernui.wordpress.com/2011/11/01/assisi-iii-desolating-sacrilege/

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #4 on:** November 24, 2011, 03:58:12 PM »

The devil knows that he can't fool people with someone who's actions are literally all evil. He must add a smidget of truth, and that's what he has done with these Vatican II "popes".

Of course the motu proprio is appealing to those who like the Traditional Latin Mass, so people assume that Benedict is Traditional. But he mixes truth with error, and you can't do that. Truth+error doesn't equal truth, it equals error. That's why people like Benedict are so dangerous, they do just one Traditional thing and people fall for it head over heals. That allows him to get away with heresy more frequently.

The SSPX (in general) seems to think that a manifest heretic can be Pope. An article on their web-site not too long ago (from Bishop Fellay I'm sure) says that one shouldn't say Benedict is an antipope just because they conclude he is a manifest heretic. The Church teaches that a Pope who is a manifest heretic loses his Office. Maybe the Society is talking about the in-ability of laypeople to judge the Papacy, but Pope St. Pius X says that the Pope cannot be judged unless he departs from the Faith. So if you believe Benedict has departed from the Faith, well, there you go. It isn't so difficult to figure out after a lot of careful and logical thought.

We always need to pray for the Jєωs. They reject Christ Our Lord, and to see Benedict take up for them is quite sad and pathetic. And sadly, even the SSPX has apparently abandoned their prayers for the Jєωs in their Masses. Though you can blame Bishop Fellay and his 360 turn the last year for that.

curiouscatholic23 · « **Reply #5 on:** November 24, 2011, 03:58:47 PM »

Santo- go that link I provided. You see that picture? There is Benedict on his knees praying with all those heretics and infidels. Do you see that guy in the red? That is the "archbishop" Rowan Williams. Behind Williams is a black guy in white robes and a white hat.........that is your vodoo witch doctor in the house....exhibit A.

Sure, the front row are all Christians, but right behind the Pope to the left we can see Wandea Bimbola, the same Ifá potentate who offered the prayer to Olokun in the Basilica of St. Francis. We can also see the tell-tale head wrap of a Sihk to the back left and what looks to be a Muslim imam in the rear center. And, from the gesture of Pope Benedict and Rowan Williams, can we conclude that anything other than prayer is going on here, especially since this particular part of the day was described as “a period of silence for individual reflection and prayer”

You can't deny it Santo. Your pope is an apostate.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #6 on:** November 24, 2011, 04:00:28 PM »

Not to mention that witch doctor sang songs of praise to his false god during the Assisi meeting.

PartyIsOver221 · « **Reply #7 on:** November 24, 2011, 06:35:30 PM »

Great thread.

No more discussion is really needed on this topic, as it is fact at this point.

Nishant · « **Reply #8 on:** November 25, 2011, 02:17:36 PM »

Curiouscatholic,

Quote

Benedict XVI thinking he is a "conservative"

Catholic faith is not in "conservatism" but in the divine promise, that the Faith of Peter will not fail. I believe, as do some others, that we are in the hour of the Passion of Holy Church, and therefore, it proves unsurprising if Peter unfortunately turns out to be rather weak, as he was then. But as we do not assert that St.Peter became a "formal apostate" or "notorious heretic" after his denial of his Friend and Master, so too we believe that Our Lord will strengthen the Pope, as He did the Apostle, in His own good time.

The difficulty for those who espouse the sedevacantist thesis, is to establish the two premises on which their argument is based.

1. That all Catholics are bound to become sedevacantists in the event of a Pope who appears to have fallen into heresy.

2. That the Pope has actually appeared to have fallen into heresy.

And despite the focus on 2, it is really the minor premise of this thesis. The focus should be on premise 1. Also, it goes without saying that no amount of apparent proof of 2 counts for anything much without 2 being proven.

I wonder if you believe Honorius was a heretic? I know some deny it, and it is not impermissible to do so, but at least for those who do not, it seems to me, there is a watertight historical example contra-sedevacantism. And this is St.Maximus the Confessor, Doctor of the Church, "hammer" of the monothelites. St.Maximus vehemently opposed the monothelite heretics, but after he brilliantly exposed their sophistry, when Honorius was cited to him by his opponents trying to prove their heresy, he defended the then Roman Pontiff from the charge of teaching heresy. He did not become a sedevacantist.

Clearly, this is an instance of him subjecting judgment to the Church and not presuming to arrogate it to himself. And this is perhaps the only publicized incident in Church history where in all probability the Pontiff in question had actually succuмbed to heresy. Even here it was left for the Church, not private individuals, to decide. So here we have so great a Saint who did not feel so confident on the one hand to judge the matter rashly and on the other, dogmatic sedevacantists who wish to tell us their position is so obvious and is binding on all faithful Catholics as if it were an object of Faith necessary for salvation. It seems to me we should at least tread cautiously in taking a conclusion.

For the record, all said, I grant that sedevacantism can be held as a plausible theological position but that is different from 1 as I've stated it above. Sedevacantists, even if mistaken, according to at least some Catholic theologians would not be in schism. However, personally I still believe it would be harmful, not least to their own spiritual life.

curiouscatholic23 · « **Reply #9 on:** November 25, 2011, 02:36:22 PM »

Quote from: Nishant2011

Curiouscatholic,

Quote
Benedict XVI thinking he is a "conservative"

Catholic faith is not in "conservatism" but in the divine promise, that the Faith of Peter will not fail. I believe, as do some others, that we are in the hour of the Passion of Holy Church, and therefore, it proves unsurprising if Peter unfortunately turns out to be rather weak, as he was then. But as we do not assert that St.Peter became a "formal apostate" or "notorious heretic" after his denial of his Friend and Master, so too we believe that Our Lord will strengthen the Pope, as He did the Apostle, in His own good time.

The difficulty for those who espouse the sedevacantist thesis, is to establish the two premises on which their argument is based.

1. That all Catholics are bound to become sedevacantists in the event of a Pope who appears to have fallen into heresy.

2. That the Pope has actually appeared to have fallen into heresy.

And despite the focus on 2, it is really the minor premise of this thesis. The focus should be on premise 1. Also, it goes without saying that no amount of apparent proof of 2 counts for anything much without 2 being proven.

I wonder if you believe Honorius was a heretic? I know some deny it, and it is not impermissible to do so, but at least for those who do not, it seems to me, there is a watertight historical example contra-sedevacantism. And this is St.Maximus the Confessor, Doctor of the Church, "hammer" of the monothelites. St.Maximus vehemently opposed the monothelite heretics, but after he brilliantly exposed their sophistry, when Honorius was cited to him by his opponents trying to prove their heresy, he defended the then Roman Pontiff from the charge of teaching heresy. He did not become a sedevacantist.

Clearly, this is an instance of him subjecting judgment to the Church and not presuming to arrogate it to himself. And this is perhaps the only publicized incident in Church history where in all probability the Pontiff in question had actually succuмbed to heresy. Even here it was left for the Church, not private individuals, to decide. So here we have so great a Saint who did not feel so confident on the one hand to judge the matter rashly and on the other, dogmatic sedevacantists who wish to tell us their position is so obvious and is binding on all faithful Catholics as if it were an object of Faith necessary for salvation. It seems to me we should at least tread cautiously in taking a conclusion.

For the record, all said, I grant that sedevacantism can be held as a plausible theological position but that is different from 1 as I've stated it above. Sedevacantists, even if mistaken, according to at least some Catholic theologians would not be in schism. However, personally I still believe it would be harmful, not least to their own spiritual life.

How can someone promote heresies and not be a heretic?

Benedict XVI actually walked into a lutheran church and prayed with a female "minister." He praised Matin Luther as if Luther was a saint. Benedict XVI also has walked into ѕуηαgσgυєs and addressed the congregation, he has walked into mosques and done the same. No, I am not making this stuff up.

If you really want to see the footage go to MHFM. Full disclaimer however, I do not believe in their feeneyite and anti-nfp positions.

curiouscatholic23 · « **Reply #10 on:** November 25, 2011, 02:38:32 PM »

And the fact is, when an SSPXer decides to leave the Vatican 2 churches, they are already making a "judgement" on the pope, by purposely leaving churches that fall under his jurisdiction with the diocesan bishop in communion with him.

TKGS · « **Reply #11 on:** November 25, 2011, 02:42:29 PM »

Quote from: Santo Subito

Quote from: curiouscatholic23
-Bizarre statement on condoms two years ago

-Stating that we no longer need to pray for the Jєωs in the "missionary sense of the word"

These are both private opinions we are free to disagree with.

Quote
-Assisi 3 last week where Benedict allowed a vodoo with doctor to address the "assembly" in the home of St. Francis of Assisi.

Provide evidence of this. First time I'm hearing it.

It was broadcast live on EWTN. Perhaps EWTN provides the video on the internet. I am unable to view video on my pc, so you'll have to check it out yourself--if you really care to know.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #12 on:** November 25, 2011, 03:12:33 PM »

Benedict speaks heresy in his book The Christian Faith, Yesterday and Today, as you can see:

"Do we, then, still have the right to re-absorb Christology [that part of theology devoted to the study of Christ and His work] into theology [the methodical study of those truths revealed by God]? Must we not rather passionately acclaim Jesus as man and consider Christology as [a form of] Humanism, an Anthropology? Or could authentic man, simply because of the fact of being completely and authentically man, be God and could God be, precisely, authentic man? Could it be possible that the most radical humanism and the Faith in the God of Revelation merge together here to become one and the same thing?" (p.130).

Sigismund · « **Reply #13 on:** November 26, 2011, 02:18:10 PM »

To condemn this as heresy, I would first have to understand what he is talking about. Maybe it makes more sense in German....

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #14 on:** November 26, 2011, 04:17:32 PM »

It's very clear what Ratzinger was saying. JPII has made similar statements before. It's part of the New Age movement.