I don't know what was going through his head and you don't, either!  Did he ask for the Koran to be handed to him or did the cleric simply give it to him?  What would you have done?  Throw it down on the ground??  And, how many people would have died as a result?  If it were me, I would have just kissed the damned thing and gone on with my agreed-to meeting.

Just like Obama and any important personage, everything is planned ahead of time, there are no surprises. The Koran was not just handed to him without him expecting it.

There have been more days than I can remember where I ardently prayed for the most torturous martyrdom, to tell of my love of the truth which the son of God has deigned to show me. To die a martyr is the greatest grace of all! I wish and still pray for this grace everyday.

You should go in a public and open crusade against the Jєωs in the U.S. and exposing all their lies outside their buildings or you could go to Rome to publicly denounce the usurperers and especially the Chief of them all.

Things like that will probably get you killed quickly.

Believe me, I have kissed things which I (sort of) abhor!  (Well, not exactly, but it would have been socially awkward, to say the least, to have not kissed certain old women whom I had not seen in a long time.  I didn't enjoy doing it, but such was my duty.)

Again, I cannot read JP II's mind, so I do not know what he was thinking.  I agree that he did many scandalous things and I agree that traditional Catholic groups (such as the SSPX) not only have the right but the duty to withhold obedience from Popes such as JP II.  On the other hand, I do not believe that simply "kissing the Koran" constitutes an act of apostasy, and even if it does, I am not in the position to pass judgment on such an act, let alone when such an act is committed by the Roman Pontiff.

Let's say, for argument's sake, that JP II committed apostasy.  When he "kissed the Koran," he became an apostate, at least in the internal forum.  Was he beyond the "pale of forgiveness"?  What if he went to his confessor (he claimed to have confessed weekly), confessed his sin and apostasy, and received absolution?  Then, what?  It is for the confessor and not you or I to impose penance.  That's what the Church does and not you or I or anyone else.  What if JP II's penance was something other than public penance?

In my opinion, these types of scenarios are a problem for sedes.  Let's say that a Pope does, indeed, lose his Petrine office, but only in the internal forum.  Can he get it back?  If so, how?  Certainly, as "all sins can be forgiven," he should be able to be forgiven and absolved of his sins, and if so, he should be able to be restored to his former office.  After all, that happened with Peter, didn't it?  He was the leader of the Apostles prior to his denial of our Lord, and after his repentance, he was restored to his former station and rank.

I would undergo torture before I would kiss that filthy book.

Jehanne, wether or not you personally believe that kissing something is a sign of reverence does not change the grievousness of the situation. At the very least surely you can admit that it is a sign of affection. the Popes feelings toward the Koran should not be affectionate but violent. The Pope knew exactly what he was doing and what was meant by kissing it.

Regarding what you mentioned about forgiveness- He is the Pope, absolved or not he was the Vicar of Christ- he was held to a much higher standard. An action like this from a Pope has much more grievous implications than the same action done by a mere layman. There is no need to sugar coat his offense. Any sincere Catholic can see what an abominable deed he did and we have every reason to denounce it and judge that it was detestable. Lets just call a spade a spade and move on.

Glad to hear your last post, Jehanne. I was going to say,

Believe me, I have kissed things which I (sort of) abhor!

Snip that habit. I have bad habits I've got to get rid of, too; it's no shame, as long as we admit they're bad habits, Confess them, etc. But true reverence should be reserved only for God. Sometimes I wish I were a bible thumper who could pull Scriptures out easily, because I know I've heard many Scriptures, Didache, and Church Fathers on reverence.

In my opinion, these types of scenarios are a problem for sedes.  Let's say that a Pope does, indeed, lose his Petrine office, but only in the internal forum.  Can he get it back?  If so, how?  Certainly, as "all sins can be forgiven," he should be able to be forgiven and absolved of his sins

Well, we can't judge popes (—Boniface VIII, late 13thC Pope who knew how to handle business). But Wojtyla was part of a growing group of friends that set out to destroy the Petrine office with smiles on their faces, and were no popes. I wasn't sede until Frank (born too late; Wojtyla was all I knew, then BXVI seemed like a Godsend!) Then Frank came, and I saw this:



Yep, that's Frank, I think back in Montini's day (edit, no I guess Wojtyla is wearing a pope hat, but maybe it was just "for kicks"; maybe they passed it around   NO idea of the date). Now LBR, part of this group always had a worldly intent to be Very Nice Guys®, yet if you dig into their incomprehensible writings (Ratzinger is the clearest imo; don't try Wojtyla unless you intend to pull your eyelashes out in frustration), you might find that sadly, they were never Catholic at all. They were universalists, and possibly masons in fact. And you have to be Catholic to hold the Petrine office. Sure, they apparently took the world by storm because they were big, fat, giggly or simply friendly men who came out of nowhere (Roncalli), weren't even cardinals 5 years before they were "elected" Pope (Montini), and ...well, the rest are pictured above, except the unfortunate murdered one.

In these cases, it truly doesn't matter if they were "good people" or "just retarded" or whatnot. They weren't Catholic to begin with; and they poisoned the well with V2 and clowns and all sorts of evil, as prophesied (some prophecies not even released to the public, so we've got to go on what we know).

That's what's running the circus now (which, btw, it quite literally is). Imagine if there had been clowns in Boniface VIII's day. He would have made great sport of them! Or in St. Peter's day. (Yeah, don't try to imagine that. #Scary). I'd venture to say that St. Pope Pius X would have taken a machine gun and blown these popes all to Hell without batting an eyelash, then gotten on with his truly HOLY business.

These clowns we have now, who enjoy priest-Sodomites in makeup and circus clothes DURING THE MASS, would be some DEAD CLOWNS, except this is what the world and even the lukewarm "catholics" want now (a QUIETED "church" filled with Sodomites who judge nothing, as the NewPope even says, "who am I to judge").

(Sorry, these clowns fooled me for a long time, too. And they continue to fool many.)

The koran is worthy of only spit. Muhomedans worship the devil.

Jehanne, I am sure God is happy you changed your mind, but we all must remember none of us could do the correct thing without the grace of God helping us.  We must trust Him, depend on Him to be there for us.  

Quote from: Jehanne

Quote from: Cathedra

And not only that but you were even exposed as an apostate who would kiss the Koran.

This is false; I would never do such a thing willingly, and I have never said that I would, but only, perhaps, under coercion, a position which I no longer maintain. ...

So, yes, Pope John Paul II was guilty of the sin of apostasy against the Catholic faith; whether such was material or formal, I cannot say.

So then you should be fine when JPII is "canonized a saint."

I don't know.  I guess that it depends if the sede position is correct, and as someone who has seriously considered that position, I don't know.  It is difficult to believe that a true Pope can canonize someone who is not in Heaven; how could someone who genuinely possesses the "Keys to the Kingdom" do such a thing?  On the other hand, if Pope Francis is a fake, an anti-Pope, no explanation is needed, is there?

For me, what would be the "final straw"?  It's kind of like a person who has a serious illness -- they will either get better on their own, with or without medical treatment, or they will die.  I suppose if Pope Francis would ever contradict, explicitly, the Church's teachings on the natural law, I would become a sede.  For instance, if he would "reverse" the Church's teachings on the immorality of artificial contraception or ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ acts, then I would certainly be convinced that sedevacanatism is the correct position.  Right now I have some doubts, but that's all that they are.  No "smoking gun" so far, but that remains to be seen.