Author Topic: Paul VI the only anti-pope? (Read 13251 times)

roscoe · « **Reply #20 on:** June 20, 2010, 02:20:23 PM »

The freemason Franz-Joseph also fails to lift a finger to help the Pope retrieve his stolen Papal States.

Alexandria · « **Reply #21 on:** June 21, 2010, 11:47:46 AM »

Raoul said:

"I will say that I don't really understand SSPX because of their position that has "schismatic overtones," shall we say, although I know no schism is intended. But if I decided to go to an una cuм Mass, I'd probably suck it up and go to an Indult. I think those in SSPX frankly just don't want to be around Vatican II types and want to carve out a little fairyland for themselves with the smells and bells. SSPX made more sense in the beginning; the excuse was to keep the Latin Mass alive. I'm not sure what the point of them is now. Because there's no reason to go to SSPX if you can go to a VII Latin Mass -- unless, perhaps, you want to SEPARATE yourselves from other Catholics because they seem like lower lifeforms or have the stink of worldliness on them. Needless to say, that isn't the greatest attitude to have."

I have thought the exact same thing for quite some time now. The SSPX really has no reason to be "outside the Church." There is no difference between them and the FSSP any longer. Both the same. Except the people that attend the FSSP are a bit more down to earth.

Caminus · « **Reply #22 on:** June 21, 2010, 11:56:09 AM »

Is there credible evidence that Paul VI was a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ?

Alexandria · « **Reply #23 on:** June 21, 2010, 11:59:54 AM »

Quote from: Caminus

Is there credible evidence that Paul VI was a ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ?

According to Randy Engel there is.

Caminus · « **Reply #24 on:** June 21, 2010, 12:01:38 PM »

Where might I take a look at this evidence?