Author Topic: St. John Boscos prediction of Vatican II  (Read 4949 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Nishant

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2126
  • Reputation: +1362/-80
  • Gender: Male
St. John Boscos prediction of Vatican II
« on: December 03, 2014, 08:45:40 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • In a well known prophecy, St. John Bosco predicted the Second Vatican Council and its disastrous impact on the Church. The full text of the same can be read here. The relevant portion is "There will be an Ecumenical Council in the next century, after which there will be chaos in the Church. Tranquillity will not return until the Pope succeeds in anchoring the boat of Peter between the twin pillars of Eucharistic Devotion and Devotion to Our Lady." St. John Bosco also predicts there will be a Pope in the year 1999 ("one year before the end of the century") and also speaks in detail of the election of two Popes during this time.

    How do sedevacantists square this prophecy with their evident misdiagnosis of the situation during and after Vatican II? The truth is that sedevacantism completely prevents real Church restoration. The real solution is not in clinging to sedevacantist private opinions, but according to the Saint, (who by the way made this prophesy in 1862, precisely 100 years before the disastrous Council was convoked,) consists rather in the promotion of devotion to Our Lady, and to the Holy Eucharist throughout the Church especially by the Pope, and by the faithful subject to and remaining in communion with him.
    "Never will anyone who says his Rosary every day become a formal heretic ... This is a statement I would sign in my blood." St. Montfort, Secret of the Rosary. I support the FSSP, the SSPX and other priests who work for the restoration of doctrinal orthodoxy and liturgical orthopraxis in the Church. I accept Vatican II if interpreted in the light of Tradition and canonisations as an infallible declaration that a person is in Heaven. Sedevacantism is schismatic and Ecclesiavacantism is heretical.

    Offline awkwardcustomer

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 457
    • Reputation: +151/-10
    St. John Boscos prediction of Vatican II
    « Reply #1 on: December 03, 2014, 09:13:26 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Prophecies, prophecies, all are prophecies.


    Offline awkwardcustomer

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 457
    • Reputation: +151/-10
    St. John Boscos prediction of Vatican II
    « Reply #2 on: December 03, 2014, 09:36:23 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Nishant,

    I clicked the link and according to St John Bosco's vision,
    Quote

    “There will be an Ecumenical Council in the next century, after which there will be chaos in the Church. Tranquillity will not return until the Pope succeeds in anchoring the boat of Peter between the twin pillars of Eucharistic Devotion and Devotion to Our Lady. This will come about one year before the end of the century…”

    Has this happened?  Has tranquility returned?  Has the Pope succeeded in anchoring the boat of Peter between the twin pillars of Eucharistic Devotion and Devotion of Our Lady?

    Obviously not.  So why are you using this vision to attack Sedevacantists?

    But you missed out this last sentence in your post, claiming that -
    Quote

    The relevant portion is "There will be an Ecumenical Council in the next century, after which there will be chaos in the Church. Tranquillity will not return until the Pope succeeds in anchoring the boat of Peter between the twin pillars of Eucharistic Devotion and Devotion to Our Lady." St. John Bosco also predicts there will be a Pope in the year 1999 ("one year before the end of the century") and also speaks in detail of the election of two Popes during this time.


    According to the vision, the Pope will succeed in anchoring the boat of Peter.... etc and this will happen about one year before the end of the century. Yet this is clearly not how you report it. You then use your version of the vision to prove there will be a Pope in 1999.  Why?







    Offline Nishant

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2126
    • Reputation: +1362/-80
    • Gender: Male
    St. John Boscos prediction of Vatican II
    « Reply #3 on: December 03, 2014, 09:55:00 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I did not "attack" sedevacantists, Awkward Customer, although I did critique sedevacantism. St. John Bosco foresaw Vatican II precisely, and therefore this prophesy has merit. Even if you disagree, it at least proves from the words of a Saint that there is no contradiction in an Ecumenical Council causing chaos within the Church. As for your critique of my post above, you say that because a restoration hasn't happened yet, this prophesy is inaccurate. But is that really what the words of the prophesy says? I agree it is not clear whether the "this" is referring to some action of the Pope to promote devotion to Our Lady and the Eucharist, or to the return of tranquility itself, but I would argue it is the former, and I agree that circumstances prove that tranquility hasn't returned yet. Finally, the other parts of the vision describe a destruction of Rome in future (in agreement with other prophecies) and the existence of Popes at the time.
    "Never will anyone who says his Rosary every day become a formal heretic ... This is a statement I would sign in my blood." St. Montfort, Secret of the Rosary. I support the FSSP, the SSPX and other priests who work for the restoration of doctrinal orthodoxy and liturgical orthopraxis in the Church. I accept Vatican II if interpreted in the light of Tradition and canonisations as an infallible declaration that a person is in Heaven. Sedevacantism is schismatic and Ecclesiavacantism is heretical.

    Offline ThomisticPhilosopher

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 461
    • Reputation: +210/-3
    • Gender: Male
    St. John Boscos prediction of Vatican II
    « Reply #4 on: December 03, 2014, 09:58:28 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quick simple reply, if your position needs a deep exegesis of private revelation it tells you that your position is wrong.

    Private revelation entails that your interpretation of it is infallible, in order for us to be able to diagnose and accept your position. Just because something is approved private revelation does not mean it can't be wrong, stick to the public deposit of faith. If private revelation is used as a means to solve all the "mysteries" of our faith, then you can be sure that it is being harmful to your faith. If it leads into believing that the end of the world is imminent at the moment, then it is leading you astray etc... Generally the Church recommends more of the pious works, such as the readings of the Passion of Catherine Emmerich and so forth. Its more of an aid to devotion, and a strengthening for those who are already firmly rooted in the Mind of the Church. I can give you just as much private revelation in favor of the Sedevacantist position, but I never do that because at the end of the day it ends up being a your opinion vs mine opinion.

    I have never ever ever seen one case of someone where they get any private revelation right, it always goes on into some crazy theories. These folks are obsessed with it, and it is usually spiritually detrimental by that point. The casuist has an excellent article on it.

    Hence for the resistance camp, the world is not working like how its suppose to, because we did not follow heaven's peace plan, this is usually the Fatima Gruner message. So they will wait until the Parousia and bombard the Vatican with letters/videos petitions to make Bergoglio consecrate Russia... Never mind the fact that Pius XII did it, its not his fault that the Bishop's all over the world did not follow accordingly.

    Briefly to answer your question, there is several other private revelations that have mentioned the name Pope which referred to anti-Popes. Secondly, remember that he is experiencing a vision not heavenly commentary on everything he sees. Thus, if you were to see a man dressed in white, you would conclude that he is a Pope. Similar to Catherine Emmerichs vision of the Pope and another "Bishop dressed in white." Which is how they put it, but they were both dressed the same. Now even remember those who receive this revelation can misinterpret it, we know this has indeed happen MANY times.

    Proper attitude to take, is to simply use private revelation as it was originally intended merely as a general guide. Its not so much the details and particulars but the message in general that we are to use for profit. Therefore Fatima must be understood as Heaven's call for penance and reparation for your personal sins and those of others. It gives us ways in which we can personally do something, such as the First Friday and First Saturday devotions. No, you can't personally go consecrate Russia yourself or expect these anti-Popes to do it either. Its absurd... A little common sense can go a long way my friend, how can you expect a marxist/arian/sodomite approver to somehow do such a task? Its like asking Obama, to consecrate the United States to the Kingship of Christ the King and the Sacred Heart of Jesus. Now suppose that even for a second such an event is possible and does happen. How long do you think that Obama will last? Excepting Divine supernatural intervention, these sorts of scenarios we cannot expect. The Great Western Schism was not solved through supernatural means, quite the contrary. St. Vincent Ferrer came to the conclusion that Pedro de Luna was a schismatic not through Divine revelation, but through theology. Therefore, we see the practice of the Saints when it comes to resolving issues dealing with a Crisis. They go back to the theology, and what does the theology tell you?

    Heretics are ipso facto, not members of the Church.

    http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13satis.htm
    Quote
    "Heresies and schisms have no other origin than that obedience is refused to the priest of God, and that men lose sight of the fact that there is one judge in the place of Christ in this world" (Epist. xii. ad Cornelium, n. 5). No one, therefore, unless in communion with Peter can share in his authority, since it is absurd to imagine that he who is outside can command in the Church.


    Now we know that in order to be in communion with Peter you must have the faith of Peter. It is totally alien to the mind of the Church, that those outside can command inside. In addition to that, you must concede that Bergoglio is not only a schismatic, but totally refuses to be the supreme judge. In every single possible instance, in both private and public. He has done everything possible to say that he is just an advisor, kind of like your guru. Just general tips on how to live your life.

    Their is total unanimous agreement that a schismatic Pope, even if he not be a heretic loses his office. No one disputes this, not even those who think that somehow a heretic retains his office. Now please note, what small examples they give of what schism is. Ohh boy the sort of stuff we have on these other anti-Popes is nothing compared to the trifling examples they give of what schism looks like.

    http://www.sedevacantist.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1290&p=13021&hilit=da+silveira&sid=7e74466c34724d6153d3c28a4a7112ba#p13021

    Quote
    Cardinal Torquemada, Summa de Ecclesia, pars I, lib. IV, cap. 11, p. 369 v, quoted by da Silveira:

    1 - (...) by disobedience, the Pope can separate himself from Christ, who is the principal head of the Church and in relation to whom the unity of the Church is primarily constituted. He can do this by disobeying the law of Christ or by ordering something which is contrary to natural or divine law. In this way, he would separate himself from the body of the Church, while it is subject to Christ by obedience. Thus, the Pope would be able, without doubt, to fall into schism.

    2 - The Pope can separate himself without any reasonable cause, just for pure self will, from the body of the Church and the college of priests. He will do this if he does not observe that which the Church Universal observes on the basis of the Tradition of the Apostles according to the chapter Ecclesiasticarum, di. 11, or if he did not observe that which was universally ordained by the Universal councils or by the authority of the Apostolic See above all in relation to Divine Worship. For example, not wishing to observe personally something from the universal customs of the Church, or the universal rite of the ecclesiastical cult. This would take place in case he did not wish to celebrate with the sacred vestments, or in consecrated places, or with candles, or if he did not wish to make “The Sign of the Cross” like the other priests make it, or other similar things which have been decreed in a general way for perpetual utility, according to the canons Quae ad perpetuam, Violatores, Sunt Quidam and Contra Statuta (25, q. 1). Departing in such a way, and with pertinacity, from the universal observance of the Church, the Pope would be able to fall into schism. The consequence is good; and the antecedent is not doubtful, for the Pope, just as he could fall into heresy, could also disobey and pertinaciously cease to observe that which was established for the common order in the Church. For this reason, Innocent says (c. “De Consue.”) that one ought to obey thePope in everything as long as he does not turn against the universal order of the Church, for in such a case the Pope must not be followed unless there is reasonable cause for this.

    3 - Let us suppose that more than one person considers himself Pope, and that one of them be the true Pope, but considered by some to be probably dubious. And let ussuppose that this true Pope comported himself with such negligence and obstinacy in the pursuit of unity in the Church, that he did not wish to do everything he could for the reestablishment of unity. In this hypothesis the Pope would be considered as a fomenter of schism, according to the way many have argued, even in our days, in connection with Benedict XIII and Gregory XII.


    Quote

    Suarez, De Caritate, disp. XII, sect. I, no. 2, pp. 733-734, quoted by da Silveira:

    Schism may come about not only by reason of heresy, but also without it, as takes place when someone, conserving the faith, does not wish to maintain the unity of the Church in his actions and his manner of practicing our religion. And this may come about in two ways. In the first way, separating oneself from the head of the Church, as one reads in the chapter “Non vos”, 23, question 5, where the Gloss says that schism consists in not having the Roman Pontiff as one’s head - not denying that the Roman Pontiff is the head of the church, for this would be schism united to heresy, but either rashly denying some Pontiff in particular, or behaving oneself in relation to him as if he were not the head: for example, if someone tried to convoke a General Council without his authorization, or elect an anti-pope. This is the most common mode of schism.

    There could be schism of a second mode if someone separated himself from the body of the Church not wishing to communicate with it in the participation of the Sacraments. Saint Epiphanius narrates an example of this (“Haeres.”, 68), in respect to the sect of Melecius, who dissenting with his Patriarch, Peter the Alexandrine, separated himself from him in all the sacrifices, and was accused of schism, there not existing between the two any divergence in matters of faith, as Epiphanius attests. And in this second mode the Pope could be schismatic, in case he did not want to have due union and coordination with the whole body of the Church as would be the case if he tried to excommunicate the whole Church, or if he wanted to subvert all the ecclesiastical ceremonies founded on apostolic tradition, as we observed by Cajetan (ad II-II, q. 39) and, with greater amplitude, Torquemada (1. 4, c. 11).”11


    This is why +Lefebvre called the new mass schismatic, and he admits that it is schism. Well just think of what a normal catechism, any theology manual says what the effects of schism are... Yes, expulsion from the Church and that includes even Popes. We have historical precedent, and on top of that no one even disputes this point.

    The Conciliar Anti-Popes:
    1) Excommunicated tradition through +Lefebvre who wanted to do this solely for the good of the Church. That is working against the unity of the Church.

    Note* That the chief job of the Pope is to be the principal chief of unity in the Church. That is his whole raison d'etre, this is why all of them unanimously agree that a schismatic Pope has 0 jurisdiction.

    2) They invented their own canon law, liturgy, de-canonized saints, accepted schismatics without converting/repenting, borrowed from condemned anathematized sects such as the Orthodox (hence Collegiality).

    Now they are making you think that there can be such a think as a Pope and a Pope emeritus... Before, even during the reign of several anti-Popes, they all understood that they had only one head, not multiple heads. So now when Bergoglio decides to take a vacation from his duties, we will have two Pope emeritus and another impostor.

    The list is truly endless...
    https://keybase.io/saintaquinas , has all my other verified accounts including PGP key plus BTC address for bitcoin tip jar. A.M.D.G.


    Offline andysloan

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1219
    • Reputation: +1/-0
    • Gender: Male
    St. John Boscos prediction of Vatican II
    « Reply #5 on: December 03, 2014, 10:05:06 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Thomisticphilosopher said:


    "I can give you just as much private revelation in favor of the Sedevacantist position"



    Could you post this please. I have never seen one apparition, prophecy or revelation that endorses sedevacantism. Rather, the contrary.

    Offline Clemens Maria

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1256
    • Reputation: +806/-303
    • Gender: Male
    St. John Boscos prediction of Vatican II
    « Reply #6 on: December 03, 2014, 01:16:28 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Nishant
    In a well known prophecy, St. John Bosco predicted the Second Vatican Council and its disastrous impact on the Church. The full text of the same can be read here. The relevant portion is "There will be an Ecumenical Council in the next century, after which there will be chaos in the Church. Tranquillity will not return until the Pope succeeds in anchoring the boat of Peter between the twin pillars of Eucharistic Devotion and Devotion to Our Lady." St. John Bosco also predicts there will be a Pope in the year 1999 ("one year before the end of the century") and also speaks in detail of the election of two Popes during this time.

    How do sedevacantists square this prophecy with their evident misdiagnosis of the situation during and after Vatican II? The truth is that sedevacantism completely prevents real Church restoration. The real solution is not in clinging to sedevacantist private opinions, but according to the Saint, (who by the way made this prophesy in 1862, precisely 100 years before the disastrous Council was convoked,) consists rather in the promotion of devotion to Our Lady, and to the Holy Eucharist throughout the Church especially by the Pope, and by the faithful subject to and remaining in communion with him.


    The full quote is:

    Quote
    “There will be an Ecumenical Council in the next century, after which there will be chaos in the Church. Tranquillity will not return until the Pope succeeds in anchoring the boat of Peter between the twin pillars of Eucharistic Devotion and Devotion to Our Lady. This will come about one year before the end of the century…” 1

    References
    1. St Don Bosco Prediction of 1862


    As others have already pointed out, "this" can refer to tranquillity or to the twin devotions or to the start of the Ecumenical Council.  Also, before the end of the century could mean the 20th century or some other century or to the 100 years between 1862 and 1962.

    Regardless of the meaning, the sedevacante theory doesn't rule out the election of a Pope and the restoration of the Church.  Furthermore, the Church law which prevents a manifest heretic from holding an ecclesiastical office is not a private opinion.  Why don't you ask Cardinal Pell about that among others?  Also, the fact that Francis is a heretic is not a private opinion either.  His heresy is public.  Hard to believe you are still trying to beat this dead horse when so many conservative novus ordites are now starting to have doubts about Francis.

    If a private revelation (such as St. John Bosco's) is in conflict with Church teaching we must always follow Church doctrine and either re-interpret the revelation or disregard it altogether.

    In any case, thanks for posting this.  It is interesting.

    Offline andysloan

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1219
    • Reputation: +1/-0
    • Gender: Male
    St. John Boscos prediction of Vatican II
    « Reply #7 on: December 03, 2014, 03:07:22 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Clemens Maria said:

    "so many conservative novus ordites"


    The fact that you can label your brothers and sisters in the Church with such disdain is measure of why God has blinded you. Private judgement of heresy and deposition of a Pope is forbidden by Our Lord (Matt 18:15-17)
    It doesn't therefore matter what any other human being says, whatever his rank maybe.

    The pharisees and scribes are those who sought to kill Christ and yet Our Lord taught to recognise their authority and obey them. We are obliged to do the same:


    Matthew 23:1-3


    "Then Jesus spoke to the multitudes and to his disciples,  Saying: The scribes and the Pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses. All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works do ye not; for they say, and do not."



    For those of us who accept these simple and clear teachings, we might reprise to you in regard to your disobedience that it is "Hard to believe you are still trying to beat this dead horse". In fact it is totally amazing!


    You yourself say: "we must always follow Church doctrine".

    Then why don't you?





    Offline awkwardcustomer

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 457
    • Reputation: +151/-10
    St. John Boscos prediction of Vatican II
    « Reply #8 on: December 03, 2014, 05:15:36 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Nishant
    I did not "attack" sedevacantists, Awkward Customer, although I did critique sedevacantism. St. John Bosco foresaw Vatican II precisely, and therefore this prophesy has merit. Even if you disagree, it at least proves from the words of a Saint that there is no contradiction in an Ecumenical Council causing chaos within the Church. As for your critique of my post above, you say that because a restoration hasn't happened yet, this prophesy is inaccurate. But is that really what the words of the prophesy says? I agree it is not clear whether the "this" is referring to some action of the Pope to promote devotion to Our Lady and the Eucharist, or to the return of tranquility itself, but I would argue it is the former, and I agree that circumstances prove that tranquility hasn't returned yet. Finally, the other parts of the vision describe a destruction of Rome in future (in agreement with other prophecies) and the existence of Popes at the time.

    You used the prophecy to claim that there would be a Pope in 1999, in order to prove Sedevacantism wrong.  Then you asked the following -
    Quote

    How do sedevacantists square this prophecy with their evident misdiagnosis of the situation during and after Vatican II? The truth is that sedevacantism completely prevents real Church restoration. The real solution is not in clinging to sedevacantist private opinions......


    This would have been a reasonable question if you had not left out the critical sentence.
    Quote

    This will come about one year before the end of the century.....

    By skewing the prophecy in this way you turned a reasonable question into an attack, IMO.






    Offline andysloan

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1219
    • Reputation: +1/-0
    • Gender: Male
    St. John Boscos prediction of Vatican II
    « Reply #9 on: December 04, 2014, 02:20:31 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • To awkward customer

    Rather than waste time in feigned objectivity; for your efforts are all about combating anyone who will challenge your heresy, which is so vainly precious to you:

    "a heretic is one who either devises or follows false and new opinions, for the sake of some temporal profit, especially that he may lord and be honored above others." - St Augustine

    you would be better off repenting and concentrating on keeping God's commandments and then He will bring you back into the Church:

    Romans 13:1-2

    "Let every soul be subject to higher powers: for there is no power but from God: and those that are, are ordained of God. Therefore he that resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God. And they that resist, purchase to themselves damnation. "

    "He left you this sweet key of obedience; for as you know He left His vicar, the Christ, on earth, whom you are all obliged to obey until death, and whoever is outside His obedience is in a state of damnation, as I have already told you in another place." (God the Father to St Catherine - Dialogues; Treatise on Obedience)



    Offline awkwardcustomer

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 457
    • Reputation: +151/-10
    St. John Boscos prediction of Vatican II
    « Reply #10 on: December 04, 2014, 03:32:45 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: andysloan
    To awkward customer

    Rather than waste time in feigned objectivity; for your efforts are all about combating anyone who will challenge your heresy, which is so vainly precious to you.......

    you would be better off repenting and concentrating on keeping God's commandments and then He will bring you back into the Church....


    You are unbelievably rude, Andysloan.


    Offline andysloan

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1219
    • Reputation: +1/-0
    • Gender: Male
    St. John Boscos prediction of Vatican II
    « Reply #11 on: December 04, 2014, 03:43:21 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • awkwardcustomer said:

    "You are unbelievably rude, Andysloan."   

    Luke 16:15


    "And he said to them: You are they who justify yourselves before men, but God knoweth your hearts;"

    Offline awkwardcustomer

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 457
    • Reputation: +151/-10
    St. John Boscos prediction of Vatican II
    « Reply #12 on: December 04, 2014, 05:05:15 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: andysloan
    awkwardcustomer said:

    "You are unbelievably rude, Andysloan."   

    Luke 16:15


    "And he said to them: You are they who justify yourselves before men, but God knoweth your hearts;"

    And God knoweth your heart, andysloan.

    Meanwhile, I only have your posts to go by.  And they consist of endless quotes interspersed with vicious insults.  Are you fit to be the judge of anyone you disagree with?  You must think so, or you wouldn't do it.  Do you have the right to viciously insult anyone you don't agree with?  You must think so, or you wouldn't do it.

    By the way, I seem to remember that you posted somewhere about your special devotion to John Paul II.  Is this true?  Would you care to elaborate?

    Do you have a special devotion for John Paul II, andysloan?

    Do tell.

    Offline andysloan

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1219
    • Reputation: +1/-0
    • Gender: Male
    St. John Boscos prediction of Vatican II
    « Reply #13 on: December 04, 2014, 05:17:18 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • awkwardcustomer said

    "By the way, I seem to remember that you posted somewhere about your special devotion to John Paul II.  Is this true?  Would you care to elaborate?

    Do you have a special devotion for John Paul II, andysloan?

    Do tell."



    Your pharasaical status is well-captured in this effort:   

    Mark 12:13

    "And they sent to him some of the Pharisees and of the Herodians; that they should catch him in his words."


    As it happens, St John Paul 2 is a great saint - as declared by the church.

    "Divine providence preserves the Church lest in such matters it should err through the fallible testimony of men" - St Thomas


    He was a victim soul, but this is another darkness of your mind that you are punished with.   

    Ecclesiasticus 11:16

    "Error and darkness are created with sinners:"

    Offline awkwardcustomer

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 457
    • Reputation: +151/-10
    St. John Boscos prediction of Vatican II
    « Reply #14 on: December 04, 2014, 08:56:21 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: andysloan
    awkwardcustomer said

    "By the way, I seem to remember that you posted somewhere about your special devotion to John Paul II.  Is this true?  Would you care to elaborate?

    Do you have a special devotion for John Paul II, andysloan?

    Do tell."



    Your pharasaical status is well-captured in this effort:   

    Mark 12:13

    "And they sent to him some of the Pharisees and of the Herodians; that they should catch him in his words."


    As it happens, St John Paul 2 is a great saint - as declared by the church.

    "Divine providence preserves the Church lest in such matters it should err through the fallible testimony of men" - St Thomas


    He was a victim soul, but this is another darkness of your mind that you are punished with.   

    Ecclesiasticus 11:16

    "Error and darkness are created with sinners:"


    See what I mean - quotes interspersed with vicious insults.

    And no attempt to answer question.



     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16