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

Author Topic: The Revolution Takes Hold Under Pius XII  (Read 15027 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Lover of Truth

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8700
  • Reputation: +1158/-863
  • Gender: Male
The Revolution Takes Hold Under Pius XII
« on: October 15, 2012, 06:30:05 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • http://www.traditio.com/tradlib/piusmodern.htm

    Pius XII and Modernism

    From Twentieth Century Harbingers (pages 1094-1099)

    The Revolution Takes Hold Under Pius XII

    Both advocates and critics of the Revolution of the Second Vatican Council agree that the role of Eugenio Maria Giuseppe Giovanni Cardinal Pacelli, who ascended the Chair of Peter on March 12, 1939, as Pope Pius XII was instrumental in securing the revolutionaries a foothold on the papacy. As Martinez solidly docuмents, and as inveterate collaborators of New-Church like Archbishop Annibale Bugnini, C.M., reaffirm, Pius XII opened the Church to "Progressivism" both politically and theologically.

    Under his 19-year-pontificate, the foundation and stepping-stones for the futuristic Newchurch were laid. The following is a short list of decrees and movements initiated by Pope Pius XII that propelled Newchurch forward:


    The Destruction of the Liturgy

    As Archbishop Annibale Bugnini records in his opening chapter to The Reform of the Liturgy 1948-1975 on the well-springs of "liturgical reform," as early as 1942, less than three years into his pontificate, Pope Pius XII assigned a project for liturgical reform (liturgical codification) to Benedictine Father Pio Alfonzo, a liturgist who taught at the College of the Propaganda and advised the Sacred Congregation of Rites. Fr. Alfonzo's "General Norms," however, was not acted upon at that time.

    It was not until four years later, on May 10, 1946, in an audience with Carlo Cardinal Salotti, Prefect for the Congregation of Rites, that Pius XII instructed Salotti to begin a study of the general reform of the liturgy.

    On July 17, 1946, Pius XII determined that a Commission for General Liturgical Restoration be established to consider that nature and substance of a general reform of the liturgy and offer concrete proposals. On May 28, 1948, the pope selected the members of the Commission. Father (later Cardinal) Ferdinando Antonelli, OFM, was named General Director and Fr. (later Archbishop) Annibale Bugnini named Secretary. When the Commission was dissolved in 1960, to make room for the Pontifical Preparatory Commission on the Liturgy established in connection with the forthcoming Second Vatican Council, Bugnini was again appointed to serve as Secretary for the new assembly. After the opening of the Council in 1962 by Pope John XXIII, until its closing in 1964 under Pope Paul VI, Bugnini continued to function in the capacity of peritus (expert) to the Conciliar Commission on the Liturgy. From 1964 to 1969, Bugnini again served as Secretary to the Consilium for the Implementation of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (Sacrosanctum Concilium) promulgated by Pope Paul VI on December 4, 1963.

    These seemingly mundane facts are presented here so that there can be no question that Annibale Bugnini knew of what he spoke when he made the following confession:

    In the twelve years of its existence (June 28, 1948 to July 8, 1960), the commission held eighty-two meetings and worked in absolute secrecy. So secret, in fact, was their work that the publication of the Ordo Sabbati Sancti instaurati at the beginning of March 1951 caught even officials of the Congregation of Rites by surprise. The commission enjoyed the full confidence of the Pope (i.e. Pius XII), who was kept abreast of its work by Monsignor Montini and even more, on a weekly basis, by Father Bea, confessor of Pius XII. The first fruit of the commission's work was the restoration of the Easter Vigil (1951). It was a signal that the liturgy was at last launched decisively on a pastoral course. The same reforming principles were applied in 1955 to the whole of Holy Week, and in 1960, with the Code of Rubrics, to the remainder of the liturgy.

    The second force operative in ensuring the coming of liturgical reform found its mature expression at Assisi (1956). This International Conference Congress on Pastoral Liturgy, was, in God's plan, a dawn announcing a resplendent day that would have no decline. Who would have predicted that three years later the greatest ecclesial event of the century, Vatican Council II, would be announced? Pope Pius XII gave a fine address. In his introduction he made a historic remark: "The Liturgical movement is a sign of the providential dispositions of God for the present time [and] of the movement of the Holy Spirit in the Church."

    It is clear today the reform was the fruit of a long period of maturation, a fruit produced by the thought and prayer of elite minds and then shared with even wider circles of the faithful.
     
    In The Murky Waters of Vatican II, Catholic writer Atila Guimaraes cites the works of the frequently quoted Post-Conciliar writer Antonio Acerbi who confirms that long before the Second Vatican Council opened, a "synthetic school" existed that attempted to integrate two currents acting on the Church -- one "progressive" and the other "conservative." This "synthesis," Acerbi suggests, inspired Pope Pius XII's Encyclical (1943).

    The draft of Mystici Corporis was actually prepared by Dutch Jesuit theologian Fr. Sebastian Trump. Its publication was a watershed event -- a major paradigm shift in redefining the juridical and societal role of the Catholic Church. Commenting on the revolutionary nature of Mystici Corporis, Father Avery Dulles, SJ, noted that an attempt to introduce the same concept of the Church as the Mystical Body of Christ was rejected in 1870 at the First Vatican Council as being "confusing, ambiguous, vague, inappropriate, and inappropriately biological."

    In History of Vatican II-Announcing and Preparing Vatican Council II, editor Joseph A. Komonchak states that Pius XII led the Revolution under the banner of "reform."

    Komonchak credits Pius XII's Encyclical on Biblical Studies Divino Afflante Spiritu (1943) that was prepared from a draft written by German Jesuit Augustin Bea, then Director of the Biblical Institute, with the freeing of Biblical scholars from former restrictions and opened up Biblical Studies to progressive thought.

    "Less open, because it attacked the two fronts of spiritualism and juridical formalism" Mystici Corporis Christi, issued in that same year [1943], replaced a purely conceptual ecclesiology with an organic one, even while asserting that the Roman Church is coextensive with the Church of Christ," claims Komoncha. "The masterpiece of these reforms was the restoration of the feast of Easter to its ancient splendor by assigning the central role once again to the Vigil, the nocturnal service celebrated between Holy Saturday and Easter Sunday," he explained.

    Archbishop Annibale Bugnini, a major architect of the Novus Ordo, confirmed that Pius XII's action was seen as a step "leading gradually to the new structuring of the liturgical year on its traditional foundations."

    Other reforms instigated by Pius XII, said Komonchak, included the establishment of secular institutes such as Opus Dei, the restoration of the permanent diaconate as an "ecclesiastical office independent of the priesthood," and the internationalization of the Curia, more by the Consistory of 1946 than the Consistory of 1953.

    Bugnini credited Pius XII with putting "the seal of his supreme authority" on the Liturgical Movement in his Encyclical Mediator Dei of November 11, 1947.

    He also notes that in 1945, two years before the encyclical appeared, Pius XII commissioned a new Latin version of the Psalms under the Pontifical Biblical Institute.

    "This work, which had been brought to completion by the tenacious determination of the rector, Father (later Cardinal) Augustin Bea, helped ripen in the pope's mind the idea of a reform of the entire liturgy; the new Psalter would be simply the first building block of the new edifice," claimed Bugnini.

    In the United States, as early as 1940, the Benedictines at St. John's Abbey in Collegeville, Minn. were hosting "Liturgical Weeks." At such avant-garde gatherings, "NewMass" was said in the vernacular with the "presider" facing the people and concelebration the norm. Chewy bread replaced the host. Private devotions were discouraged.

    From the beginning, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ clergy and religious like Archbishop Rembert Weakland were greatly attracted to the concept of "liturgical reform" as a vehicle of doctrinal and moral change. Catholic historian, Joseph White was very perceptive when he noted that "Liturgical activists were concurrently social reformers."


    The Undermining of Seminary Life

    Before Pope Pius XII issued Menti Nostae On the Development of Holiness in Priestly Life on September 23, 1950, members of the Curia informed the pope that the wholesale changes embraced by the apostolic exhortation, especially those tied to the "updating" of seminary life, would adversely affect the priesthood.

    The concerns of the Sacred Congregation of Seminaries and Universities centered on the predictable erosion of spirituality and seminary discipline likely to result from Menti Nostae's novel emphasis on new methods of training and courses of professional studies that mimicked secular education. Pius XII ignored the Curia's warning.

    Under the guise of "seminary reform," all forms of discipline including prayer life and dress were relaxed to enable seminarians to break out of their "isolation" and fraternize with the "modern world." The decline in seminary discipline and morale was also mirrored in the general priesthood as the Holy See began to receive increased numbers of requests for laicization i.e., reduction to the lay state, by priests.

    In the seminary classroom, especially in the United States, the mandatory use of Latin, the universal language of the Church, was already in precipitous decline by the early 1950s. Giuseppe Cardinal Pizzardo, the Prefect for the Congregation correctly claimed that without Latin the sources of the Catholic tradition would become inaccessible to upcoming seminarians and priests -- a thoroughly delicious thought to the architects of NewChurch. The replacement of Latin with the vernacular anticipated a number of other important "reforms" already on the drawing boards including the use of the vernacular in Sacred Liturgy and the internationalization of the Roman Curia.

    Up until the start of the Second World War, the Italian-dominated Curia and College of Cardinals remained Catholic, that is, universal, competent, and faithful to Tradition. Like the Legislative branch of government, the Holy Office has offered a system of checks and balances in the governance of the Church and has served as a counter-weight to papal abuse of power especially when it threatened the Deposit of Faith.

    No less an authority than Rev. Thomas J. Reese, SJ, the sympathetic chronicler of AmChurch, acknowledges that the internationalization or de-Romanization of the Curia began under Pius XII. In 1946, the pope raised the overall number of the Sacred College of Cardinals from 36 to 70 and in 1953 he added 24 more cardinals with an eye fixed on breaking the historic dominance by Italians in the Curia.


    The Promotion of Episcopal Conferences

    Closely connected to the de-Romanization of the Curia, was the expansion in scope and power, of Episcopal National Conferences under Pius XII.

    While Cardinal and Secretary of State from 1930 to 1939, Eugenio Pacelli backed the creation of a centralized Church bureaucracy within each nation or groups of nations, a practice begun under Pope Benedict XV.

    Today every nation has its "Bishops Club" such as the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops or a super-structured bureaucracy such as CELAM created in 1955 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, that today represents some 22 Episcopates in Latin America and the Caribbean.

    By the time Pius XII's successor, Pope John XXIII, gave formal approval to the structure of National Episcopal Conferences in Annuario Pontificio (1959), 40 such bureaucracies were already in place.

    As noted in Chapter 11, there was justifiable concern among American bishops when the NCCB/USCC was created in 1966, that the new Episcopal bureaucracy would undermine the authority of the individual bishop and interfere with the age-old line of transmission that has existed between a bishop and the Holy See in the person of the pope.

    The creation of NewChurch would have been very difficult, if not impossible, without the existence of these vast and universal bureaucratic structures. In the U.S., the ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ Collective personified by New Ways Ministry, could hardly have had its way with the Church had it not been for the cooperation and resources of the NCCB/USCC and its successor, the USCCB.

    One could cite numerous other examples, including the ill-fated "updating" of religious orders, to docuмent the unhappy fact that the current Revolution sweeping the Roman Catholic Church today began, in earnest, at the top, with Pope Pius XII.

    The completion of the Revolution would have to wait for Pope Paul VI with Pope John XXIII serving as the bridge between the two pontiffs.

    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church


    Offline Capt McQuigg

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4671
    • Reputation: +2624/-10
    • Gender: Male
    The Revolution Takes Hold Under Pius XII
    « Reply #1 on: October 15, 2012, 01:56:50 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • This is very true.  

    I think the guardians of the deposit of faith must also become guardians of the gateway to the deposit of faith, i.e., pay closer attention to who people are and what motivates them.    

    Now, either Pius XII did none of this, or he was a willing participant.

    It's all very unsettling to ponder.


    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8700
    • Reputation: +1158/-863
    • Gender: Male
    The Revolution Takes Hold Under Pius XII
    « Reply #2 on: October 15, 2012, 02:21:06 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Capt McQuigg
    This is very true.  

    I think the guardians of the deposit of faith must also become guardians of the gateway to the deposit of faith, i.e., pay closer attention to who people are and what motivates them.    

    Now, either Pius XII did none of this, or he was a willing participant.

    It's all very unsettling to ponder.


    Well put.

    Truth is stranger than fiction.  You can't make these things up.  We are dealing with plans and plots originated in the depths of Hell.
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church

    Offline roscoe

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7610
    • Reputation: +617/-404
    • Gender: Male
    The Revolution Takes Hold Under Pius XII
    « Reply #3 on: October 15, 2012, 05:26:04 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • This topic is just another cheap shot at Pius XII. As a layman I am not qualified to evaluate whatever changes were made to the liturgy but at least( unlike John 23 & Paul 6) Pacelli is a real Pope.

    Like another recent post there is no mention in the above that Pius XII was at odds with Montini & had him farmed out to Milan w/o the purple.
    There Is No Such Thing As 'Sede Vacantism'...
    nor is there such thing as a 'Feeneyite' or 'Feeneyism'

    Offline Hobbledehoy

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3746
    • Reputation: +4806/-6
    • Gender: Male
    The Revolution Takes Hold Under Pius XII
    « Reply #4 on: October 15, 2012, 09:13:02 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: roscoe
    This topic is just another cheap shot at Pius XII. As a layman I am not qualified to evaluate whatever changes were made to the liturgy but at least( unlike John 23 & Paul 6) Pacelli is a real Pope.

    Like another recent post there is no mention in the above that Pius XII was at odds with Montini & had him farmed out to Milan w/o the purple.


    You know something, this is the most awesome thing you have posted!

    "As a layman I am not qualified to evaluate whatever changes were made to the liturgy" - that's for "Father Moderator" (Mr. Morrison) to confess in all humility.

    The very idea that Pius XII could have abetted the modernists' subversive anti-Christian agenda is disgusting.

    But the "TRADITIO effect" is too commonplace amongst traditionalists, particularly some sedevacantists.


    NEWS FLASH: Traditio is not a reliable source of information, and anything on there that is true is information Morrison got from somewhere else without duly acknowledging or citing the source.
    Please ignore all that I have written regarding sedevacantism.


    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8700
    • Reputation: +1158/-863
    • Gender: Male
    The Revolution Takes Hold Under Pius XII
    « Reply #5 on: October 16, 2012, 12:03:05 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Hobbledehoy
    Quote from: roscoe
    This topic is just another cheap shot at Pius XII. As a layman I am not qualified to evaluate whatever changes were made to the liturgy but at least( unlike John 23 & Paul 6) Pacelli is a real Pope.

    Like another recent post there is no mention in the above that Pius XII was at odds with Montini & had him farmed out to Milan w/o the purple.


    You know something, this is the most awesome thing you have posted!

    "As a layman I am not qualified to evaluate whatever changes were made to the liturgy" - that's for "Father Moderator" (Mr. Morrison) to confess in all humility.

    The very idea that Pius XII could have abetted the modernists' subversive anti-Christian agenda is disgusting.

    But the "TRADITIO effect" is too commonplace amongst traditionalists, particularly some sedevacantists.


    NEWS FLASH: Traditio is not a reliable source of information, and anything on there that is true is information Morrison got from somewhere else without duly acknowledging or citing the source.


    I will say that the editor of traditio tends to exaggerate things.  Things are bad enough, no need to make it seem worse than it is.

    I also wish he would put down whether the Masses are SV or not.  He acts as if this is irrelevant (I have corresponded with him).  Though it may be licit to attend an una cuм Benedictio it would be nice to know of alternatives when you travel.  Also he is clearly not SV though he respects the "opinion".

    I have not gone to the site regularly in years.  And it has been years since I looked at his daily commentary which used to be, years ago, the only thing I looked at on his site.  He does have some good stuff there though, the Divine Office for instance.  

    A reminder, that  I was just reminded about, the SVs that have to attend the "una cuм Benedictio" Mass, remember, according to Father Stepanich, you have expressly withhold consent to his name being in the canon:

    Quote
    To answer your questions briefly for now, let me just say that sedevacantist traditional Catholics can attend una cuм Benedicto Masses lawfully, provided that they expressly withhold approval of the Priest adding the name of No-Pope Benedict to the una cuм phrase in the Canon of the Mass.  They may not merely disregard the naming of a false Pope, saying that’s the Priest’s problem, but must expressly disapprove of it, while approving only of the Priest offering the Sacrifice, the true Tridentine Latin Mass. …
     

    I asked Mike Cain how one would "expressly" withhold consent [supposing what Father Stepanich says is accurate] and he said as follows (he does not believe we can attend but he allows people to disagree with him without punishing them):

    Quote
    By silently praying the following at the Diptychs of the Living in the Canon of the Mass in unison with the true priest celebrating holy Mass.  If he isn't a true priest, you shouldn't be there.  Period!    

         Here are the words used by the CMRI and sedevacantist priests:
    "una cuм omnibus orthodoxis atque Catholicae, et Apostolicae Fidei cultoribus."
    "unite and govern her throughout the world, together with all true believers and professors of the Catholic and Apostolic Faith."

         And encouraging others to do likewise.

         That would be "expressly withholding assent.  Note, the true priests and bishops would be included as "all true believers and professors."  


    Gratefully that is what I was doing already.

    Kind of off topic but there it is.
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church

    Offline brotherfrancis75

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 220
    • Reputation: +0/-0
    • Gender: Male
    The Revolution Takes Hold Under Pius XII
    « Reply #6 on: October 16, 2012, 07:57:03 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Hobbledehoy
    Quote from: roscoe
    This topic is just another cheap shot at Pius XII. As a layman I am not qualified to evaluate whatever changes were made to the liturgy but at least( unlike John 23 & Paul 6) Pacelli is a real Pope.

    Like another recent post there is no mention in the above that Pius XII was at odds with Montini & had him farmed out to Milan w/o the purple.


    You know something, this is the most awesome thing you have posted!

    "As a layman I am not qualified to evaluate whatever changes were made to the liturgy" - that's for "Father Moderator" (Mr. Morrison) to confess in all humility.

    The very idea that Pius XII could have abetted the modernists' subversive anti-Christian agenda is disgusting.

    But the "TRADITIO effect" is too commonplace amongst traditionalists, particularly some sedevacantists.


    NEWS FLASH: Traditio is not a reliable source of information, and anything on there that is true is information Morrison got from somewhere else without duly acknowledging or citing the source.


    Amen, Mr. Roscoe and Mr. Hobbles.  Amen!  

    L. of T. needs to apologize for the public disrespect he unjustly presumes to write against our saintly Pope Pius XII the Great.  A very few Popes have been public sinners (and but for the grace of God there go I) while a few have made serious political mistakes (again, surely no great surprise) but over-all our Roman Popes have been the greatest and most admirable group of men the world has ever known.  Beyond compare!  We should humbly read the essays of Fr. Joseph Clifford Fenton about Pope Pius XII and thank the Lord for having sent us so great a Bishop of Rome.

    This Jansenist disrespect against our Holy Father is unconscionable.
     

    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8700
    • Reputation: +1158/-863
    • Gender: Male
    The Revolution Takes Hold Under Pius XII
    « Reply #7 on: October 17, 2012, 03:14:52 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Just to clarify - I did not "write" the post from:

    From Twentieth Century Harbingers (pages 1094-1099)

    Someone else did.  

    If anything posted is not true please provide docuмentation.  I think it is fairly safe to say he was not one of our greatest Popes.  

    Bad things happened under him.

    He can not be mentioned in the same breath as Pius V or Pius X.  These were great Popes beyond dispute.

    Alot went on when he was Pope that was not good and had many of high repute and good will scratching their heads.  It is not like everything was perfect one day and there was a 360 degree turnaround when Roncalli claimed office.

    Facts are stubborn things.  Some don't want to accept them.  Others can.

    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church


    Offline roscoe

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7610
    • Reputation: +617/-404
    • Gender: Male
    The Revolution Takes Hold Under Pius XII
    « Reply #8 on: October 17, 2012, 11:35:26 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Specifically--- what 'bad things' things happened under him. Can U name some of the 'many of high repute' who were scratching their heads and why?

    I realise that WWII happened while he was Pope. Are U blaming him for the war?

     

    There Is No Such Thing As 'Sede Vacantism'...
    nor is there such thing as a 'Feeneyite' or 'Feeneyism'

    Offline brotherfrancis75

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 220
    • Reputation: +0/-0
    • Gender: Male
    The Revolution Takes Hold Under Pius XII
    « Reply #9 on: October 17, 2012, 01:50:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Lover of Truth
    Just to clarify - I did not "write" the post from:

    From Twentieth Century Harbingers (pages 1094-1099)

    Someone else did.  

    If anything posted is not true please provide docuмentation.  I think it is fairly safe to say he was not one of our greatest Popes.  

    Bad things happened under him.

    He can not be mentioned in the same breath as Pius V or Pius X.  These were great Popes beyond dispute.

    Alot went on when he was Pope that was not good and had many of high repute and good will scratching their heads.  It is not like everything was perfect one day and there was a 360 degree turnaround when Roncalli claimed office.

    Facts are stubborn things.  Some don't want to accept them.  Others can.



    Mr. L. of T.,

    The Jansenist malice of your entries in this thread do not deserve any serious response.  Even to honour them with an answer would be to sin against God and His holy religion.  Truly there is nothing to be done here but for you to repent and beg forgiveness for your monstrous slanders against our Holy Mother the Church.

    May the Good Lord in His patience have mercy on your soul.

     :pray: :pray: :pray:



    Offline Lover of Truth

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8700
    • Reputation: +1158/-863
    • Gender: Male
    The Revolution Takes Hold Under Pius XII
    « Reply #10 on: October 17, 2012, 02:07:51 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: roscoe
    Specifically--- what 'bad things' things happened under him. Can U name some of the 'many of high repute' who were scratching their heads and why?

    I realise that WWII happened while he was Pope. Are U blaming him for the war?

     



    See the above quotes at the beggining of this thread for the answers.  Father Stepanich is one and he says there were others.  

    I believe he protected Jєωs in WWII and that is obviously a good thing.  All of us are mixed bags having some good and some evil about us for some it is 99/1 in one way or the other but none of us is perfect.

    I don't think I need to win this dispute though.  I'll take him over those who followed any day, not even close.  But . . .

    I'm sure he suffered alot and was probably of good will.  No unCatholic agendas I hope.  But so much will be revealed on the last day.  Things we can not imagine.  We have already learned so much about the conciliar "pope" that not long ago we never would have imagined.

    I'm just concerned with the truth.  

    Now whether posting these facts serves a good purpose is another question.

    He was a valid Pope.

    1.  Should we avoid any negative truth about him since he was Pope?  

    2.  Or is it important to get to the root cause of all that has befallen us?

    I'm sure legitimate arguments can be made for both sides.

    I believe all the facts should be known so a future Pope won't make the same mistakes.

    Our next Pope needs to be strong in every way, not just one who manages to avoid heresy.  Maybe seeing all the details that opened the door to where we are will help.

    Did you know that since Leo XII the only Pope not to have diplomatic experience was Piux X.  He just told it like it was and did not pander to anyone.  I'm sure he was hated, and that is a good sign.  No honey or vinegar, just straight.  That is how I like it and I believe we should desire the truth no matter how sad or uncomfortable it is so that we can avoid past mistakes.

    That is my motivation.  If anyone can docuмent that the original posting is false I'll gladly embrace it.  I want his reputation to be clean.  I don't want anything negative about him to be true.  I certainly am not into knowingly  falsely accusing anyone.  

    There are negative private things that should be kept private if they do not hurt anyone our put souls in peril.  But when it comes to Popes I believe it is a different story.  If we can't hold them accountable who can we hold accountable?

    They have so many souls in their hands in a manner of speaking.

    I am not looking to get anyone angry or scandalized when I post unpopular things.  I know by posting contraversial things that I can learn.  It gives people the opportunity to correct me with docuмentation if possible.  It also gives them the opportunity to merit by defending him.  I am glad to defend him as a valid Pope and as one who risked alot by housing the Jєωs.  And he did many other good things.  I would like to think I'd be willing to die for him were I alive when he was Pope, though I'm not sure I am man enough to do it.

    I hope that clarifies.  And I'll be glad to see the first posting proven wrong.  I also welcome any charitable explanation as to why posting such a thing even if it is true does more harm than good or is evil in and of itself.  I will carefully read anything on that topic.

    I hope my motives were pure this time.  
    "I receive Thee, redeeming Prince of my soul. Out of love for Thee have I studied, watched through many nights, and exerted myself: Thee did I preach and teach. I have never said aught against Thee. Nor do I persist stubbornly in my views. If I have ever expressed myself erroneously on this Sacrament, I submit to the judgement of the Holy Roman Church, in obedience of which I now part from this world." Saint Thomas Aquinas the greatest Doctor of the Church


    Offline roscoe

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7610
    • Reputation: +617/-404
    • Gender: Male
    The Revolution Takes Hold Under Pius XII
    « Reply #11 on: October 17, 2012, 07:32:58 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Lover of Truth
    Quote from: roscoe
    Specifically--- what 'bad things' things happened under him. Can U name some of the 'many of high repute' who were scratching their heads and why?

    I realise that WWII happened while he was Pope. Are U blaming him for the war?

     



    See the above quotes at the beggining of this thread for the answers.  Father Stepanich is one and he says there were others.  

    I believe he protected Jєωs in WWII and that is obviously a good thing.  All of us are mixed bags having some good and some evil about us for some it is 99/1 in one way or the other but none of us is perfect.

    I don't think I need to win this dispute though.  I'll take him over those who followed any day, not even close.  But . . .

    I'm sure he suffered alot and was probably of good will.  No unCatholic agendas I hope.  But so much will be revealed on the last day.  Things we can not imagine.  We have already learned so much about the conciliar "pope" that not long ago we never would have imagined.

    I'm just concerned with the truth.  

    Now whether posting these facts serves a good purpose is another question.

    He was a valid Pope.

    1.  Should we avoid any negative truth about him since he was Pope?  

    2.  Or is it important to get to the root cause of all that has befallen us?

    I'm sure legitimate arguments can be made for both sides.

    I believe all the facts should be known so a future Pope won't make the same mistakes.

    Our next Pope needs to be strong in every way, not just one who manages to avoid heresy.  Maybe seeing all the details that opened the door to where we are will help.

    Did you know that since Leo XII the only Pope not to have diplomatic experience was Piux X.  He just told it like it was and did not pander to anyone.  I'm sure he was hated, and that is a good sign.  No honey or vinegar, just straight.  That is how I like it and I believe we should desire the truth no matter how sad or uncomfortable it is so that we can avoid past mistakes.

    That is my motivation.  If anyone can docuмent that the original posting is false I'll gladly embrace it.  I want his reputation to be clean.  I don't want anything negative about him to be true.  I certainly am not into knowingly  falsely accusing anyone.  

    There are negative private things that should be kept private if they do not hurt anyone our put souls in peril.  But when it comes to Popes I believe it is a different story.  If we can't hold them accountable who can we hold accountable?

    They have so many souls in their hands in a manner of speaking.

    I am not looking to get anyone angry or scandalized when I post unpopular things.  I know by posting contraversial things that I can learn.  It gives people the opportunity to correct me with docuмentation if possible.  It also gives them the opportunity to merit by defending him.  I am glad to defend him as a valid Pope and as one who risked alot by housing the Jєωs.  And he did many other good things.  I would like to think I'd be willing to die for him were I alive when he was Pope, though I'm not sure I am man enough to do it.

    I hope that clarifies.  And I'll be glad to see the first posting proven wrong.  I also welcome any charitable explanation as to why posting such a thing even if it is true does more harm than good or is evil in and of itself.  I will carefully read anything on that topic.

    I hope my motives were pure this time.  


    BF75 is probably right & I really should not answer your lunacy. However Fr Stepanich was a libeler of Fr Feeney & it is now evident he is a libeler of Pius XII whose Bull Humani Generis supported Fr Feeney.
    There Is No Such Thing As 'Sede Vacantism'...
    nor is there such thing as a 'Feeneyite' or 'Feeneyism'

    Offline roscoe

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7610
    • Reputation: +617/-404
    • Gender: Male
    The Revolution Takes Hold Under Pius XII
    « Reply #12 on: October 17, 2012, 08:15:48 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: Lover of Truth


    Alot went on when he was Pope that was not good and had many of high repute and good will scratching their heads.  

    Facts are stubborn things.  Some don't want to accept them.  Others can.



    So far only one person has been named that is allegedly 'of high repute & good will'.

    MO is that he doesn't qualify.

    Since there are allegedly 'many', possibly more names can be provided.
    There Is No Such Thing As 'Sede Vacantism'...
    nor is there such thing as a 'Feeneyite' or 'Feeneyism'

    Offline brotherfrancis75

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 220
    • Reputation: +0/-0
    • Gender: Male
    The Revolution Takes Hold Under Pius XII
    « Reply #13 on: October 17, 2012, 10:22:22 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Mr. Roscoe,

    It requires much humility and sincerity to appreciate the great achievements of Popes such as Benedict XV, Pius XI and Pius XII.  Those who with false pride choose to twist the truth by slyly mixing good and evil together so as to make everything look bad and suspicious are only belittling great men to make themselves look bigger.

    That L. of T. presumes to judge great Popes like Benedict XV, Pius XI and Pius XII is gravely delusional, to say the least.  For any Catholic with some serious knowledge of history his gross distortions of fact are downright bizarre.  To take such anti-Catholic diatribes seriously is to waste our precious time when we could be studying real Catholic history and religion instead.  Jansenists have always engaged in this sort of dishonest fear-mongering, and these falsehoods are no different.  They are in truth straight from out of the Protestant Reformation.

    Better for us to buy snake oil from our friendly local carnival carny than pollute our minds by watching the slithering sleights of hand constantly performed by L. of T.  Almost all of our Popes before V2 were holy men, and there's an end to it.  

    Most of the few exceptions were Anti-Popes, and (as Archbishop Lefebvre strongly suspected)  probably still are.  It seems only hard-hearted Jansenists like L. of T. really have much trouble telling the difference.




    Offline roscoe

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7610
    • Reputation: +617/-404
    • Gender: Male
    The Revolution Takes Hold Under Pius XII
    « Reply #14 on: October 18, 2012, 12:03:36 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I have not seen LOT's post re: Ben XV(15?) but I suspect--- if for no other reason that his office was attained with the assistance of election fraud of some sort--- that he may be an anti-pope.
    There Is No Such Thing As 'Sede Vacantism'...
    nor is there such thing as a 'Feeneyite' or 'Feeneyism'