Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => Topic started by: stevusmagnus on December 17, 2010, 11:32:24 AM
-
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jPgGTvY1xdbOh0weSAeFFf3nxyPQ?docId=3ca2c5ebde384076962b96f0c9d09dfc
Vatican tried to keep Irish child rapist as priest
(AP) – 2 hours ago
DUBLIN (AP) — The Vatican tried to stop Dublin church leaders from defrocking a particularly dangerous pedophile priest and relented only after he raped a boy in a pub restroom, an investigation reported Friday.
Dublin Archbishop Diarmuid Martin said he fully accepted the findings of the latest chapter in Ireland's investigation into child abuse by Catholic Church figures.
Martin called Tony Walsh an "extremely devious man" who should never have been ordained a priest, and said the report highlighted how the church had grown too powerful and arrogant in 20th century Ireland.
A state-ordered investigation into Dublin Archdiocese cover-ups reported last year that Catholic officials had shielded scores of priests from criminal investigation over several decades and didn't report any crimes to the police until 1995. The findings sent shockwaves through the church and forced three Irish bishops to resign.
A chapter dealing with Walsh was censored from the original report because he was still facing a criminal trial. The Department of Justice published the chapter Friday following the 56-year-old Walsh's Dec. 6 conviction for repeatedly raping three boys three decades ago. He received a 12-year prison sentence.
The investigators — a judge and lawyers acting independently of the Irish government — concluded that Walsh actually raped and molested hundreds of boys while serving as a Dublin priest from 1978 to 1996, a rein of terror that church leaders never effectively stopped.
They described Walsh as "probably the most notorious child sɛҳuąƖ abuser" of the 46 cases they investigated covering the years 1975-2004. Walsh often performed as an Elvis impersonator in a traveling Catholic song-and-dance production popular with children called the "All Priests Show." The report found this increased his easy access to so many victims.
The fact-finders based their conclusions on previously confidential Dublin and Vatican docuмents and interviews with key church figures that took five years to gather. They found that Dublin Archdiocese leaders spent several years arguing over whether Walsh should be defrocked, sent to counselors in England, or assigned to duties that kept him away from children.
They finally expelled him from the priesthood at a 1993 canonical trial — the first in Ireland in three decades. But Walsh successfully appealed the verdict to the Vatican, which ordered him to be sent for 10 years to a monastery instead.
The investigators docuмented how Rome relented only after police finally opened a 1995 criminal probe into the mountain of abuse reports — including Walsh's recent sɛҳuąƖ assault of a boy in a pub restroom following the funeral of the victim's grandfather.
-
I am stunned ;)
-
Serial child rapist sent to monastery for 10 years.
ABL excommunicated for keeping Tradition.
Hmmmmm... :scratchchin:
-
Just more innocent, good-willed mistakes...which are in NO WAY indicative of any kind of bad will :)
-
and Ireland, except SSPX, is now mainly secular.....no surprise there.....
(unsure of status of any SV movement there)
-
But if you take the bad things as intentional, you have to take the good things as well. Thus BXVI intentionally freed the Mass and remitted the excomms and is changing "for all" to "for many".
So if BOTH the good and the bad are intentional it shows a confused mind or a sort of schizophrenia present (Modernism) where the Pope is holding two contradictory theses in his mind and thinks they are compatible.
A truly evil anti-pope would never have done the good things. He would have merely steered the Church more forcefully towards perdition.
-
B16 is like a confused man-deer in headlights look-that is barely standing on the bow of 2 ships, waving and wiggling, nearly in the water or one of the ships
-
If someone wants to drag people along with him, he makes a few signs of orthodoxy. Like at the Republican Convention, they pay lip service to opposition to abortion and family values.
-
A truly evil anti-pope would never have done the good things. He would have merely steered the Church more forcefully towards perdition.
How does the devil operate? Does he not give "good things" to those he intends to ensnare? Does that mean he is schizophrenic?
Your line of argumentation here is, to be kind, childish.
-
But if you take the bad things as intentional, you have to take the good things as well. Thus BXVI intentionally freed the Mass and remitted the excomms and is changing "for all" to "for many".
So if BOTH the good and the bad are intentional it shows a confused mind or a sort of schizophrenia present (Modernism) where the Pope is holding two contradictory theses in his mind and thinks they are compatible.
A truly evil anti-pope would never have done the good things. He would have merely steered the Church more forcefully towards perdition.
Remember Pope Leo XIII. There is nothing more dangerous than mixing the error with truth. One error/word, like a drop of poison is enough to kill.
-
If someone wants to drag people along with him, he makes a few signs of orthodoxy. Like at the Republican Convention, they pay lip service to opposition to abortion and family values.
true, and now, some momma bear TV shows to show family values and guns.... :tv-disturbed:
-
So now BXVI is some prophetic mastermind whose every move is calculated to bring about maximum devastating effects to the Church sprinkling just the right amount of Truth affirmation and good acts with bad ones.
This is just as bad as the Neo-Caths who believe every apparent bad act of the Pope is really a long term mastermind strategy for renewal.
And I'M the one whose thinking is childish?
This is the kind of insane conspiracy-first mindset I was talking about earlier that drains Trads of all credibility.
It is ridiculous to think a diabolical Modernist anti-pope Hell-bent on Church destruction is going to free the Latin-Mass and rehabilitate the SSPX. To think so, simply forces whatever evidence there is into a pre-conceived radical conclusion.
The obvious explanation is that the man is a Modernist and truly thinks there is a synthesis of Catholicism with what is "true" in secular values and that this does not compromise the Faith. He is working under a completely different orientation than us. If you understand his orientation his actions make sense. As Bp. W has said he has a Traditional heart and a Modernist mind.
If BXVI were as truly diabolically brilliant as some of you would have him to be he could have destroyed the Church 6 times by now or at least made more progress in destroying the liturgy than freeing the Mass and trying to reform the NO to be more conservative.
Sedes have the same disorientation and distorted thinking as their ridiculous conclusion serves as a false pretext and skewed prism for viewing and interpreting all actions in this crisis. Indeed Sedes are the mirror image of their Neo-Cath brothers. Both are a bunch of absolutist neo-ultramontanists.
-
So now BXVI is some prophetic mastermind whose every move is calculated to bring about maximum devastating effects to the Church sprinkling just the right amount of Truth affirmation and good acts with bad ones.
This is just as bad as the Neo-Caths who believe every apparent bad act of the Pope is really a long term mastermind strategy for renewal.
And I'M the one whose thinking is childish?
This is the kind of insane conspiracy-first mindset I was talking about earlier that drains Trads of all credibility.
It is ridiculous to think a diabolical Modernist anti-pope Hell-bent on Church destruction is going to free the Latin-Mass and rehabilitate the SSPX. To think so, simply forces whatever evidence there is into a pre-conceived radical conclusion.
The obvious explanation is that the man is a Modernist and truly thinks there is a synthesis of Catholicism with what is "true" in secular values and that this does not compromise the Faith. He is working under a completely different orientation than us. If you understand his orientation his actions make sense. As Bp. W has said he has a Traditional heart and a Modernist mind.
If BXVI were as truly diabolically brilliant as some of you would have him to be he could have destroyed the Church 6 times by now or at least made more progress in destroying the liturgy than freeing the Mass and trying to reform the NO to be more conservative.
Sedes have the same disorientation and distorted thinking as their ridiculous conclusion serves as a false pretext and skewed prism for viewing and interpreting all actions in this crisis. Indeed Sedes are the mirror image of their Neo-Cath brothers. Both are a bunch of absolutist neo-ultramontanists.
Tell me stevus. How sane is it to give assent to who a man who is diabolically disoriented, schizophrenic, naturally spiritually blind.
-
So now BXVI is some prophetic mastermind whose every move is calculated to bring about maximum devastating effects to the Church sprinkling just the right amount of Truth affirmation and good acts with bad ones.
This is just as bad as the Neo-Caths who believe every apparent bad act of the Pope is really a long term mastermind strategy for renewal.
And I'M the one whose thinking is childish?
This is the kind of insane conspiracy-first mindset I was talking about earlier that drains Trads of all credibility.
It is ridiculous to think a diabolical Modernist anti-pope Hell-bent on Church destruction is going to free the Latin-Mass and rehabilitate the SSPX. To think so, simply forces whatever evidence there is into a pre-conceived radical conclusion.
The obvious explanation is that the man is a Modernist and truly thinks there is a synthesis of Catholicism with what is "true" in secular values and that this does not compromise the Faith. He is working under a completely different orientation than us. If you understand his orientation his actions make sense. As Bp. W has said he has a Traditional heart and a Modernist mind.
If BXVI were as truly diabolically brilliant as some of you would have him to be he could have destroyed the Church 6 times by now or at least made more progress in destroying the liturgy than freeing the Mass and trying to reform the NO to be more conservative.
Sedes have the same disorientation and distorted thinking as their ridiculous conclusion serves as a false pretext and skewed prism for viewing and interpreting all actions in this crisis. Indeed Sedes are the mirror image of their Neo-Cath brothers. Both are a bunch of absolutist neo-ultramontanists.
Tell me stevus. How sane is it to give assent to a man who is diabolically disoriented, schizophrenic, naturally spiritually blind.
-
So now BXVI is some prophetic mastermind whose every move is calculated to bring about maximum devastating effects to the Church sprinkling just the right amount of Truth affirmation and good acts with bad ones.
This is just as bad as the Neo-Caths who believe every apparent bad act of the Pope is really a long term mastermind strategy for renewal.
And I'M the one whose thinking is childish?
This is the kind of insane conspiracy-first mindset I was talking about earlier that drains Trads of all credibility.
It is ridiculous to think a diabolical Modernist anti-pope Hell-bent on Church destruction is going to free the Latin-Mass and rehabilitate the SSPX. To think so, simply forces whatever evidence there is into a pre-conceived radical conclusion.
The obvious explanation is that the man is a Modernist and truly thinks there is a synthesis of Catholicism with what is "true" in secular values and that this does not compromise the Faith. He is working under a completely different orientation than us. If you understand his orientation his actions make sense. As Bp. W has said he has a Traditional heart and a Modernist mind.
If BXVI were as truly diabolically brilliant as some of you would have him to be he could have destroyed the Church 6 times by now or at least made more progress in destroying the liturgy than freeing the Mass and trying to reform the NO to be more conservative.
Sedes have the same disorientation and distorted thinking as their ridiculous conclusion serves as a false pretext and skewed prism for viewing and interpreting all actions in this crisis. Indeed Sedes are the mirror image of their Neo-Cath brothers. Both are a bunch of absolutist neo-ultramontanists.
Tell me stevus. How sane is it to give assent to who a man who is diabolically disoriented, schizophrenic, naturally spiritually blind.
Do you feel B16 is:
-possesed? if so, what proof?
-purposely evil, dispensing evil aroudn the globe
-confused and raised with heretical beleifs like most of us were (no, the 20's were not pristine!)
if your dad, when you were a child and he head of home-was a drunk that swore, gave poor example and dumb theology-etc-would you still recognize he had the headship role???
if not, then who would be the head? your mother? older brother? who???
can we conclude B16 has the Chair-but is there in name only? or filling a position without authority??
-
If BXVI were as truly diabolically brilliant as some of you would have him to be he could have destroyed the Church 6 times by now or at least made more progress in destroying the liturgy than freeing the Mass and trying to reform the NO to be more conservative.
No person can destroy the Roman Catholic Church. The only SVs who think the way you describe are converts from Protestant sects carrying a residual dislike of popes in general. IMO.
-
This is the kind of insane conspiracy-first mindset I was talking about earlier that drains Trads of all credibility.
You know it took a couple of days for the SSPX to criticize the Pope's condom remarks, and Stevus has actually been arguing to us to ditch St. Thomas Aquinas teachings, which were simply restatements of what the Church has always taught.
It's crazy to think the Pope is a "conservative" - but that's what people think. The Pope obviously wants people to think that he is, even though he isn't. That isn't "conspiracy first" thinking. That's just the reality. Those who defend him at all costs end up losing the Faith.
-
So now BXVI is some prophetic mastermind whose every move is calculated to bring about maximum devastating effects to the Church sprinkling just the right amount of Truth affirmation and good acts with bad ones.
This is just as bad as the Neo-Caths who believe every apparent bad act of the Pope is really a long term mastermind strategy for renewal.
And I'M the one whose thinking is childish?
This is the kind of insane conspiracy-first mindset I was talking about earlier that drains Trads of all credibility.
It is ridiculous to think a diabolical Modernist anti-pope Hell-bent on Church destruction is going to free the Latin-Mass and rehabilitate the SSPX. To think so, simply forces whatever evidence there is into a pre-conceived radical conclusion.
The obvious explanation is that the man is a Modernist and truly thinks there is a synthesis of Catholicism with what is "true" in secular values and that this does not compromise the Faith. He is working under a completely different orientation than us. If you understand his orientation his actions make sense. As Bp. W has said he has a Traditional heart and a Modernist mind.
If BXVI were as truly diabolically brilliant as some of you would have him to be he could have destroyed the Church 6 times by now or at least made more progress in destroying the liturgy than freeing the Mass and trying to reform the NO to be more conservative.
Sedes have the same disorientation and distorted thinking as their ridiculous conclusion serves as a false pretext and skewed prism for viewing and interpreting all actions in this crisis. Indeed Sedes are the mirror image of their Neo-Cath brothers. Both are a bunch of absolutist neo-ultramontanists.
Tell me stevus. How sane is it to give assent to who a man who is diabolically disoriented, schizophrenic, naturally spiritually blind.
Do you feel B16 is:
-possesed? if so, what proof?
-purposely evil, dispensing evil aroudn the globe
-confused and raised with heretical beleifs like most of us were (no, the 20's were not pristine!)
if your dad, when you were a child and he head of home-was a drunk that swore, gave poor example and dumb theology-etc-would you still recognize he had the headship role???
if not, then who would be the head? your mother? older brother? who???
can we conclude B16 has the Chair-but is there in name only? or filling a position without authority??
A child rapist, a serial murderer, a satanist offering human sacrifice to satan would still retain his biological father-ship. He would loose his place as Spiritual father. The head will always Christ.
-
Yes, the Pope's master plan includes fooling the mad liberal world into thinking he is a conservative, so he can be hated and reviled. Then he chooses to wreck the Church by reinstating the TLM and remitting the excommunications of the Society. Genius!
His conspiratorial abilities truly know no bounds...
-
Tell me stevus. How sane is it to give assent to who a man who is diabolically disoriented, schizophrenic, naturally spiritually blind.
You give assent to anything he lawfully teaches or promulgates that is in keeping with the Catholic Faith because he is a validly elected Pope.
Following your logic, you would have personally declared John XXI, Liberius, and Honorious anti-popes and did your own Protestant thing during their reign.
-
A child rapist, a serial murderer, a satanist offering human sacrifice to satan would still retain his biological father-ship. He would loose his place as Spiritual father.
Remind me when any of the post-conciliar Popes did these things. I must have forgotten...
The head will always be Christ.
Spoken like a true Protestant. They also claim Christ as their head and obey no divinely appointed earthly authority.
-
A child rapist, a serial murderer, a satanist offering human sacrifice to satan would still retain his biological father-ship. He would loose his place as Spiritual father.
Remind me when any of the post-conciliar Popes did these things. I must have forgotten...
The head will always be Christ.
Spoken like a true Protestant. They also claim Christ as their head and obey no divinely appointed earthly authority.
I'll do better, I will remind you to read the post I made that response to.
-
Friend of mine loves Palin and wants her as President.
I feel like I'm in the political twilight zone.
If someone wants to drag people along with him, he makes a few signs of orthodoxy. Like at the Republican Convention, they pay lip service to opposition to abortion and family values.
true, and now, some momma bear TV shows to show family values and guns.... :tv-disturbed:
-
Flub :)
-
So now BXVI is some prophetic mastermind whose every move is calculated to bring about maximum devastating effects to the Church sprinkling just the right amount of Truth affirmation and good acts with bad ones.
No one said that, but the added huffing is greatly appreciated and useful.
And I'M the one whose thinking is childish?
Yes, it is -- and your melodrama does not help at all.
This is the kind of insane conspiracy-first mindset I was talking about earlier that drains Trads of all credibility.
Considering it is, in this case, a figment of your imagination, I shall not lose sleep...
It is ridiculous to think a diabolical Modernist anti-pope Hell-bent on Church destruction is going to free the Latin-Mass and rehabilitate the SSPX.
Calling it ridiculous and actually discussing, calmly and rationally, how/why such moves could be motivated from something other than good intentions are two different things.
BTW... Do you think it was his 'Traditional heart' that enjoyed the audience with the half-naked beefcakes the other day?
If you understand his orientation his actions make sense.
Agreed -- we are just not in agreement as to what his "orientation" is.
Indeed Sedes are the mirror image of their Neo-Cath brothers. Both are a bunch of absolutist neo-ultramontanists.
While you likely felt an emotional release, your comments have no weight whatsoever -- and you have failed utterly to show how your initial comment still holds. Did not Satan tempt Jesus by means of offering Him good things? Yes, and that is the end of your childish line of argumentation. FWIW, I am not a sede-vacantist, strictly speaking.
-
Before you go off again, stevus, you might like to know that an aged/deceased SSPX priest -- Fr. Pulvermacher, I think -- once said that he believed the Modernists would "free" the TLM once most/all of the certainly-valid priests (ordained pre-1968) had died. Men were speaking of the TLM's "freedom" as a potentially-genius move before you even knew a damn thing about any of this. Similarly, men have thought for many years the SSPX would be brought in, probably just before WW3 ushers in the NWO and its dogma-less, humanitarian religion (for which the V2 anti-Church has been but a preparation).
Your knowledge, whether book or experiential, of the history of Traddieland, among other things, is insufficient to go on as you do. You may be reasonably intelligent and learned, but part of true intelligence is knowing and remaining within your limitations.
-
Gladius,
It's called sarcasm. It's used to make a point.
Plainly put, the point is that you are contorting the facts to have them fit your conclusion just like the Neo Caths. BXVI is no master strategist out to get you. He is a modernist Hegelian who is naturally schizophrenic. He will continue to take one step forward and two steps back, while you think it is all part of his master plan.
-
Plainly put, the point is that you are contorting the facts to have them fit your conclusion just like the Neo Caths
Could you please quote where, in this thread, I have done so? Thank you.
It is plain that there was collusion, at the highest levels, in order to keep the pedophile priest free to do his thing. The fact is: The snakes in the Vatican have enabled MANY pedophiles to do, and continue doing, their thing. How is this a distortion? Is it distorted to think bad will played a part? Can you give us the 'good-willed-bungler-and-pedophile-protector' scenario? I am sure we would all be most enlightened to learn of such a thing...
I commented; your responded.
BXVI is no master strategist out to get you.
Could you please point to the place where I claimed he is? Thank you.
He will continue to take one step forward and two steps back, while you think it is all part of his master plan.
He will continue -- like the Banksters -- to kick your a**, while you fail to grasp that war is being waged upon you, by forces visible AND invisible. It is not about BXVI's master plan -- something I have never mentioned (although you speak of as if I did so) -- but there IS a plan. The revolutionaries themselves told us as much quite some time ago. Have you never heard of or read the docuмent on the Alta Vendita, or other such items? It is as plain as the nose on your face, and well docuмented, that the idea was to change things from within -- not destroy from without.
Do you buy the idea that Ben Bernanke is just doing his best, however confusedly? Is Obama just a good-willed, confused bungler, taking one step forward, two steps back? If you do NOT buy such nonsense about other players within the Kleptocracy -- basing your conclusions upon easily-available, incontrovertible evidence -- why do you fail to do so when it comes to the snakes in the Vatican?
FWIW, Bp. Williamson (among other non-sedes) has said most clearly that the V2 leadership has uttered heresies. I know it is germane to another thread, but your ignorance of what has transpired in Traddieland before your fairly-recent arrival wears badly because of the way you go about your business.
-
Since we are on the subject:
SNAP Press Statement
For immediate release: Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Child sex victim settles case vs. ex-NYC big shot Jesuit
Statement by David Clohessy of St. Louis, Director of SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (314 566 9790, SNAPclohessy@aol.com)
(On Sunday, the Newark Star Ledger disclosed that a six figure settlement was paid in 2008 by Catholic officials to a man who was molested by a priest who taught religious studies at Xavier High School in New York City. The cleric, who now holds a prominent post with the church in Rome, hasn’t ever been publicly accused before.)
Two years ago, New Jersey Catholic officials secretly paid a six-figure settlement to a man who he molested as a boy by a Catholic employee. Later, that employee became a priest. And today, despite the child sex allegation against him and the settlement, that priest is a prominent Jesuit priest who continues to work for the church in Rome.
We call on officials at Xavier High School and the New York archdiocese to use their vast resources to aggressively seek out others who may have been hurt by this predator in the New York area.
Here’s how the Newark Star Ledger describes the predator: “Fr. Keith F. Pecklers. . .is now a prominent Jesuit scholar. A professor of liturgy at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome, he has written, contributed to or edited nine books, according to his Facebook page, and is a frequent commentator on Vatican affairs for American media outlets — including the sex abuse scandals.”
Fr. Pecklers essentially admits the abuse. Here’s how he tries to minimize and excuse his hurtful actions:
“I was a student — I was a minor myself — so it would be impossible to be accused of that type of thing. I was 17 years old, so that’s the end of the story.”
Jesuit and New Jersey Catholic officials should be ashamed of themselves. This is the very same secrecy and recklessness that the Catholic hierarchy has engaged in for decades, in the US and across the globe. It is the very same callous and destructive pattern being repeated again and again with devastating results for kids, parents, families and ironically, for the church itself.
We call on the Jesuits to suspend Pecklers and explain their dangerous secrecy about both the accusation against him and the settlement. Again, we strongly urge archdiocesan and high school officials in the New York area to reach out. We hope others who saw, suspected or suffered Pecklers’ abuse will come forward, get help, call police, protect others and start healing.
(SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, is the world’s oldest and largest support group for clergy abuse victims. We’ve been around for 22 years and have more than 10,000 members. Despite the word “priest” in our title, we have members who were molested by religious figures of all denominations, including nuns, rabbis, bishops, and Protestant ministers. Our website is SNAPnetwork.org)
continued:
http://www.snapnetwork.org/snap_statements/2010_statements/121510_child_sex_victim_settles_case_vs_ex_nyc_big_shot_jesuit.htm
-
So if BOTH the good and the bad are intentional it shows a confused mind or a sort of schizophrenia present (Modernism) where the Pope is holding two contradictory theses in his mind and thinks they are compatible.
Confused, or just delightfully, consciously, and deliberately Hegelian.
-
Have you never heard of or read the docuмent on the Alta Vendita, or other such items?
Yes but they said at that time (the 1820s) - that they did not want the Pope to directly join their cause, instead to be an unwitting agent. Which is the role I think they intended for Pius IX. They also said the work could go on for a century or more. Let's be honest, when they talked about putting "the Church in her tomb" - in the eyes of the world, the grave is dug and the body is about to be put in, because it seems to be dead.
-
Gladius,
Why don't you help my ignorance.
So we haven't had a true Pope in 50 years. All post conciliar Popes are part of a plotted revolution which includes Obama, Bernake, unspecified "banksters", etc. Please let me know who else is in on this global conspiracy. Are all Cardinals and Bishops in on it? Priests? Benedict is intentionally assisting them or just their pawn? And freeing the TLM and rehabbing the Society obviously fits into this plan...how?
And this conspiracy runs how many years? Centuries? Millions of people have been in on it? Thousands? And all kept it secret? Except of course the leaks you've been able to pick up on and "discover" the truth while the rest of us idiots are kept "in the dark".
Maybe it would be easier to simply ask who's NOT in on this conspiracy?
It truly is fascinating. My next door neighbors may be in on it. We may be monitored. Perhaps I'm a mole for the NWO?
Maybe you are. We can never be too sure...
-
Oh, I forgot the Society is in on it now too. Bishop Fellay has been a double agent from the beginning. But then again maybe ABL set up the Society as a traditional Trojan horse! Diabolical genius...
-
Oh, I forgot the Society is in on it now too. Bishop Fellay has been a double agent from the beginning. But then again maybe ABL set up the Society as a traditional Trojan horse! Diabolical genius...
stevus, what you are calling "sarcasm to make a point" is actually making you look like a drama queen. Now, I'm not saying you are doing it in drag.
-
These are serious questions. I want to know what all I've missed in "traddie-land". I need to get up to speed on this conspiracy.
-
These are serious questions. I want to know what all I've missed in "traddie-land". I need to get up to speed on this conspiracy.
I am sure the others in this thread take it serious, but it may be more productive if you lay off the "drama".
-
These are serious questions. I want to know what all I've missed in "traddie-land".
For starters, it would be wise to consider and accept the obvious fact that many non-sede clerics have used the terms heresy, schism, and/or apostasy, etc., to describe the words and deeds of the V2 and post-V2 'pontiffs'. To act as if no one has made a solid case for the presence of heresy, even material, is total nonsense. The Abbe de Nantes, for one, wrote an entire (and truly excellent) book of accusations against Paul VI for...heresy, schism, and apostasy. While he certainly would have disagreed with me, for example, about the consequences, there was little to no difference in how he and I perceived the material to be examined.
Go dig up some of ABL's comments -- they are likely much harder-hitting than you think. The idea that there just isn't any heresy is only held by a few, less-than-erudite men. The difference comes into play when we discuss whether or not it is formal, what follows if it is formal, etc.
FWIW, you need to get up to speed on more than just 'the conspiracy', stevus. You speak about things of which you are ignorant. Now, ignorance is often excusable -- but to speak as if you know about something, when you really do not, is less so. Perhaps you should ask about certain things, rather than trying to teach those who know more than you? Just an idea. Godspeed :)
-
The ripple-effect of Tony Walsh absolutely must not be underestimated.
There all of the devastated victims, their siblings, their ruined parents, aunts, uncles, grandparents and cousins.
Then, in order to keep the Elvis act running and a continuous supply of new victims, there had to be countless helpers, enablers, fellow-travelers and assorted psychopaths.
The damage to Ireland done by these satanists is obvious: it became a different country very quickly. Sean Fortune and his coven is another story.
Let's say it's true that the Irish have always had the most awe and blind obedience for their priests. The ripple effect, the collateral damage of Walsh and Fortune will have affected a huge amount of the population, similar to a fatal epidemic.
And Stevus, read the Alta-Vendita. I think it's free online. Get yerself up to speed.
-
I realize many churchmen have uttered heresy in the last 50 years. I think it is very debatable whether post conciliar Popes have uttered material heresy. I have stated repeatedly it is impossible for you or anyone else to judge the Pope of formal heresy, thus I fail to see how you can say BXVI is not Pope. As for apostasy and faithlessness among Romans and most all Catholics since VCII, no kidding.
I'd suggest you stop assuming what others know and what they don't and stick to the facts.
-
An observation...
The biggest obstacle to overcoming your ignorance will be your arrogance. It is clear you think your knowledge in these matters is greater than it is, and you presently lack good dispositions -- which is why you are likely to remain (willfully) blind.
While misrepresenting what I say might make you feel better, it will not serve any other, useful purpose.
-
stick to the facts.
The Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita by John Vennari, costs $2.50
-
I'd suggest you stop assuming what others know and what they don't and stick to the facts.
The fact is many Trads -- sede and non-sede alike -- have attributed heresy to the putative pontiffs. Do you grasp and accept this fact?
Just the other day, you acted as if this had NEVER been done...presumably by ANYONE. Do you deny this fact?
-
I'm well aware of the Alta vendita. It is no mystery the Freemasons at the time it was written meant what they said. It is no secret the Church is under attack and has been infiltrated by Communists and others. But cօռspιʀαcιҽs only go so far and are limited by their nature.
I think it is a mistake to turn the crisis in the Church into a vast century spanning plot with millions of co conspirators. We now have people claiming the Society has been infiltrated and BF is in on it, etc. It is ridiculous. This is where sede-ism leads. A conspiracy first mindset, paranoia, believing body double theories, Cardinal Siri theses, etc. Once you can actually bring yourself to believe there hasn't been a Pope for 50 years, you begin to believe anything.
-
I'd suggest you stop assuming what others know...
I am going by YOUR OWN WORDS, mate.
I can go find them, so as to quote you to yourself, but I do not believe it is necessary to do so. Is it?
-
I'm well aware people accuse the Popes of heresy all the time. The Dim-onds find about 2,000 heresies per day. The fact is, they can prove none of it. They take an ambiguous phrase out of context, assume the worst interpretation and declare heresy. The very nature of liberalism makes it so these Popes are masters of wordsmanship and double speak. They are not going to be so stupid as to declare clear heresy.
-
If you were the bad guys and you had just kicked total a** and taken names with your triumph at V2, would you STOP -- or follow the now-scattered sheep into the desert?
Frankly, those who think the revolutionaries would stop harassing the Remnant as soon as they had the Remnant on the run, confused, etc., are naive in the extreme.
BF is a separate matter -- but that the SSPX would immediately be on the radar of the infiltrators is, IMO, the mother of all no-brainers.
-
You are assuming what I know from a few posts on a discussion board. That's your first mistake. You've claimed I'm not even qualified to speak on this subject. Please, I beg you to enlighten me and fill me in on the "truth". Please do so. Explain the entire conspired crisis so I can be educated. I beg you.
-
The Dim-onds find about 2,000 heresies per day.
We are NOT talking about the Dimonds -- and you know it. Bringing them up is, IMO, calculated and disingenuous.
I AM speaking of ABL, Bp. W, and MANY other, non-sede Trad priests.
The fact is, they can prove none of it. They take an ambiguous phrase out of context, assume the worst interpretation and declare heresy.
Again, we are NOT speaking of the Dimonds -- but of knowledgeable, trained clerics, whose names and characters you denigrate by so characterizing their behavior.
They are not going to be so stupid as to declare clear heresy.
Maybe you will not be smart enough to see it, even if they do?
-
You are assuming what I know from a few posts on a discussion board.
I know you are a willfully blind tool bag who thinks it is acceptable to drag in nonsense that is not ad rem, precisely to make himself look better than he really is.
As your request for light is clearly just as disingenuous as your reference to the Dimonds, I shall, for the present, refrain.
-
Once you can actually bring yourself to believe there hasn't been a Pope for 50 years, you begin to believe anything.
Once you believe the doctrines, disciplines, and worship of Holy Mother Church can be the instrument of the supernatural destruction of hundreds of millions of her own children, you are toast.
-
For pity's sake, Stevus! Your OP clearly describes a CONSPIRACY to enable predator clergy to destroy thousands of lives. Two (or was it three?) bishops were forced to resign!
Only when this effing monster raped a boy in a pub was he stopped!
The investigation clearly shows a conspiracy.
-
Would it be accurate to lump all sede-plenists in with Hans Kung, Stan Fortuna, or some other wild-card member of the Novus?
Perhaps now you can see the absurdity of mentioning all sede-vacs in the same breath as the Dimonds, as if they are in any way representative of others or of s_v-ism as a whole. This is even more absurd when I am involved, for I am not an s_v, as I have told you (and others) many times.
-
For pity's sake, Stevus! Your OP clearly describes a CONSPIRACY to enable predator clergy to destroy thousands of lives...
Ira Knee is in da house :)
-
FWIW, it is precisely because Bp W. knows BXVI has uttered heresies that he offers the explanation that BXVI is schizo. Sadly, what follows is...
IF he cannot be mentally solid enough to be an actual heretic --i.e., he utters heresies, but does not/cannot adhere to them -- he cannot be mentally solid enough to hold the Faith, either.
-
Gladius,
Why don't you help my ignorance.
So we haven't had a true Pope in 50 years. All post conciliar Popes are part of a plotted revolution which includes Obama, Bernake, unspecified "banksters", etc. Please let me know who else is in on this global conspiracy. Are all Cardinals and Bishops in on it? Priests? Benedict is intentionally assisting them or just their pawn? And freeing the TLM and rehabbing the Society obviously fits into this plan...how?
And this conspiracy runs how many years? Centuries? Millions of people have been in on it? Thousands? And all kept it secret? Except of course the leaks you've been able to pick up on and "discover" the truth while the rest of us idiots are kept "in the dark".
Maybe it would be easier to simply ask who's NOT in on this conspiracy?
It truly is fascinating. My next door neighbors may be in on it. We may be monitored. Perhaps I'm a mole for the NWO?
Maybe you are. We can never be too sure...
The conspiracy officially started with the calling of the false Vatican 11 council, which was purposely called to "update the church." John XX111 wanted to open a window and let some fresh air into the church!
Doctrines, and ALL the sacraments and the mass changed! We have a new false counter church. It does not resemble in the slightest degree the true church, which is now relagated the the catacombs of today, and reduced to minute numbers! This is the CRUCIAL point you have to accept if you want to call yourself a trad Catholic.
Presented with the evidence, .......connect the dots Stevus. You have a difficult time doing this, it seems!
Evidence is presented tou you........but you cant seem to draw the TRUE, CORRECT conclusions!
-
Read the Great Facade. You and other Sedes recognize the crisis but you overreact, taking an extreme view of indefectability that ironically leads you to conclude the Church has defected. Your error is the same as the Neo-Caths. Neo-Caths would have praised and obeyed Athanasius' excommunication. Sedes would have declared Liberius an anti-pope.
Once you can actually bring yourself to believe there hasn't been a Pope for 50 years, you begin to believe anything.
Once you believe the doctrines, disciplines, and worship of Holy Mother Church can be the instrument of the supernatural destruction of hundreds of millions of her own children, you are toast.
-
Your error is the same as the Neo-Caths.
It's not the same error. Being a neo-Cath automatically means your doctrinal positions are up in the air and you can never be certain of anything.
Neo-Caths would have praised and obeyed Athanasius' excommunication. Sedes would have declared Liberius an anti-pope.
Those who declared Liberius an anti-Pope were acting in good Faith and their decision to appoint follow a new Pope, though in error, does not seem to be condemned. They were the opposite of heretics. The Neo-Caths though, almost without a doubt, tend towards one heresy or another, as a matter of necessity. You yourself are a case in point.
-
It is the same error of believing the Pope and Church can do no wrong. Neo Caths believe whatever authority says. Sedes believe what authority says is wrong so they believe the authority doesn't exist anymore. Both views are two sides of the same erroneous coin.
Your personal disagreement with one Society priest has had the result of ironically driving you to a priest in communion with Rome for the sacraments while at the same time opening yourself to Sedevacantism. Your emotions are turning what once was a logical mind into one that is spiraling out of control.
The most logical stand in all of this is to use your brain and realize because the Pope does and says dumb things doesn't mean he's not Pope. Sedes have zero ability to make distinctions. They offer zero solutions. They only serve to write two liners taking digs at other groups, happy to sit on the sidelines living in their false dreamworld.
They have succeeded in convincing themselves of a false reality. It's like self imposed brainwashing with absolutely no insight.
-
Hey stevus. Did you read the post I directed to you over at the General forum. In the Neocat thread.
-
You and other Sedes...
HeL-Lo-O Genius,
I have told you, more than once in this very thread, that I am not a sede-vacantist, strictly speaking. Your comment makes it clear you do not actually READ what I write before you plow ahead, sharing your 'wisdom.' I have nothing more to say at this time. Pax tecuм.
-
Sedes have zero ability to make distinctions. They offer zero solutions. They only serve to write two liners taking digs at other groups, happy to sit on the sidelines living in their false dreamworld.
Ira Knee has apparently decided to make another appearance...
-
It is the same error of believing the Pope and Church can do no wrong.
When I meet a sede (or any man) who actually thinks such a thing, I will be happy to let you know...
-
It is the same error of believing the Pope and Church can do no wrong.
When I meet a sede (or any man) who actually thinks such a thing, I will be happy to let you know...
And don't hold your breath O Great Steve.
Anyway blunder on.
-
I keep on asking you to tell me what you believe and what should be believed regarding the crisis, but so far no answer. If you are not a sede, please enlighten me as to your beliefs.
-
The investigators docuмented how Rome relented only after police finally opened a 1995 criminal probe into the mountain of abuse reports — including Walsh's recent sɛҳuąƖ assault of a boy in a pub restroom following the funeral of the victim's grandfather.
An abomination typical of these monsters, preying on siblings during a funeral wake or gathering at the home of the kid who committed ѕυιcιdє, because of being raped by the "priest".
This evil goes straight to the top.
-
Your personal disagreement with one Society priest has had the result of ironically driving you to a priest in communion with Rome
I didn't choose to be kicked out of the Church. Are you saying the SSPX is not in communion with Rome? I attend mass to fulfill my Sunday obligation, I don't have a choice. It's a pre-Vatican II ordained priest and he seems okay.
for the sacraments while at the same time opening yourself to Sedevacantism.
I was always open to sedevacantism, your position is opposed to Archbishop Lefebvre's.
Your emotions are turning what once was a logical mind into one that is spiraling out of control.
LOL - listen, if your position on the Pope leads to you saying the sorts of things you've been saying the past few weeks, then your position is problematic.
-
As you have admittedly employed sarcasm on a regular basis within this thread, stevus, you will pardon me if I have not taken, and do not take, your inquiries seriously.
A blessed Sunday to you , sir.
-
As expected, you claim I'm incorrect as to what you believe yet you refuse to explain what you believe. Thus it is your own fault if you are misrepresented.
-
Tele, you were kicked out of the Church? What the heck did you do?
-
Stevus:
The most logical stand in all of this is to use your brain and realize because the Pope does and says dumb things doesn't mean he's not Pope.
Doing and saying "dumb things" is putting it euphemistcally. He does and says a lot more than dumb things. From my point of view anyway, he's a card-carrying modernist and a heretic. But you're right- that doesn't mean he's not the pope. But for the sede, of course, it does.
Stevus: Sedes have zero ability to make distinctions.
Distinctions? Like the inability to discern that a man who speaks and acts like an anti-pope, could, in spite of all that, still be considered the pope? If you will recall, the Archbishop cut some slack to the sedes. He understood their position and was even tempted at one time to take virtually the same position himself. (check the Assisi history)
As it touches the liturgy, I see sedes using the pre-62 missals, (as do many SSPXers, BTW), and conducting the Mass celebration much the same as we do. Sure, they don't do the una cuм famulo to Papa nostro, et Antistite nostro..., and maybe they eliminate Joseph from the Communicantes. But, apart from that, they practice the liturgy and the rest of the Sacraments much as we do, don't they?
They offer zero solutions. They only serve to write two liners taking digs at other groups, happy to sit on the sidelines living in their false dreamworld
Exactly what solutions are being offered by other traditional Catholic groups, including SSPX, which, you imply, go more towards a solution of the present crisis? What do you mean by "solutions?" Nobody I've seen has any real solutions to this present mess.
The sedes are, you say, happy to "sit on the sidelines." How are those trads, who recognize the pope, yet, for all intents and purposes, are as alienated from him and Rome as the former, any more 'in the game' than they are?
And, as for digging at other groups, many of us trads, of whatever stripe, are quite good at that in our own right.
-
I'm willing to cut well meaning Sedes a break. Some of them just get on my nerves for various reasons.
How does anyone know what to do in this freaking insanity? It is enough to make one despair and kill themselves out of hopeless frustration.
-
I'm willing to cut well meaning Sedes a break. Some of them just get on my nerves for various reasons.
How does anyone know what to do in this freaking insanity? It is enough to make one despair and kill themselves out of hopeless frustration.
How "gracious" of you stevus. I'm sure there will be sighs of relief at hearing this.
Now as to the freaking insanity, what to do is the question. What to do with a man who's loyalty sides with the Arch-heretic Kiko Arguello. What to do with a man who claims the Chair of Peter and beds down with the devil.
Vatican City, Dec 16, 2010 / 07:32 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Citing years of “trouble,” Japan’s Catholic bishops have asked the Neocatechumenal Way to cease activities in the country for the next five years.
Archbishop Joseph Mitsuaki Takami of Nagasaki told CNA on Dec. 15 that the bishops’ proposal, made directly to the Way’s founder, Kiko Arguello, has so far not been accepted.
Archbishop Takami was reached by phone at his home in Nagasaki. Four other Japanese bishops took part in a Dec. 13 closed door meeting in Rome with Pope Benedict XVI.
The Pope had called the meeting in order to discuss the bishops’ proposal. Archbishop Takami indicated that the Pope was not comfortable with the plan. Neither the Vatican nor officials of the Neocatechumenal Way have made any public comment on the meeting or the proposal.
-
The Neo Caths don't speak our language. Their minds are mush. They think they do good. No insight.
-
The Neo Caths don't speak our language. Their minds are mush. They think they do good. No insight.
What language do you speak when you gloss over that Peter and the devil now share the same bed.
-
Benedict 16 is clearly an anti-pope but I wouldn't describe the situation as St Peter sharing his bed with the devil-- a better choice of words is needed
-
The Neo Caths don't speak our language. Their minds are mush. They think they do good. No insight.
What language do you speak when you gloss over that Peter and the devil now share the same bed.
That phrase is meaningless. Unless you talk plainly and clearly no discussion can take place.
-
LM,
What if you are wrong and die a schismatic?
-
LM,
What if you are wrong and die a schismatic?
Are you purposely being obtuse or does it come naturally.
-
This is like fighting a man with no arms.
-
The Neo Caths don't speak our language. Their minds are mush. They think they do good. No insight.
[/b]
What language do you speak when you gloss over that Peter and the devil now share the same bed.
That phrase is meaningless. Unless you talk plainly and clearly no discussion can take place.
I asked you what to do with a man who claims the Chair of Peter and beds down with the devil, and your response is "The Neo Caths don't speak our language, etc. etc. , than come back and talk of meaningless phrases when you can't recognize your own.
-
But if you take the bad things as intentional, you have to take the good things as well. Thus BXVI intentionally freed the Mass and remitted the excomms and is changing "for all" to "for many".
So if BOTH the good and the bad are intentional it shows a confused mind or a sort of schizophrenia present (Modernism) where the Pope is holding two contradictory theses in his mind and thinks they are compatible.
A truly evil anti-pope would never have done the good things. He would have merely steered the Church more forcefully towards perdition.
I'm sure the criminal below did some good things, too.
The investigators docuмented how Rome relented only after police finally opened a 1995 criminal probe into the mountain of abuse reports — including Walsh's recent sɛҳuąƖ assault of a boy in a pub restroom following the funeral of the victim's grandfather.
-
Yes, the Pope is the moral equivalent of a serial child rapist.
Makes perfect sense...
-
Yes, the Pope is the moral equivalent of a serial child rapist.
Makes perfect sense...
The Pope looks to be in a worse spot. Below is vindication of the Apostles and Church Fathers teaching on heresy. By approving and favoring the Neocat heresy, B16 is allowing the destruction of the Creed and the Church.
Vindication of their teaching
The first law of life, be it the life of plant or animal, of man or of a society of men, is self-preservation. Neglect of self-preservation leads to ruin and destruction. But the life of a religious society, the tissue that binds its members into one body and animates them with one soul, is the symbol of faith, the creed or confession adhered to as a condition sine qua non of membership. To undo the creed is to undo the Church. The integrity of the rule of faith is more essential to the cohesion of a religious society than the strict practice of its moral precepts. For faith supplies the means of mending moral delinquencies as one of its ordinary functions, whereas the loss of faith, cutting at the root of spiritual life, is usually fatal to the soul. In fact the long list of heresiarchs contains the name of only one who came to resipiscence: Berengarius. The jealousy with which the Church guards and defends her deposit of faith is therefore identical with the instinctive duty of self-preservation and the desire to live. This instinct is by no means peculiar to the Catholic Church; being natural it is universal. All sects, denominations, confessions, schools of thought, and associations of any kind have a more or less comprehensive set of tenets on the acceptance of which membership depends. In the Catholic Church this natural law has received the sanction of Divine promulgation, as appears from the teaching of Christ and the Apostles quoted above. Freedom of thought extending to the essential beliefs of a Church is in itself a contradiction; for, by accepting membership, the members accept the essential beliefs and renounce their freedom of thought so far as these are concerned.
-
Ok, so the Pope is morally WORSE than a serial child rapist. Got it!
-
Martin .... said the report highlighted how the church had grown too powerful and arrogant in 20th century Ireland.
:good-shot: :good-shot: :good-shot: :good-shot:
Good thing the satanists have you to kick Ireland's Catholic children down to the gutter. They won't be so powerful now, will they. :good-shot: :good-shot: :good-shot: :good-shot:
St. Patrick, pray for us. :incense:
-
Ok, so the Pope is morally WORSE than a serial child rapist. Got it!
So nonchalant about the destruction of our Creed and Church, or did that fly over your head.
-
As expected, you claim I'm incorrect as to what you believe yet you refuse to explain what you believe. Thus it is your own fault if you are misrepresented.
An interesting twist.
Although it may make you feel better to have distorted my response, I do not refuse, nor have I refused, to say what I believe. Your excessively sarcastic tone throughout this thread has left me with reasonable doubt that your request to know is sincere. Do you see the difference?
FWIW, I have made 20K+ posts, here and elsewhere, in the last few years. You may rest assured I have no problem sharing my beliefs with others.
-
I'm willing to cut well meaning Sedes a break. Some of them just get on my nerves for various reasons.
There are people of all persuasions who will get on one's nerves. Such is life in this vale of tears.
How does anyone know what to do in this freaking insanity?
Presuming you mean the crisis, it is precisely the unprecedented enormity of it all that should make us grant as much latitude as possible to our fellows -- even if they disagree with us on this or that aspect.
There is no handbook for such times. We must do the best we can, assisting each other as much as we are able. Godspeed.
-
Have you been assisting me in this thread?
I sincerely want to know what you believe.
-
Yes, the Pope is the moral equivalent of a serial child rapist.
Makes perfect sense...
Of course that's not what I said ... but carry on Stevus.
-
You compared the Pope to a serial child rapist.
But carry on, SJB...
-
You would think LM would at least tread with some caution in case BXVI is actually the Pope. But he apparently has more faith in his theory than common sense to hedge his bet. Instead he treats the man as his personal dart board ascribing every possible evil intention and motive. I think you'd give your worst enemy more benefit of the doubt than Benedict. This venom usually accompanies a true schismatic.
-
Where There is No Hatred of Heresy,
There is No Holiness
by Father Frederick William Faber
Taken from his work: The Precious Blood, published in 1860.
Father Frederick Faber was one of the most eminent and beloved Catholic authors of the late 19th Century.
If we hated sin as we ought to hate it, purely, keenly, manfully, we should do more penance, we should inflict more self-punishment, we should sorrow for our sins more abidingly. Then, again, the crowning disloyalty to God is heresy. It is the sin of sins, the very loathsomest of things which God looks down upon in this malignant world. Yet how little do we understand of its excessive hatefulness! It is the polluting of God’s truth, which is the worst of all impurities.
Yet how light we make of it! We look at it, and are calm. We touch it and do not shudder. We mix with it, and have no fear. We see it touch holy things, and we have no sense of sacrilege. We breathe its odor, and show no signs of detestation or disgust. Some of us affect its friendship; and some even extenuate its guilt. We do not love God enough to be angry for His glory. We do not love men enough to be charitably truthful for their souls.
Having lost the touch, the taste, the sight, and all the senses of heavenly-mindedness, we can dwell amidst this odious plague, in imperturbable tranquillity, reconciled to its foulness, not without some boastful professions of liberal admiration, perhaps even with a solicitous show of tolerant sympathies.
Why are we so far below the old saints, and even the modern apostles of these latter times, in the abundance of our conversations? Because we have not the antique sternness? We want the old Church-spirit, the old ecclesiastical genius. Our charity is untruthful, because it is not severe; and it is unpersuasive, because it is untruthful.
We lack devotion to truth as truth, as God’s truth. Our zeal for souls is puny, because we have no zeal for God’s honor. We act as if God were complimented by conversions, instead of trembling souls rescued by a stretch of mercy.
We tell men half the truth, the half that best suits our own pusillanimity and their conceit; and then we wonder that so few are converted, and that of those few so many apostatize.
We are so weak as to be surprised that our half-truth has not succeeded so well as God’s whole truth.
Where there is no hatred of heresy, there is no holiness.
A man, who might be an apostle, becomes a fester in the Church for the want of this righteous indignation.
-
You would think LM would at least tread with some caution in case BXVI is actually the Pope. But he apparently has more faith in his theory than common sense to hedge his bet. Instead he treats the man as his personal dart board ascribing every possible evil intention and motive. I think you'd give your worst enemy more benefit of the doubt than Benedict. This venom usually accompanies a true schismatic.
Your drama queen antics are getting quite tiresome.
-
Ahh, now an article to justify hatred of the Pope due to "heresy" he's committed. Of course the "heresy" is the entire issue. I've yet to see anyone point out where a post conciliar Pope spoke unambiguous heresy without contorting out of context quotes interpreted with heretical intent. Even then the hatred of the man is so easily substituted for hatred of the perceived "heresy" as for there to be no distinction.
-
LM,
Yet another non-answer. It is telling that you completely avoid engaging me.
-
:sign-thread-hijacked:
The investigation involved tens of thousands of abuse cases from the 1940's through the 1990's.
(according to SNAP)
But lets us not become festers for lack of righteous indignation.
-
Ahh, now an article to justify hatred of the Pope due to "heresy" he's committed. Of course the "heresy" is the entire issue. I've yet to see anyone point out where a post conciliar Pope spoke unambiguous heresy without contorting out of context quotes interpreted with heretical intent. Even then the hatred of the man is so easily substituted for hatred of the perceived "heresy" as for there to be no distinction.
You've crashed and burned so many times stevus, you're smoke and ashes.
-
I've yet to see anyone point out where a post conciliar Pope spoke unambiguous heresy without contorting out of context quotes interpreted with heretical intent.
I posted some links.
-
LM,
Whatever makes you feel better.
-
LM,
Whatever makes you feel better.
Blindness/deafness does the job for you.
-
The investigation involved tens of thousands of abuse cases from the 1940's through the 1990's.
That is sad and disgusting. God alone knows the total in the entire, wicked world during the modern era. We shall soon learn just how tired He is of our wickedness and excuses.
Stevus, I am, more or less, a sede-privationist. While I cannot deny the de facto non-Catholicity of the New Religion (and those responsible for it), nor can I deny that such things have yet to be recognized where the order of law is concerned.
It is my opinion that sede-vacantism, strictly speaking, emphasizes the order of fact to the detriment of the order of law. At the same time, sede-plenism emphasizes the order of law to the detriment of the order of fact. Rightly or wrongly, I believe sede-privationism gives that which is due to each of the two orders.
-
You compared the Pope to a serial child rapist.
But carry on, SJB...
No, I merely pointed out that bad men often do objectively good things.