Author Topic: VII Was The Great Apostasy Change My Mind (Read 4888 times)

TheRealMcCoy · « **Reply #60 on:** October 15, 2023, 11:37:51 AM »

Quote from: Drolo on October 14, 2023, 02:52:35 PM

The Antichrist will pretend to be God, yes. 2 Thessalonians 2. But. Will the mankind do it? What is the source?

People will believe that God dwells inside of them therefore they have no need for external religion. The new age movement already teaches this. My mother died believing this yet she called herself a Christian.

Read The Lord of the World because it explains it very well.

The anti Christ will tell the world that he came to power through manifesting. It's also called the law of attraction.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #61 on:** October 15, 2023, 11:38:38 AM »

Quote from: poenitens on October 15, 2023, 08:20:34 AM

Many bishops signed VII docuмents because they didn't read them. Just like we accept the terms of use of a software without reading them.

That is not an excuse, however.

There's a wide variety of reasons. Some were foaming-at-the-mouth Modernists that wanted to go even further. Some were just non-theological dummies. You'd be surprised at how many bishops barely had more than Catechism-level knowledge of the faith, and that's why so many periti were brought in tow with them.

Some spent half their time at "Bar Jonah" and just didn't care. Their idea of being a bishop reduced to building schools and organizing after-school activities (sounds a lot like the neo-SSPX). For them, all this "doctrine" stuff didn't matter, and what mattered were PRACTICAL things like the aforementioned.

Others cared and saw the errors, the so-called Coetus conservative Fathers. But, when +Lefebvre was asked, he had gotten the impression that they were merely signing onto their having participated in the Council, as +Lefebvre had voted non placet consistently on a couple docuмents.

But there was in fact the core error that most of them missed ... the heretical Conciliar ecclesiology. Rahner rightly points out that it was by far the most revolutionary aspect of Vatican II and marveled that the conservative Fathers hadn't noticed it or made even a peep about it.

But that's because this notion that pretty much anyone can be saved had already deeply penetrated the minds of even the conservatives. We have statements of Archbishop Lefebvre that non-Catholics can be saved BY the Church (even if not IN the Church). That's identical to Rahner's "Anonymous Christian" thesis.

But once you have non-Catholics being saved, then, since it's dogma that there can be no salvation outside the Church, this means that these non-Catholics have to be IN the Church somehow ... if they can be saved. This, then, is the foundation of the V2 ecclesiology where the "Church of Christ" SUBSISTS in the Catholic Church, i.e. that the Catholic Church constitutes its visible core, but there are others who are either in or "related to" this Church in varying degrees, but inside enough to be saved.

Gloria Tibi Domine · « **Reply #62 on:** October 15, 2023, 12:33:46 PM »

Miser Peccator- I agree with you. Except, for those who signed without exact knowledge of what was in the docuмents, for whatever reason, will be held accountable by God according to their level of negligence regarding this. Since we don't know that level of negligence in this regard, only God does know this, we have to discern those signers of Vatican Council II who continued teaching this lie from those signers who didn't teach this before or after signing the docuмents.

Therefore, it can be hard to say precisely who apostatized from the faith and who signed something they should not have signed and would not have signed.

Objectively speaking, the statement about the muslims appears to be apostasy. The other consideration regarding the statement about muslims is that some of the signers were thinking they were acknowledging a truth about the muslim fake religion-the truth about that fake religion claiming to worship one God- and that is all the signers meant to do by signing.
I'm not defending the signing of the docuмents or trying to make excuses to explain away an entire hierarchy apostatizing, I'm just thinking of what variables their are to in this situation to discern who's who.

Matthew · « **Reply #63 on:** October 15, 2023, 01:26:42 PM »

Quote from: Miser Peccator on October 14, 2023, 07:53:39 AM

From what I can understand from researching the definition of Apostasy
ALL those guys who signed the docuмents
left the Catholic Church.
They denied the First Commandment and they denied Christ.
So if that wasn't the Great Apostasy what do you imagine the Great Apostasy would look like?

That's not how it works. It's not that simple.
Yes, the current Crisis in the Church is certainly *A* great apostasy. But it's not *THE* great apostasy because we're not in the right time period.

The Triumph of the Immaculate Heart hasn't happened yet.

Look at history and form a big picture in your mind. See how God works. I'll give you a hint: he does lots of foreshadowing and dress-rehearsals. And there are TONS of recapitulations, remixes, and rhyming. History doesn't repeat, but it rhymes. And certain themes play themselves out over, and over, and over again throughout the ages.

It's like a great piece of Classical music. Yes, many parts sound alike, but they are in different parts of the song for different technical reasons.

And there's only one "end of the song". No matter how often that general theme (which sounded almost identical to the end of the song) occurred in many ways throughout the song as well...

If you want to become well-informed about the End of the World and the Last Days, I suggest you read some good pre-Vatican II Catholic prophecies on the matter. Read "Catholic Prophecy", "Reign of Antichrist" and other books TAN used to put out. There may be other good collections of Catholic Tradition on this matter. Also read the Old Testament to get more familiar with how God deals with His creation over the ages.

Drolo · « **Reply #64 on:** October 15, 2023, 01:30:09 PM »

Quote from: Matthew on October 15, 2023, 01:26:42 PM

That's not how it works. It's not that simple.
Yes, the current Crisis in the Church is certainly *A* great apostasy. But it's not *THE* great apostasy because we're not in the right time period.

The Triumph of the Immaculate Heart hasn't happened yet.

Look at history and form a big picture in your mind. See how God works. I'll give you a hint: he does lots of foreshadowing and dress-rehearsals. And there are TONS of recapitulations, remixes, and rhyming. History doesn't repeat, but it rhymes. And certain themes play themselves out over, and over, and over again throughout the ages.

It's like a great piece of Classical music. Yes, many parts sound alike, but they are in different parts of the song for different technical reasons.

And there's only one "end of the song". No matter how often that general theme (which sounded almost identical to the end of the song) occurred in many ways throughout the song as well...

If you want to become well-informed about the End of the World and the Last Days, I suggest you read some good pre-Vatican II Catholic prophecies on the matter. Read "Catholic Prophecy", "Reign of Antichrist" and other books TAN used to put out. There might be others.

Why do The Triumph of the Inmaculate Heart must be before the Great Apostasy?

I will read those books. Maybe it's explained.

poenitens · « **Reply #65 on:** October 15, 2023, 01:37:00 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on October 15, 2023, 11:38:38 AM

But that's because this notion that pretty much anyone can be saved had already deeply penetrated the minds of even the conservatives. We have statements of Archbishop Lefebvre that non-Catholics can be saved BY the Church (even if not IN the Church). That's identical to Rahner's "Anonymous Christian" thesis.

I agree. I don't know if you've read this:

The native - a tract in one act (from Fr. Feeney's The Point) - The Feeneyism Ghetto - Catholic Info (cathinfo.com)

Matthew · « **Reply #66 on:** October 15, 2023, 01:37:27 PM »

Quote from: Drolo on October 15, 2023, 01:30:09 PM

Why do The Triumph of the Inmaculate Heart must be before the Great Apostasy?

I will read those books. Maybe it's explained.

Because nothing can come after it. It's literally the End of the World. Great Apostasy -> Antichrist appears -> 3 1/3 years pass -> Elias and Henoch appear and preach against AC -> these 2 are put to death by AC -> the AC is struck down by God while trying to ascend into heaven -> God wraps it all up, we all hear the Last Trump, etc. End of time, New Jerusalem, a New Heaven/New Earth, etc. Basically the last chapters of the book of the Apocalypse (a.k.a. "Revelations")

But think about it. There have been SEVERAL mass-movements of apostasy over the ages, involving millions of people (which justify the adjective "GREAT"). The Protestant Revolt, the French Revolution, the Modern World, etc.
Still no Antichrist! So we're not in THE Great Apostasy. Not yet. Just a great apostasy. No capital letters, no definite article (THE).

I'll give you another hint -- if you just look at how bad it is, whether we're in a real bad age (objectively speaking), lots of evil and apostasy in the world, you're GOING to get it wrong. That's why various Prot groups have jumped the gun on "It's the end of the world!" for centuries, up to and including the present day. They keep getting it wrong, because they don't know what else to look for, or the big picture.

Durango77 · « **Reply #67 on:** October 15, 2023, 02:28:59 PM »

Quote from: Catholic Knight on October 14, 2023, 05:21:59 PM

They did not necessarily knowingly, consciously, and willingly sign docuмents that were a public defection of the Catholic Faith. Once again, you are making a blanket statement.

So if a Bishop voted against a docuмent because they felt it contained error, and then signed it anyway, that's not knowingly? That's to say nothing that the role of the bishop is to teach the faith and govern the faithful.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #68 on:** October 15, 2023, 02:29:24 PM »

Quote from: Matthew on October 15, 2023, 01:37:27 PM

Because nothing can come after it. It's literally the End of the World. Great Apostasy -> Antichrist appears -> 3 1/3 years pass -> Elias and Henoch appear and preach against AC -> these 2 are put to death by AC -> the AC is struck down by God while trying to ascend into heaven -> God wraps it all up, we all hear the Last Trump, etc. End of time, New Jerusalem, a New Heaven/New Earth, etc. Basically the last chapters of the book of the Apocalypse (a.k.a. "Revelations")

Really the only out is that the 3 1/2 years is figurative somehow. Times can be a little strange with prophetic texts.

Nevertheless, the recurring theme in Catholic prophecy (admittedly mostly private revelation) seems to be that there would be a Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, then a period of peace, about a generation or so, before THE Antichrist shows up on the scene.

DecemRationis · « **Reply #69 on:** October 15, 2023, 03:50:36 PM »

To give an example of what a mess has been made of prophecy with talk of a yet to happen worldwide conversion and triumph of the Church (which Cardinal Manning, in the 19th Century, said had happened already, even hundreds of years before he wrote), the triumph of the Immaculate Heart, the Great Monarch, and the 3 Days of Darkness, I'll start with looking at the quote in Fr. Kramer's book from St. John Eudes, quoted by Miser in Reply #54:

This is from Fr Paul Kramer:

Quote

Quote
St. John Eudes states in his book “The Life and the Kingdom of Jesus Christ In Christian Souls”: pray especially for those who will have to suffer the persecution of the Antichrist at the end of the world for it will be the most cruel and horrible persecutions.

BUT THEN in another book called “The Admirable Heart of Mary” he goes on to explain that with the defeat of the Antichrist shall come the most glorious Triumphant period of the Church!

It goes as follows:

All the holy Fathers (16) agree that after the death of antichrist

the whole world will be converted,

and although some of them assert that the world will last but a few days after his death, while others say a few months, some authorities insist that it will continue to exist many years after. St. Catherine of Siena, St. Vincent Ferrer, St. Francis of Paula and a number of other saints have predicted this ultimate universal conversion. (16) .

Dionysius the Carthusian in cap. 3, Epist. 1 adTher.; Cornelius a Lapide in cap. 2, Epist. ad Rom. vers. 15. The Admirable Heart of Mary pg 319

Right off the bat, we have two quotes from St. John Eudes which contradict each other: a terrible persecution by Antichrist at the end of the world in one quote, and a triumph of the Church (with worldwide conversion) after the defeat of the Antichrist in the other.

Then we have the proclamation, from Eudes, that "all the holy Fathers agree" that the whole world will be converted after the Antichrist. Well, that would make me, Matthew, Cardinal Manning, St. Augustine and a host of others, who believe that Antichrist comes at the end during a horrible persecution, potential heretics for going against the unanimous consent of the Fathers. You could also throw into that fire Haydock and his Bible, for Haydock says:

Quote

He [i.e., St. Augustine} then expounds what may be understood by the binding and chaining of the devil for a thousand years; (Cap. vii. & viii, p. 581) that the thousand years, meaning a long time, may signify all the time from Christ's first coming[4] to his second at the end of the world, and to the last short persecution under antichrist.

Then what about the original annotators of the original Rheims NT, who said:

Quote

Original Rheims annotation - 2. Bound him. ] Christ by his Passion hath abridged the power of the Devil for a thousand years, that is, the whole time of the new Testament, until Antichrist's time, when he shall be loosed again, that is, be permitted to deceive the world, but for a short time only, to wit, three years and a half.

Where's the "worldwide conversion" after the Antichrist in the good Catholic bibles of Rheims and Haydock?

Then we have the influential books of Fr. Kramer and Fr. Berry, both of whom believed that there was a reign or triumph of the Church for 1,000 years after Antichrist. I don't remember what they have to say happens at the end of that 1,000 year triumph. Could it be worse than the Antichrist? I'll provide sources if necessary, but this view of Kramer and Berry is discussed in this thread:

https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/question-re-kramer's-book-of-destiny/

Here's a quote from Fr. Berry:

Quote

After the defeat of Antichrist the Gentile nations will return to the Church and the Jєωs will enter her fold. Then shall be fulfilled the words of Christ: ''There shall be one fold and one shepherd.'"

Guess we haven't yet had "one fold" and "one shepherd."

And here's Fr. Kramer:

Quote

Verse four [of Rev. 20:4] is impossible of logical interpretation for those who place the thousand years chronologically ahead of the reign of Antichrist, because its contents are a positive contradiction of that theory.

Well, not only are those of us who hold that Antichrist comes at the end or very near it, and any conversions or triumph of the Church before the Antichrist (I share Cardinal Manning's view that this triumph happened earlier, with the Church's conversion of the Roman empire and flourishing thereafter) potentially heretical for going against "the unanimous consent of all the Fathers," but we're illogical and in a "positive contradiction" with Scripture.

As I said, it's a mess.

Then there's Culleton and Dupont, with their unsourced quotes, etc. For one example, Dupont has Pope St. Pius X (or one of the 20th century Pius popes) saying something about this stuff without any citation given, and I couldn't find it anywhere despite its fairly recent genesis.

I suggest reading St. Augustine, Chapter XX of the City of God, for starters.

Proselytize · « **Reply #70 on:** October 15, 2023, 04:08:26 PM »

The Protestants also get it wrong jumping to the end of the world now because they don’t know Our Lady, they leave her out, yet she will bring in the 6th Age of the Church with the Reign of Christ the King via the portal of the 3 Dark Days.

The 3 Dark Days, when God is ready, will exorcise and cleanse the earth of most all satanic men, women, customs, etc. but a few will survive. I imagine the wicked who survive will be the devil’s tools for the 7th Age and anti-Christ.

By the way, the angels are supposed to be abundant and magnificent in the clean up efforts that will have to be done of human remains, etc. after the 3 Dark Days. The whole clean up is supposed to happen unusually fast.

So hoping to be a part of it.

Simeon · « **Reply #71 on:** October 15, 2023, 04:14:50 PM »

We interrupt this broadcast to insert a question.

This subject matter is entirely matter for speculation. Certitude dwells only in the Mind of God.

Why such zeal to force opinions on those not of like mind? Why whenever someone utters a peep, an entire phalanx of frenetic zealotry arrives - on cue - to smash it to powder?

As if such rough handling could coerce minds and hearts that think and pray.

Think and let think. Wait and see.

Michelle · « **Reply #72 on:** October 15, 2023, 04:55:23 PM »

Prophecies can be conditional depending on man's response. Our Lady at Fatima asked for the consecration of Russia to be done in 1929. She promised an Era of peace. She also stated that if it wasn't done as asked, Russia would spread her errors, raising up persecutions against the Church, nation's would be annihilated and so on.
It's clear that the will of God was for a time of peace before the antichrist but because men did not stop offending God and the Pope did not fulfill Our Ladys requests, the triumph will likely occur after the antichrist. The third secret was to be publicized by 1960, which would have happened before Vatican ll and the "french REVOLUTION" in the church.
This might explain why many saints had different opinions about the time of antichrist.
A couple other points to consider are, first, the vision of Pope Leo Xlll, when Our Lord gave Satan 100 years to try to destroy His Church.
Secondly, sister Lucy stated that Satan was in the mood for a final battle.
It doesn't seem likely to me that Our Lady will triumph only for the antichrist to turn around and triumph over her.
He will lie in wait for Her heel.

Catholic Knight · « **Reply #73 on:** October 15, 2023, 05:42:37 PM »

Quote from: Durango77 on October 15, 2023, 02:28:59 PM

So if a Bishop voted against a docuмent because they felt it contained error, and then signed it anyway, that's not knowingly? That's to say nothing that the role of the bishop is to teach the faith and govern the faithful.

Error does not equal heresy.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #74 on:** October 15, 2023, 06:08:51 PM »

Quote from: Catholic Knight on October 15, 2023, 05:42:37 PM

Error does not equal heresy.

Error does not ALWAYS equal heresy. There's real heresy in Vatican II and in the works/teachings of Joseph Ratzinger.

Author Topic: VII Was The Great Apostasy Change My Mind (Read 4888 times)

TheRealMcCoy

Re: VII Was The Great Apostasy Change My Mind

Ladislaus

Re: VII Was The Great Apostasy Change My Mind

Gloria Tibi Domine

Re: VII Was The Great Apostasy Change My Mind

Matthew

Re: VII Was The Great Apostasy Change My Mind

Drolo

Re: VII Was The Great Apostasy Change My Mind

poenitens

Re: VII Was The Great Apostasy Change My Mind

Matthew

Re: VII Was The Great Apostasy Change My Mind

Durango77

Re: VII Was The Great Apostasy Change My Mind

Ladislaus

Re: VII Was The Great Apostasy Change My Mind

DecemRationis

Re: VII Was The Great Apostasy Change My Mind

Proselytize

Re: VII Was The Great Apostasy Change My Mind

Simeon

Re: VII Was The Great Apostasy Change My Mind

Michelle

Re: VII Was The Great Apostasy Change My Mind

Catholic Knight

Re: VII Was The Great Apostasy Change My Mind

Ladislaus

Re: VII Was The Great Apostasy Change My Mind