Wherefore, civil society must acknowledge God as its Founder and Parent, and must obey and reverence His power and authority. justice therefore forbids, and reason itself forbids, the State to be godless; or to adopt a line of action which would end in godlessness — namely, to treat the various religions (as they call them) alike, and to bestow upon them promiscuously equal rights and privileges. Since, then, the profession of one religion is necessary in the State, that religion must be professed which alone is true, and which can be recognized without difficulty, especially in Catholic States, because the marks of truth are, as it were, engraven upon it. This religion, therefore, the rulers of the State must preserve and protect, if they would provide — as they should do — with prudence and usefulness for the good of the community. For public authority exists for the welfare of those whom it governs; and, although its proximate end is to lead men to the prosperity found in this life, yet, in so doing, it ought not to diminish, but rather to increase, man’s capability of attaining to the supreme good in which his everlasting happiness consists: which never can be attained if religion be disregarded.

Everyone here knows about Pope Leo XIII's great encyclical about the nature of liberty, Libertas praestantissimum, where that pope insists that Catholicism needs to be each society's State religion. In part 21 of that encyclical, he writes:
So here's my question.  To comply with what Pope Leo teaches, should Congress amend the Constitution to remove its religiously indifferentirst First Amendment and adopt Catholicism as the State religion?  During a lecture I heard on YouTube, a hero of mine, Fr. Gregory Hesse says that America needs that amendment because in our religiously diverse country, everyone needs to get along.  But I disagree because in a Catholic confessional state, non-Catholics may practice their religions because it's immoral to force those people to become Catholic.  Your thoughts?

You also lied when you claimed that Jorge "preached against the тαℓмυd" https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/pope-francis-said-51197/msg672784/#msg672784 and that Jorge was "paraphrasing St. Paul" when Jorge said Jesus “made himself the devil.” https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/pope-francis-said-51197/msg671082/#msg671082

Just as we do not find the words, 'real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist,' or 'Transubstantiation' in the Sacred Scripture, so also it is not necessary to find the word 'тαℓмυd' when we hear Pope Francis preach against useless traditions or when he preaches on the theme of the Council of Jerusalem.

In speaking of the Jєωs, Pope St Pius X did say, "After all, there are other bonds than those of religion: courtesy and philanthropy." This sounds like a precursor to Pope Francis'  "Open Door," and "the common way,"

Not supporting the Zionist movement does not equal hatred of or hostility to the Jєωs. Pope St Pius X said so himself when he said, that from his days at Mantua he always got along well with the Jєωs.

Many Catholics (this seems to be Poche's view and perhaps Fr. Hesse's) think that we should encourage the separation of church and state because this works to the advantage of Catholics in non-Catholic countries.  This is arguably the teaching of Vatican II.  In effect, this view encourages people to believe an error in the hopes that Catholics will benefit.

This seems to me to be a case of doing evil that good may come of it.  How could it be right to encourage people to believe a false principle?  On the other hand, I can see making a case for the position that, if the state religion is not Catholicism, it is better to separate church and state.  

Poche, you cannot run away from the evidence that YOU ridicule the faith with your heresies and YOU are a serial habitual liar, even a Falsifier of Scripture.


You willfully falsified the Matthew 16:18. You substituted "you" for "it" to bolster your equally phony contention about Jorge.

Quote from: poche on November 07, 2019, 04:55:39 AM
"And the gates of Hell shall not prevail against you" -Jesus to Peter
https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/is-francis-the-pope/msg674301/#msg674301


Repeatedly you have partially quoted Pope St. Pius X to falsify his attitude toward the Jєωs. Representative examples: https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/another-gift-for-the-rabbi/msg675367/#msg675367 https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/pius-xii-and-ww2-pius-the-liberal-and-roncalli-the-conservative/msg674407/#msg674407 You willfully omitted:

"We are unable to favor this [Zionist] movement. We cannot prevent the Jєωs from going to Jerusalem, but we could never sanction it. The ground of Jerusalem, if it were not always sacred, has been sanctified by the life of Jesus Christ. As the head of the Church, I cannot answer you otherwise. The Jєωs have not recognized Our Lord; therefore, we cannot recognize the Jєωιѕн people.... If you come to Palestine and settle your people there, we will be ready with priests and churches to baptize all of you". (Pope St. Pius X)

You also lied when you claimed that Jorge "preached against the тαℓмυd" https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/pope-francis-said-51197/msg672784/#msg672784 and that Jorge was "paraphrasing St. Paul" when Jorge said Jesus “made himself the devil.” https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/pope-francis-said-51197/msg671082/#msg671082

Your father is the father of lies and murder and you do his work.

You have claimed that Jorge has “the same view” on the Jєωs as Pope St. Pius X. https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/another-gift-for-the-rabbi/msg675367/#msg675367  Directly to their faces Pope St. Pius X told the Jєωs of Jesus Christ and their need to convert. Jorge is the diametric opposite, not “the same.” Jorge confirms тαℓмυdic Jєωs in their Faith and teaches their heretical dogmas to Catholics. Several examples here: http://judaism.is/st.-francis-on-francis.html#тαℓмυdicantipope

You are Satan's lying sack of dirt… again and again.

Here is Jorge's full allocution: https://zenit.org/articles/holy-father-continues-catecheses-on-acts-of-the-apostles/

First, there is not one word about the тαℓмυd, not one stinking word.

Second, contrary to your assertion that Jorge preached "how Christianity is distinct from the Jєωιѕн religion," https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/pope-francis-said-51197/msg672784/#msg672784 Jorge uses the metaphors of "the Open Door," "the common way," "synodality,"  Instead of making a distinction, Jorge proposes an indifferentist blend of Christ and Belial: "relation between faith in Christ and the observance of the Law of Moses."  The only "relation" recognized by the perennial and infallible Magisterium is that the Law of Moses died with Christ on the Cross—and, as expected, that dogma is entirely missing in Jorge's subversion.

Third, Jorge cannot bring himself to teach de fide supersessionism, that the Law of Moses is dead, so instead he infers тαℓмυdic Noahidism: "ask them only to reject idolatry and all its expressions." So Jorge did not "preach against the тαℓмυd" as you claimed. Jorge did the exact opposite; he preached тαℓмυdic Noahidism.

"Funny how you" constructed three lies in your one run-on sentence!

Poche, you are a serial habitual liar, even a Falsifier of Scripture. Get thee behind me, Satan!