Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
Let's take the recent case where about a half dozen Cardinals correctly called out Bergoglio for heresy in his "Joy of Sex" encyclical.  They are absolutely correct, and this is not rocket science.  But where's the outrage from the rest of the 99.999% of the Cardinals, bishops, and lay people?  Those who have issues with this Encyclical are also in the extreme minority.  But does that make Bergoglio's teaching universally accepted by the Church?
22
The Feeneyism Ghetto / Re: Reverend Crawford , Feeney, Dimond video
« Last post by forlorn on Today at 12:27:58 PM »
Scarcely anyone is saved today. It is not hard to see that God put those Indians there in his mercy, for had they been born in Europe they would have ended in the deepest pits of hell, which is reserved for Catholics.
A multitude of souls fall into the depths of Hell. (St. Anthony Mary Claret - It has been revealed that on the day of the death of St. Bernard there also died 79,997 other people, and of this total of 80,000 who died, only St. Bernard and two other monks were saved.)
 
99.96% of Catholics are damned? And only twice as many went to purgatory as straight to Heaven? And it also folloes that Etreme Unction is pointless, since surely at least a few thousand of the souls that died that day would've received it(any souls who died of old age, illness, or who took hours to succumb to their wounds) and were still damned regardless.

I always found that revelation hard to believe.
23
I just don't feel that those "material" Catholics factor into the equation.  Novus Ordo has taken polls themselves where 95%+ of self-described "Catholics" are heretics, and we're not talking about being in material error about some detail.  They knew Church teaching and refused it or doubted it on some core dogmas ... papal infallibility, the real presence, use of artificial birth control.  In other words, since they felt they could pick and choose from Church teaching, they did not hold the Church to be their formal rule of faith, and are therefore formal heretics.
24
Sure, and they're suspect of heresy by many good serious Catholics.  This isn't just the case of one or two crackpots floating a theory, like the guy I knew who said that Pius IX wasn't a legitimate pope.

I was just watching the +Williamson conference posted by Matthew where His Excellency outright states that Vatican II is apostasy, that Paul VI was a wicked man who imposed it on the Church with an iron fist (contrary to the theories of some that V2 was entirely optional).

Well yes, but most people would lump someone saying Pius IX wasn’t pope in the same group as those who say the conciliar popes aren’t popes.

Also, if there are 25-30k sedes in the world, out of 1.2 billion self-described/material Catholics (0.00009%), it still amounts to your “couple crackpots.”

I do realize those same people are unwitting modernists.

I just don’t think the various sede theories are anywhere near gaining a proportionately large enough following to challenge universal consent (especially as I think this term pertains to the bishops, and not laymen, in which case there are no bishops possessing office endorsing them).

Again, still trying to make sense of it all; I could be off.
25
In another thread, I offered as a possible explanation the post that the pre-conciliar popes were dogmatic facts, but the conciliar popes were not, because these latter were suspect of heresy.

Sure, and they're suspect of heresy by many good serious Catholics ... for some very real and serious reasons.  This isn't just the case of one or two crackpots floating a theory, like the guy I knew who said that Pius IX wasn't a legitimate pope.

I was just watching the +Williamson conference posted by Matthew where His Excellency outright states that Vatican II is apostasy, that Paul VI was a wicked man who imposed it on the Church with an iron fist (contrary to the theories of some that V2 was entirely optional).
26
I don’t think the definition of dogmatic fact was ever intended to apply to men who cast doubt on their own legitimacy. When tens of thousands of Catholics are having doubts about the legitimacy of the Conciliar popes, it is already long past the window of applicability for that particular doctrine.  And it’s not just a few cranky laymen.  Hundreds of clergy are having doubts too if they haven’t already come to the conclusion that the see is empty.

Hi CM-

In another thread, I offered as a possible explanation the post that the pre-conciliar popes were dogmatic facts, but the conciliar popes were not, because these latter were suspect of heresy.

But that’s just me trying to make sense of how Lefebvre could have countenanced the possibility of sedevacantism, in light of the teaching of Billot which he himself quoted on another occasion, making the universal consent argument.

But I am not sure that I can find any theologians making the same argument.

To be honest, I think I would be more inclined to accept the common teaching of the pre-conciliar over a contrary Lefebvre (preferring to believe the latter sometimes said things in the heat of the moment which ran contrary to his more common teachings/positions, as Michael Davies said the Archbishop admitted to doing in Apologia (Vol. II, Ch. 40).

Obviously, I could be off base here, and am still trying to make sense of all this .
27
Crisis in the Church / Re: Prophecy of st nilus
« Last post by Maria Regina on Today at 11:54:47 AM »
Anyone know if it is accurate
It says in end times God will deprive the world of the holy ghost?



Quote
St. Nilus:

At that future time, due to the power of such great crimes and licentiousness, people will be deprived of the grace of the Holy Spirit, which they received in Holy Baptism and equally of remorse.


This only applies to those who have fallen into serious sin (great crimes and licentiousness). We can see this in Nancy Pelosi from California. She is supposedly Catholic, but pushes abortion, infanticide, etc.

Quote
St. Nilus:

The Churches of God will be deprived of God-fearing and pious pastors, and woe to the Christians remaining in the world at that time; they will completely lose their faith because they will lack the opportunity of seeing the light of knowledge from anyone at all. Then they will separate themselves out of the world in holy refuges in search of lightening their spiritual sufferings, but everywhere they will meet obstacles and constraints.

A small remnant will still worship Christ in secret, in caves. The Holy Spirit will be present among them and will guide the few who are being saved.


Quote
St. Nilus:

Then the All-good God will see the downfall of the human race and will shorten the days for the sake of those few who are being saved ...

28
This man belongs in a seminary, forming generations of priests.  What a crime that the SSPX ousted him.
29
I struggle to believe there were zero of them in America before Columbus.  Maybe god did a miracle but idk
Scarcely anyone is saved today. It is not hard to see that God put those Indians there in his mercy, for had they been born in Europe they would have ended in the deepest pits of hell, which is reserved for Catholics.
A multitude of souls fall into the depths of Hell. (St. Anthony Mary Claret - It has been revealed that on the day of the death of St. Bernard there also died 79,997 other people, and of this total of 80,000 who died, only St. Bernard and two other monks were saved.)
 
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10