Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
91
The Feeneyism Ghetto / Re: Will the Real Catechism of Pius X Please Stand Up?
« Last post by Struthio on Yesterday at 12:05:56 PM »
It's well known that the American Baltimore catechism of the 1800s had BOD and BOB in there, and the US bishops included them, not rome.  It would not be surprising that the US Bishops inserted BOD and BOB into Pius X's catechism as well.

BoB and BoD also were inserted ex post in the early 1800s in Bavaria, home of Adam Weishaupt, in the Catechism of St. Petrus Canisius. Differing versions are available on archive.org.

The italian wikipedia-page

https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catechismo_di_Pio_X

has a different story though on the "Catechism of Pius X." It starts with Il Catechismo di Pio X è una sintesi di un catechismo unico del Congresso Catechistico Nazionale svolto a Piacenza nel 1889 and has, as far as I could find so far, no real proof that St. Pius X approved what is sold as his Catechism. It is an odd wiki-page with more footnotes than text.
92
It's well known that the American Baltimore catechism of the 1800s had BOD and BOB in there, and the US bishops included them, not rome.  It would not be surprising that the US Bishops inserted BOD and BOB into Pius X's catechism as well. 
93
Catholic Living in the Modern World / Re: Besetting Sin
« Last post by Jaynek on Yesterday at 11:39:27 AM »
It's also called a predominant fault, or sometimes a predominant passion.
Thanks.  These seem to be the more usual terms among Catholic writers.  This is what I should be looking for.  

I've never of a besetting sin - where did you get that from? - just curious. Are you talking about habitual sin?

I suspect I must have picked it up from Protestant writers, since they seem to use the expression more than Catholics do.  Now that I have the right terminology, it will be much easier to find Catholic sources.  It's a good thing that I asked.  
94
General Discussion / Trying to find answers
« Last post by Endeavor on Yesterday at 11:35:57 AM »
This Sunday, our priest, Father James Kosek, announced he would no longer be saying Mass for us at our current location in Homer Glen, IL. He was initially under Bishop Oliver Oravec and, after his death, was under Bishop Jose Rodriguez from Mexico. Father Kosek said he found a Cardinal in Italy, and he would be under him now, but he would still say Mass in the U.S.A.
We did ask him the name of this Cardinal, and he answered that it was none of our business.
As you can imagine, this news has upset all who attend his Mass here in Illinois as well as those who attend the Mass he says in Pensacola, FL.
The question I have is, is anyone on Cathinfo familiar with who this Cardinal could be? We need to trace who ordained him and who consecrated him. Father Kosek's reluctance to tell us this information is alarming.
Thank you
95
General Discussion / World’s Largest Archdiocese Suspends All Masses
« Last post by SeanJohnson on Yesterday at 11:24:40 AM »
From the French Resistance forum:

https://resistance.vraiforum.com/t1136-L-archeveque-de-Milan-suspend-toutes-les-messes.htm

(DeepL Translation)

Archbishop of Milan suspends all Masses

You can see how churchmen are nowadays in the hands of politicians...


If these churchmen had the Faith of a St Gregory the Great, they would have rather proposed to make penitential processions...

and public pleas to ward off "the epidemic".

But as good modernists, they cannot bring themselves to see this epidemic as God's just punishment for world apostasy.


Now the Mass is the only rampart that appeases the divine anger... take away the Mass, it is the end of the world:

The Archbishop of Milan, Mario Delpini, has ordered the suspension of all Masses from the evening of Sunday, February 23rd...
until further notice.


The reason or pretext is the coronavirus that was detected in a city near Milan.

Delpini refers to an order of the President of the Lombardy Region, Attilio Fontana, and to a consultation with the Minister

Milan is the largest diocese in the world.
96
General Discussion / Re: Oldest Active CI Members?
« Last post by Jaynek on Yesterday at 11:13:38 AM »
Ah ok, my apologies to Quis.
It is an easy thing to be mistaken about.  Even at the time, it was hard to tell what was going on.  There was one person (posing as various people) telling many lies.  In addition, lots of bystanders were posting their speculations and theories, which other people then treated as facts.  I doubt anybody now could get it right simply relying on memory.

It was a rather horrible situation, but none of the trads involved did anything really bad.  We just wanted to befriend and help these (fake) people and figure out the truth.
97
The Feeneyism Ghetto / Re: Will the Real Catechism of Pius X Please Stand Up?
« Last post by Struthio on Yesterday at 11:11:44 AM »
Will the Real Catechism of Pius X Please Stand Up?

On the website of the Museo San Pio X in Salzano (Venezia) there are digital transcripts of three versions of what is called "Catechism of Pius X" including


Scanning the text for "batt"esimo (baptism), "sang"ue (blood), and "desi"derio (desire) I could not find any reference to BoB or BoD.


The other two later versions found on that site do talk about Battesimo di sangue, Battesimo di desiderio, desiderio almeno implicito etc.



98
General Discussion / Re: Oldest Active CI Members?
« Last post by Stubborn on Yesterday at 10:58:29 AM »
In my first years on trad forums, people often called for me to banned.  I was a notorious liberal much like Poche is now, although with less disturbing eating habits.
LOL
99
General Discussion / Re: Oldest Active CI Members?
« Last post by rum on Yesterday at 10:45:02 AM »
You are remembering a false rumour rather than what really happened.  Laura had created several identities, one of whom died and had a fake online obituary which stated that Quis was her fiance.  This led to a rumour about them having a romantic relationship.  The romance was just as much a lie as everything else she said.  Quis never did anything like that.  He left Vox for reasons that had nothing to do with Laura.  Given the situation, it was arguably the right thing to do.
Ah ok, my apologies to Quis.
100
Crisis in the Church / Good indicators of possible Catholicity?
« Last post by rum on Yesterday at 10:42:31 AM »
What are some good indicators of possible Catholicity?

I'll throw some out there.

Someone saying:

"I'm Catholic." -- This could include just about anyone. Too broad to be useful.
"I'm a traditional Catholic." -- Max Krah (I could give many more names) calls himself a traditional Catholic.  Not useful either.
"I believe in all the teachings of the Catholic Church." -- Including the teachings that are no longer emphasized, such as that the Jewish people are Children of the Devil? You believe that, too? Even if someone says this it doesn't tell me that I can know they're Catholic in any way but possibly a baptismal sense. What they could mean is that they believe in all the teachings given emphasis by the Novus Ordo church. The Novus Ordo has stripped Catholicism of much of the meat. That you're a good Novus Ordo Catholic means you might better be described as a noahide. Plenty of "traditional Catholics" strike me as noahides.

"I'm anti-Jewish"
"The holocaust didn't happen"

The two above could be said by many different types of people as well, so I wouldn't know, with no other information, if the person saying those two things is Catholic. There are people from all backgrounds (even some Jews) who know the holocaust is hogwash. Even saying the two statements in combination along with "I'm Catholic" still isn't enough.

"I'm Catholic."
"I'm anti-Jewish."
"The holocaust didn't happen."

In this day and age it's the best compass I can find, though it's not reliable 100% of the time. (At least 1 member on this forum says all three of these things and yet has been a big fan of a major Judaizer and holohoax promoter.) If the SSPX had used the above 3 statements as a standard from which to determine the Catholicity of leaders and laity for possible expulsion Fellay/Krah would have found it impossible, or at least much more difficult, to take over the SSPX. The SSPX would have possessed a vigilant Jew-awareness, which it lacked.

The misfortunes of the Church in recent centuries can be attributed to more than one thing, but the fact of Judaization would be at the top, or near to it.

It's likely that at some point in the future the Jews will take credit for discovering the fraud of the holohoax, and it will be forgotten how they used this fake event in all sorts of nefarious ways. The persecution of holocaust revisionists will be blamed on gentiles and a few bad Jews, with Jews not being viewed as the wizard behind the curtain. Then new litmus tests will have to be formulated based on future Jewish frauds. Jews are snakes. They shed their skin from time to time and grow a new one. Changing times require new deceits.

There's a saying that when the fortunes of the Jews are good the fortunes of the Church are dismal. And vice versa. The fortunes of the Church can be good if the Church returned to putting emphasis on the satanic nature of the Jew.
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]