Author Topic: Do Jєωs and Muslims Decide the Conditions for the Recognition of the SSPX? (Read 1956 times)

Maria Auxiliadora · « **on:** August 08, 2016, 05:06:18 AM »

This article from The Eponymous Flower contains an article from the American Jєωιѕн Commitee:

http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2016/08/do-Jєωs-and-muslims-decide-conditions.html

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #1 on:** August 08, 2016, 05:44:11 AM »

Quote

"The international Islamic community follows closely the development of this convergence process of the SSPX for reintegration into the Catholic Church. It is about the sensitivity to find a coherence regarding the pastoral implications of the outcome of the Council and of the docuмent Nostra Aetate. While Pope Francis and the Catholic Church, together with the spiritual authorities of many other religious denominations, celebrate the prophetic value of this Council that initiated the historical cycle of 50 intense years of inter-religious and ecuмenical dialogue on providential way, the SSPX appears to downplay at least the this path and this orientation to maintain a traditionalist interpretation that actually denies the spiritual need of respect and fellowship with believers and other confessions believing in a God. In a moment of dramatic international crisis in which the manipulation of religion becomes a hostage of some fundamentalist groups, there seems to arise a claim of 'legitimate violence' against Muslims, Christians and Jєωs, concerns us and the anachronism and the lack of sensitivity of movements that the Society even wants to force the Church or to teach a different hierarchy of values, than the Council and obedience to the saints and the popes."

The Truth at last: "Convergence". Are +Fellay and leadership the only ones not to know their "reintegration into the Catholic Church" it is nothing but a "convergence process" as any other non Catholic religions into the OWC? Or, do they know?

Last Tradhican · « **Reply #2 on:** August 08, 2016, 08:17:14 AM »

Quote from: Maria Auxiliadora

This article from The Eponymous Flower contains an article from the American Jєωιѕн Commitee:

http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2016/08/do-Jєωs-and-muslims-decide-conditions.html

Very enlightening article. Thanks

Barry · « **Reply #3 on:** August 08, 2016, 10:53:18 AM »

Bishop Bernard F'Allah', anyone? Would that show sensitivity and convergence?

Wessex · « **Reply #4 on:** August 08, 2016, 06:45:38 PM »

This is another reason why Catholics should distance themselves from modern Rome. That participants in the establishment of the new religion would insist on their say was to be expected especially if anything were to undermine that subversive influence. Bp. Fellay knew this and has over the years made the Society less opposed to other religions.

This new situation in Rome where others have a veto on policy strongly reflects the void that the Church used to fill. How can the occupants claim that unique authority and convince us that they are acting in the name of the Church? They can only speak for that new worldly construct. But it is comforting knowing that these predatory Semites are less sure of their victory in the West and that the tide may be turning although this unholy alliance is thought more highly in Rome than groups of Catholics.

Matto · « **Reply #5 on:** August 08, 2016, 07:47:15 PM »

thought this was an interesting comment by one of the readers of the article:

TexanaAugust 8, 2016 at 2:18 PM
Interesting that Archbishop Pozzo also wants SSPX to recognize the validity of Novus Ordo episcopal consecrations. They want to terminate the true line of Roman Catholic Apostolic Succession!

songbird · « **Reply #6 on:** August 08, 2016, 10:12:01 PM »

Wow! No wonder the priest want the children in their schools, only!

RomanCatholic1953 · « **Reply #7 on:** August 08, 2016, 10:23:21 PM »

Why do any false religions have any say in the affairs in the Catholic Church?

Incredulous · « **Reply #8 on:** August 08, 2016, 11:05:40 PM »

Quote from: RomanCatholic1953

Why do any false religions have any say in the affairs in the Catholic Church?

Hope this suffices as an overview explanation:

1. The Jєωs are the seedbag of all heresies, said St. Pope Pius V.

2. The Jєωs instituted Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ and more recently, used their secret societies to infiltrate the Catholic Church from the time of Pope Leo XIII and before.

3. 70 years later, the resulting Consiliar (schismatic) church is run by the Freemasons.

4. Converging all the heresies into a one world religion has always been the plan.

5. Bp Fellay is merely acting as the "Judas goat" to herd remnant Catholics into the one-world fold.

That's why you're seeing false religions have their say.

OHCA · « **Reply #9 on:** August 09, 2016, 01:27:32 AM »

Quote from: RomanCatholic1953

Why do any false religions have any say in the affairs in the Catholic Church?

Good question to ask Montini (perhaps a mason) who inflicted upon the faithful the "mess" fabricated by Bugnini (probable mason) and his committee of 6 heretical ministers and a kike.

OHCA · « **Reply #10 on:** August 09, 2016, 01:32:09 AM »

There's a quote in the article claiming that "deicide" was refuted by the Council of Trent. Any idea of what the basis of that assertion is? Anybody schooled on the subject sufficiently to say whether the claim in the article is just another kike lie?

Incredulous · « **Reply #11 on:** August 09, 2016, 03:00:19 AM »

"Kike" Etymology (Wiki)

The earliest recorded uses of the word were in 1900[1] and 1904.[2][3]

The source of the term is uncertain, but the Encyclopedia of Swearing stated the most reasonable and most likely origin of the term is the one proposed by Leo Rosten,[4] according to whom:

The word kike was born on Ellis Island when there were Jєωιѕн migrants who were also illiterate (or could not use Latin alphabet letters). When asked to sign the entry-forms with the customary "X", the Jєωιѕн immigrants would refuse, because they associated an X with the cross of Christianity. Instead, they drew a circle as the signature on the entry-forms. The Yiddish word for "circle" is kikel (pronounced ky-kul), and for "little circle", kikeleh (pronounced ky-kul-uh). Before long the immigration inspectors were calling anyone who signed with an "O" in place of an "X" a kikel or kikeleh or kikee or, finally and succinctly, kike.[5]

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, it may be an alteration of the endings –ki or –ky common in the personal names of Jєωs in eastern Europe who immigrated to the United States in the early 20th century.[2]

A variation or expansion of this theory published in Our Crowd, by Stephen Birmingham, postulates that the term "kike" was coined as a put-down by the assimilated U.S. Jєωs from Germany to identify eastern European and Russian Jєωs: "Because many Russian [Jєωιѕн] names ended in 'ki', they were called 'kikes'—a German Jєωιѕн contribution to the American vernacular. The name then proceeded to be co-opted by non-Jєωs as it gained prominence in its usage in society, and was later used as a general derogatory slur."

Compounding the mysterious origin of this term, in 1864 in the UK the word ike or ikey was used as a derogatory term for Jєωs, which derived from the name "Isaac", a common Jєωιѕн name.[4][6]