tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post6839059074734319971..comments2023-10-05T08:25:13.232-04:00Comments on Biblical Evidence for Catholicism: Robert Sungenis' Blistering Attacks and Slanders on the Church, and Popes St. John Paul the Great and Benedict XVIDave Armstronghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comBlogger83125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-68571688949563308802011-05-27T15:47:09.703-04:002011-05-27T15:47:09.703-04:00I'll tell you the little secret though about A...<i>I'll tell you the little secret though about Armstrong. He simply CAN'T refute Sungenis on a variety of points because to do so he would be speaking in direct opposition to Holy Tradition. And I don't think when it comes down to it he wants to go there.</i><br /><br />Right. One only has so much time to spend refuting nonsense (if it is worth dealing with it at all). To me his current rantings are self-evidently ridiculous. I don't spend time on nonsense. I simply expose it. I have the same exact policy with anti-Catholic Protestants. Bob is an anti-Catholic Catholic. What is more ludicrous than that, I ask? A house divided against itself cannot stand.<br /><br />But I have dealt in depth with several of Bob's errors, such as his view that an omniscient God can change His mind, etc. You can see the posts on my "Traditionalism" page where Bob has his own section.Dave Armstronghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-28434568771396864212011-05-23T20:58:22.050-04:002011-05-23T20:58:22.050-04:00Assai
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assai
Assai m...<b>Assai</b><br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assai<br /><br />Assai may mean:<br /><br />Assai in musical terminology, meaning "very"<br /><br />Euterpe, a genus of palms commonly called Açaí or Assai Palm<br /><br /><br /><b>Assisi</b><br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assisi<br /><br />Assisi (Italian pronunciation: [asˈsiːzi], from the Latin: Asisium) is a town and comune of Italy in the province of Perugia in the Umbria region, on the western flank of Monte Subasio.<br /><br />It was the birthplace of St. Francis, who founded the Franciscan religious order in the town in 1208, and St. Clare (Chiara d'Offreducci), the founder of the Poor Sisters, which later became the Order of Poor Clares after her death. The 19th-century Saint Gabriel of Our Lady of Sorrows was also born in Assisi.Confiteborhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17951083063448447552noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-41171163947306752792011-05-23T15:18:31.854-04:002011-05-23T15:18:31.854-04:00scotju said...
Dan, you claim Assai purpose was to...<b><i>scotju said...<br />Dan, you claim Assai purpose was to expose the beknighted heathen, infidels, and pagans to the Christian faith. We needed Assai to do this?</i></b><br /><br />Yes. We need everyone to do this, especially in a very public way like at Assisi. It's not a question of "Don't we have enough evangelism going on?" No. Never. Jesus didn't say we can just ignore some methods of bringing people to Him as long as other people are working hard in other areas. He wants all people to be on mission, and for a very public person like the Pope, that is going to involve very public gatherings of non-Catholic people -- but He brought them to a Catholic place to pray for the common good -- and THAT, sir, is ALWAYS for the conversion of sinners.<br /><br /><b><i>Bl.JPII needed Assai to stroke his ego as the Pope everybody luvs.</i></b><br /><br />All I need to do to refute this absurd remark is repeat it, and it refutes itself.<br /><br /><b><i>So what if the pagans splaced their Satanic idols on the altars of a Christian Church and prayed to what were no gods at all, the impottant thing was, according to folks like you, was to give a witness to the Christian Faith.</i></b><br /><br />People who pray to a being they believe to be God are doing the best they know how. That is a GOOD thing, not a bad thing; for the Pope to bring them to a place of *true* prayer may stir something in their souls. A person who sincerely tries to find God, however feebly, may perceive more clearly what his true purpose is, when he sees the splendor of *true* religion in a place like Assisi.<br /><br /><b><i>It's a pity the deluded pagans at Assai didn't see it the way you do!</i></b><br /><br />We do not know how God touched their hearts that day. Certainly they were not harmed by prayer before the Eucharist; if God is working on them, you do not know it.<br /><br />But even if NO ONE converted because of Assisi, that is no different from other works of the apostolate -- the majority of the time, very few people listen to the missionary. But the missionary did his job.<br /><br />We should not judge our efforts by the standard of success but by the standard of faithfulness to the Great Commission. The Pope at least did what people are commanded by Jesus to do, in the only way a Pope can do it; no one else could have brought together the multitudes of religious leaders, and shown them the true faith, like he did. But he did.dmar198https://www.blogger.com/profile/11913009400701162605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-56963295798947647292011-05-23T14:58:46.341-04:002011-05-23T14:58:46.341-04:00Dan, you claim Assai purpose was to expose the bek...Dan, you claim Assai purpose was to expose the beknighted heathen, infidels, and pagans to the Christian faith. We needed Assai to do this? The last time I looked we have church services that are open to everybody, tv and radio programs that proclaim the gospel 24/7 and missionaries and evangelist who go, at the risk of their lives, to proclaim Jesus Christ as the only savior to the world. We needed Assai to do this? No, Bl.JPII needed Assai to stroke his ego as the Pope everybody luvs. So what if the pagans splaced their Satanic idols on the altars of a Christian Church and prayed to what were no gods at all, the impottant thing was, according to folks like you, was to give a witness to the Christian Faith. It's a pity the deluded pagans at Assai didn't see it the way you do!Steve "scotju" Daltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17864544146213840928noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-69306625043108351922011-05-23T13:25:18.052-04:002011-05-23T13:25:18.052-04:00Armstrongiswrong said...
So you are saying that a ...<b><i>Armstrongiswrong said...<br />So you are saying that a Council (that never employed Infalliblity) actually called for peoples of all religions to get together and pray to their respective deities and devils along side those who call upon the One, True, God?</i></b><br /><br />That is not an accurate summation of our stance. A Council (protected from error by the Holy Spirit) called upon Christians to acknowledge the good in other religions and to cooperate with them toward promoting the common good. By inviting members of other religions to worship alongside Catholics in such a holy place as Assisi, the Pope was exposing people to the holy Catholic faith -- showing our faith to THE LEADERS of these other religions, no less -- people who might never otherwise have seen it firsthand. It was an "evangelism moment." You'll notice that the Day of Peace wasn't held at the Great Mosque, or at the Wailing Wall, but at **Assisi**, the home-town of one of the Church's greatest evangelists.<br /><br />Inviting members of other religions to pray at Assisi is not the same thing as inviting them to adore false gods. Someone who prays to a false god, if they are doing the best they know how, is not even sinning -- he is doing the best that he knows how. The Pope was right to call them to Assisi because, not only did he promote what was good in other religions, but he encouraged them to do it in a Catholic location, where they would be exposed to the beauty and truth of Catholic prayer, and perhaps see that their own attempts to pray, though sincere, fall far below the prayer that our Lord Jesus invites us to pray. And with that knowledge, these other men might be led to the Church they saw in action.dmar198https://www.blogger.com/profile/11913009400701162605noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-77276123348728856542011-05-23T02:40:50.264-04:002011-05-23T02:40:50.264-04:00Ai ai ai ai ai ai!
And the Rad-Trads are off agai...Ai ai ai ai ai ai!<br /><br />And the Rad-Trads are off again!Jedinovicehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16401504300105353435noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-49779953911692760202011-05-22T17:23:59.455-04:002011-05-22T17:23:59.455-04:00"And I don't think when it comes down to ..."And I don't think when it comes down to it he wants to go there."<br /><br />That's because they're rabbit trails.Jim Patonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16468940799078913115noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-63055415949074625402011-05-22T02:40:32.015-04:002011-05-22T02:40:32.015-04:00Asserted: "Rad-Trads are single issue campaig...Asserted: "Rad-Trads are single issue campaigners which is why defending JPII or any post Vatican II Pope is pointless because it is not really where they are coming from. Dave is right not to engage with Rad-Trads because they cannot be satisfied on their own terms. Of course, they are not supposed to be satisfied by their own terms but that means changing the terms of the debate from liturgy and 'reverence' to more fundemental issues of obedience, humility and faith... which never happens."<br /><br />Possibly in the case of the SSPX. But for the rest of us who think Sungenis is right in speaking out this assertion is purely fallacious. The issue is and has been that of heresy or orthodoxy. Holiness or scandal. The liturgy is an important issue but it isn't even close to the only or main one.<br /><br />I'll tell you the little secret though about Armstrong. He simply CAN'T refute Sungenis on a variety of points because to do so he would be speaking in direct opposition to Holy Tradition. And I don't think when it comes down to it he wants to go there.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-51917520298531221062011-05-22T02:32:12.415-04:002011-05-22T02:32:12.415-04:00JM: Where did JPII get the precedent of Assisi con...JM: Where did JPII get the precedent of Assisi conference?<br /><br />Answer: From an Ecumenical Council."<br /><br />Question: This is quite a scandalous assertion. So you are saying that a Council (that never employed Infalliblity) actually called for peoples of all religions to get together and pray to their respective deities and devils along side those who call upon the One, True, God? I would not want to answer to God on judgment day for such an assertion.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-86526950573536947022011-05-22T02:25:34.991-04:002011-05-22T02:25:34.991-04:00Armstrong: "If Bob comes here and challenges ...Armstrong: "If Bob comes here and challenges me to refute his endless tomes, I'll tell him the same thing I've been telling him and everyone else. Not interested . . . have better things to do."<br /><br />Read: "I can't refute Bob. Besides, why refute Bob when you can ATTACK Bob and paint him as a sedevacantist-in-the-making?"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-63235780230733498492011-04-30T17:38:52.845-04:002011-04-30T17:38:52.845-04:00Sungenis Returning to the Church:
“But the Lord r...Sungenis Returning to the Church:<br /><br />“But the Lord rescued me from my wanderings. What heavenly irony that he chose to use former Evangelical anti-Catholics…Scott and Kimberly Hahn, Thomas Howard...and others – to show me the way back home to Rome” (p. 117)<br /><br />“As I sifted through the pile of Catholic books Bob [Swenson] and Gerry [Hoffman] sent me, the first thing I re-examined was the Protestant concept of sola scriptura…it was like a slap in the face to realize the truth of the Catholic claim that sola scriptura is a false doctrine…As I studied the Catholic case against sola scriptura I knew instinctively that the whole debate between Catholicism and Protestantism could be boiled down to authority.” (p. 117)<br /><br />“After all the anti-Catholic propaganda to which I had been exposed in my Protestant years, what I found in the Catholic Church were the most reasonable and trustworthy interpretations of Scripture I had ever seen. It was this faithfulness to Scripture that sealed my decision to enter the Catholic Church.” (p. 126)<br /><br />Do you see anything in there that sounds like the new story he’s telling his ultra-trad friends?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-21108780377871500612011-04-30T17:36:47.252-04:002011-04-30T17:36:47.252-04:00Sungenis Leaving the Church:
(From Surprised by T...Sungenis Leaving the Church:<br /><br />(From Surprised by Truth)<br /><br />“I never took the time or had the motivation to really understand Catholicism.” (p. 104)<br /><br />“I made friends with the wrong crowd and promptly fell away from the Church. I soon found myself floundering with no sense of direction…” (pp 104-105)<br /><br />“I continued to attended [sic] the Catholic church [sic] in my neighborhood in Washington D.C. At this point I wasn’t trying to figure out whether the Catholic Church was the true Church…One Saturday evening I found a call-in radio program in which the host was answering Bible-related questions. I was enthralled…at one point in the show, a particular doctrine of the Catholic Church was the topic of discussion. The host informed his audience that this particular Catholic belief was ‘unbiblical,’ and offered a few verses to support his claim. I naively agreed with his arguments and, without realizing it just then, took my first step away from the Catholic Church. I found myself wanting to do what this teaching was doing – be on the radio...” (p. 107)<br /><br />“Not long after this, I met with some well-intentioned Protestants who, once they found out I was Catholic, persuaded me that the Catholic Church was too steeped in meaningless ritual and corrupt traditions and had strayed far from the Bible. They convinced me that what I really wanted was a simple faith, a ‘biblical’ faith that I couldn’t enjoy within the strictures of Catholicism - just me, Jesus and the Bible. My newfound love for Jesus and the Bible coincided with a rejection of the Catholic Church, which I thought had ‘hidden’ Jesus from me – a notion my Protestant friends egged me on to believe. My weak moorings in the Catholic Church were easily cut under the sharp knife of their anti-Catholic arguments, and I soon found myself no longer a Catholic. I had accepted the Protestant recipe for eternal happiness and began to grope my way toward what I hoped would be a vibrant relationship with Jesus, not realizing that each step was leading me away from his Church…I didn’t merely drift away…I developed a robust hatred for Catholicism…seeing it as a deception, a diabolical detour which led souls away from Christ by entangling them in a morass of ritual, legalism and unbiblical traditions of men.” (pp 107-108)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-66405886521844774662011-04-30T17:34:03.749-04:002011-04-30T17:34:03.749-04:00After finding out that the voodoo/snake/cucumber s...After finding out that the voodoo/snake/cucumber story was bunk, I went back and looked over some of the other things Sungenis wrote about all this.<br /><br />Another thing that hit me was this exchange:<br /> <br />Dejak: “Sungenis has an interesting history which, while not dispositive of his current position, may explain some of his oddities. He rejected the Catholic faith of his youth to become a Protestant pastor and teacher for a number of years…”<br /><br />Sungenis: “No, I didn’t reject the Catholic faith. I rejected the perversion of the Catholic faith I saw coming out of Vatican II’s aftermath. The Catholic faith of tradition I loved, but I couldn’t stand the monster that was created in the 1960s, 70s and 80s. Too bad I was too young and naïve not to see the difference back then. I came back to the Catholic Church to help it retrieve its original doctrines and practices.”<br /><br />I remembered enough of his conversion story in Surprised by Truth to know that this didn’t sound familiar so I went and checked it. At least if you believe what he wrote back then, then his new story here is made up. Maybe he thinks this story will make him look good to his new fringe ultra-trad friends? For his sake, I hope they don’t ever read his own conversion story to see what really led him out of the Church and back into it because it’s not exactly the kind of story that will go over big with them. One of the main reasons he left was because he hated the ritual and traditions of the Catholic Church and thought they were from the Devil. Another was just because he was lazy and never took the time to learn the faith. And who rescued him and brought him back to the Church? The ultra-trads? Nope. People like Scott and Kimberly Hahn. And that's all according to Sungenis himself, at least before he went back to being ultra-trad again.<br /><br />It’s too bad that he can’t seem to stay calm and humble long enough to be happy anywhere for long.<br /><br />(continued)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-17360294116588029392011-04-28T00:25:14.681-04:002011-04-28T00:25:14.681-04:00It was only a question of time before Sungenis cou...It was only a question of time before Sungenis couldn't restrain himself any longer in regard to attacking popes. All of his friends and associates who had any common sense and willingness to correct him left some years ago and so he now has only adulators around him who tickle his ears.<br /><br />So much for his "Open Letter" of Sept 18, 2006:<br /><br />R. Sungenis: “In case you haven’t noticed, CAI has also made a shift to the middle of the theological spectrum. Beginning in 2002, CAI embraced the more traditional side of the Catholic faith. There are many things we like about traditionalism, but we also found that there are also many dangers. Traditionalism, because of the distance it creates between itself and the pope, has bred many and varied reactions to the papacy, from the schism of the SSPX to outright rejection of the papacy advocated by sedevacantism, none of which we can sanction and some of which we deplore.” <br /><br />“Recently we posted an answer on our Q&A board that we sincerely regret the manner in which we often spoke about John Paul II. At times there was much disrespect for him. Even though we still have trouble with some of the things John Paul did, in many cases we simply did not express our objections in the best way. In the future, only when our words contain the utmost respect and recognition of the dignity of the pope’s office will we ever offer our comments on his actions.”<br /><br />And in regard to Pope Benedict XVI, it was obvious that his "obedience" and "respect" was only to the extent that Benedict agreed with him. The reality is that Sungenis is his own pope. <br /><br />R. Sungenis: "The reason I don’t publicly condemn Benedict XVI is because he hasn’t done anything even close to what John Paul II did." (2/6/07)<br /><br />http://web.archive.org/web/20070214084305/http://www.catholicintl.com/book-recomendation/palmweb.pdf<br /><br />R. Sungenis: "Now that we have a new pope, and one that I see is a lot more sensible, I have a renewed faith in the pope." (Sept. 2006)<br /><br />http://web.archive.org/web/20070103234952/http://www.catholicintl.com/qa/2006/qa-sept-06.htm<br /><br />If you read his autobiographical conversion story in Suprised by Truth, you'll see that he's done the same thing everywhere he's gone. He goes from place to place and incites fights because of his arrogance and temper. Inside, he really thinks that he should be the Pope. But because that isn't possible, he's found something even better: he's playing the part of the "prophet" who corrects the pope.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-89230073793611260112011-04-27T05:51:39.697-04:002011-04-27T05:51:39.697-04:00@Adomnan
"It was the Freemasons. Am I right,...@Adomnan<br /><br />"It was the Freemasons. Am I right, john martin?"<br /><br />Looks like the toffee's are staying put for now :)Jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04608918306750440883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-27348820998914510532011-04-27T03:17:26.345-04:002011-04-27T03:17:26.345-04:00Here is a good article that covers the major issue...Here is a good article that covers the major issues which should prohibit JPII being beatified - <br /><br />http://www.dici.org/en/documents/a-statement-of-reservations-concerning-the-impending-beatification-of-pope-john-paul-ii/john martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06660610295915450085noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-61826387192572023522011-04-27T02:53:30.442-04:002011-04-27T02:53:30.442-04:00Answer: From an Ecumenical Council.
Counter answ...Answer: From an Ecumenical Council. <br /><br />Counter answer - the quotes were analyzed and nothing was provided in the ecumenical council other than some vague statements on some truth in other religions. This in no way provides an objective foundation for praying with false religions, especially after a consecration has already been done for world peace. <br /><br />Anyone following JPII could easily come to the conclusion that JPII thought the consecration didn't work and that's why we all needed the Assisi gathering. Evidently either heaven wasn't working well enough to obtain world peace, or JPII didn't do what he was supposed to do - consecrate Russia to the immaculate heart. <br /><br />Even so, why did JPII think he needed to consecrate the world after other Popes had already done consecrations? Do we really need this consecration festival for heaven to work? Will Benedict XVI do yet another consecration because the others weren't getting through to heaven?<br /><br />Where does all this Papal disobedience end? Does it end when the anti Christ comes to persecute the church? Or, does it end when one Pope takes Fatima seriously and does the right thing . . . the consecration of Russia, that was supposed to happen nearly 100 years ago.<br /><br />Evidently the Popes have chosen the low road of disobedience (or at least acting on very bad advice) in the face of instructions given at Fatima, otherwise Russia would have been converted to the Catholic faith by now.<br /><br />The non conversion of Russia to the Catholic faith is an outstanding example of why recent Popes cannot be beatified due to Papal disobedience to the commands of heaven made at Fatima.<br /><br />How can anyone take the Papal consecrations seriously when we see such widespread secularism and Satanism in Russia today?<br /><br />Were recent Pope genuine Popes - yes.<br /><br />Is Vatican II a genuine ecumenical council - yes.<br /><br />Have modern Popes done much good for the church - yes.<br /><br />Have modern Popes consecrated Russia to the immaculate heart of Mary as required at Fatima - a resounding no.john martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06660610295915450085noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-51748421953893819072011-04-27T02:13:00.537-04:002011-04-27T02:13:00.537-04:00Hi all,
Jae asked, "Who is the right entity ...Hi all,<br /><br />Jae asked, "Who is the right entity to interpret Sacred Tradition?"<br /><br />The correct answer is, of course ...<br /><br />☞ The “Magisterium of the Catholic Church.” ☜ <br /> <br />That's certainly how St. Bernard - to name just one Father and Doctor - saw things - see page 67 of <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=lj_CNqojMV8C&pg=PA67&dq=%22turn+to+those+specifically+charged+with+teaching+them+the+ways+of+truth+and+justice:+their+clergy%22&hl=en&ei=wJy3TazzFYnf0QHB7qzVCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22turn%20to%20those%20specifically%20charged%20with%20teaching%20them%20the%20ways%20of%20truth%20and%20justice%3A%20their%20clergy%22&f=false" rel="nofollow"> this book </a> (might also <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=f2lKAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA705&dq=bernard+%22Bishop+of+the+world%22&hl=en&ei=-7t1Tci1Ooa0lQeUh8z8Bw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22Bishop%20of%20the%20world%22&f=false" rel="nofollow">check out p. 705 of this book</a>.<br /><br />As to all this business about praying with Pagans, non-Christians, etc, and the related topic of “salvation outside the Church,” I think maybe Augustine has a few comments we all should note. In the book below, some pages are not shown in preview, but the author of this work is clearly referring to Augustine’s letter to Deogratias <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=FnnvO743FlwC&pg=PA118&dq=%22written+between+406+and+412%22+letter&hl=en&ei=2q-3TbrDDaTs0gGGmbkD&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CE8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22written%20between%20406%20and%20412%22%20letter&f=false" rel="nofollow">(letter 102) </a>. <br /><br />Here's <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=jg7ZOUWnHeMC&pg=PA20&dq=augustine+salvation+pagans+%22letter+102%22&hl=en&ei=35-3TaSlIKjZ0QHEoOgF&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=augustine%20salvation%20pagans%20%22letter%20102%22&f=false" rel="nofollow">Letter 102</a> with some introductory remarks.Benhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16971132944684765473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-45565606917373073772011-04-26T23:39:38.583-04:002011-04-26T23:39:38.583-04:00JM, "If you carefully read Sungenis, he USES ...JM, "If you carefully read Sungenis, he USES Catholic tradition as a measure to judge JPII's actions such as the Assisi meetings".<br /><br />Noticed the word "USES"... by whom? According to whom? Who is the right entity to interpret Sacred Tradition?<br /><br />Choose one:<br /><br />1. Dr. Sungenis/SSPX/Sede<br /><br />2. Magisterium of the Catholic Church<br /><br />Where did JPII get the precedent of Assisi conference? <br /><br />Answer: From an Ecumenical Council.Jaehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08949794711507726903noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-7273140475038757992011-04-26T21:02:46.041-04:002011-04-26T21:02:46.041-04:00Jim Paton: I don't have a million in the bank....Jim Paton: I don't have a million in the bank. But if anyone can tell me who cut short JPI's life, I will send them a bag of highland toffee's. A bag of these beauties are as good as million in the bank. How does that sound? :)<br /><br />Adomnan: Sounds delicious.<br /><br />It was the Freemasons. Am I right, john martin?Adomnanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15746373228302022418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-72053541434245366292011-04-26T20:40:42.079-04:002011-04-26T20:40:42.079-04:00This speculation about Robert becoming a sede is o...This speculation about Robert becoming a sede is only speculation. <br /><br />Then again what do we do with JPII's praying with animists in West Africa in 1985? JPII said " “the prayer meeting in the sanctuary at Lake Togo was <br />particularly striking. There I prayed for the first time with animists.”<br /><br />Does this mean praying with false religions to false gods is now permissible because the Pope has done this in public and thought there was nothing wrong with this?<br /><br />If there is a problem with this, why then can the Pope do it as head of the church and in public and the rest of the faithful cannot?<br /><br />If there is no problem with praying with animists, why is it that JPII is the first Pope to do so in 2000 years of Catholic history? Are all the other Popes completely deluded or thoroughly inept at understanding such a simple principle as - its ok to pray with false religions for something we know is due to a misunderstanding or sin concerning the nature of the true God?<br /><br />It seems far more likely that all the other Popes got it right and did not pray in public with false religions and JPII has freely chosen to act outside this clear Catholic tradition.<br /><br />Where do we see any apostle pray with false religions? The only possible candidate is pray in the temple, but this is an exceptional time whereby God granted a time for a decision to be made concerning the end of the old covenant. The Jews were given about 40 years to make up their minds about Christ and the value of the temple with its priesthood. During this short time, God permitted relations between Catholics and Jews to continue to encourage the Jews to convert. after the temple was destroyed, there was no longer any excuse for Jew to remain Jews and continue to pray to a God that had now fully revealed himself as the Trinity.<br /><br />Any example other than this short and rather specific situation in salvation history is only an exception. There are no other examples of Israel, the prophets or the NT church members legitimately praying with false religions. Furthermore, every time Israel engaged in false worship it only brought condemnation and never blessing.<br /><br />Once we look at these events with JPII and his novel prayer meetings after he supposedly consecrated the world to the immaculate heart of Mary. Why did JPII feel the need to have these false religions gather together when he had already made his consecration? Is it evident that world peace did not come about as promised at Fatima? Is it that JPII’s consecration was not done properly and therefore Russia has not converted to the faith and world peace was not given as a blessing for the failed consecration? If JPII’s consecration was done properly, why hasn’t heaven acted to bring world peace? Has heaven lied to the faithful at Fatima after perhaps the second greatest miracle in world history?<br /><br />Evidently heaven cannot lie and world peace has not been granted and Russia has not converted to the faith because the Popes have not consecrated Russia as required by Fatima. This is why JPII thought he was forced to have the Assisi prayer meetings. Evidently JPII thought the consecration was not having its effect and that why he set up the Assisi meetings. Evidently JPII was not acting in accordance with heavens will in regard to the consecration.john martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06660610295915450085noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-601663835789198122011-04-26T19:34:33.690-04:002011-04-26T19:34:33.690-04:00Bob's consistent trend is to always go more an...Bob's consistent trend is to always go more and more to the right. He will continue to do so, if the past is any guide at all. And this road leads right off the cliff.<br /><br />He might stop in the halfway house of SSPX, but if he keeps progressing in this thought-pattern, sedevacantism is almost inevitable, in my opinion.<br /><br />Look at Matatics' journey for the blueprint. Bob is just 4-5 years behind him. They can become partners. Then Matatics can be guaranteed an audience of one when he goes on his worldwide preaching tours.Dave Armstronghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-3759509009228622432011-04-26T19:21:40.054-04:002011-04-26T19:21:40.054-04:00@Dave
But then again, I have read his "the i...@Dave<br /><br />But then again, I have read his "the insanity of sedevacantism" article. I agree with you that he looks as if he is heading down sede road. But another part of me is saying that he knows deep down the sede argument is crazy. In the end, I hope he doesn't go down that road.Jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04608918306750440883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-85150246503646039452011-04-26T18:59:43.972-04:002011-04-26T18:59:43.972-04:00@Dave
"I don't think he'll last even...@Dave<br /><br />"I don't think he'll last even a year before he goes sede."<br /><br />It looks that way. How does one go from the "Not alone" books to this? It completely baffles me. The JPI statement gives a glimpse of what state his mind is in. It's frightening.Jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04608918306750440883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-79111439452176115412011-04-26T18:29:41.345-04:002011-04-26T18:29:41.345-04:00Still no evidence has been presented to establish ...Still no evidence has been presented to establish any objective foundation in Catholic tradition for JPII's actions at Assisi. Of course this was never going to be presented because JPII has clearly and repeatedly broken with tradition by publicly praying with false religions for world peace. Somehow the modern church overlooks this glaring problem and continues on, on its merry way to beatify the flawed Pope.<br /><br />If JPII was as saint, why not beatify an entire series of Popes who behaved far better than him such as Leo XIII, Pius IX, XII, Paul VI and so on. Why not beatify the whole lot? Why, because the church is making a politically motivated statement about a recent Papacy.<br /><br />Yes JPII had many good qualities, but then again, why the rush to beatify him when so many questions hang over his Papacy? Could it be that the church has made a mistake in taking the step to beatify JPII?<br /><br />How many serious miracles have been accredited to him? I'd really like to know.<br /><br />The fact remains, this beloved Pope still remains controversial and has shadows over his character through his actions at Assisi, his associations with a known criminal and his failure to have the crooks at the Vatican bank investigated. These facts of history speak for themselves . . .what is the real reason JPII is being beatified?john martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06660610295915450085noreply@blogger.com