Posted on 02/10/2022 4:53:56 AM PST by JosephJames
👍👍👍👍
👍👍👍👍
They are. The heretical pope is the problem here.
Amazing to see that he is afraid of EWTN! Will he work to get it cancelled? like he worked against Trump and Salvini?
“Pope Francis Rebukes EWTN as Work of the Devil”
I don’t believe he was referring to EWTN.... Church Militant, more likely. EWTN, hardly a hard-hitting outfit these days.
The ImPopester is the devil’s minion.
Apostasy, the falling away, living in the end times as seen through the words of Revelation. Maranatha!
He is actually creating some unity. I first started calling the pope a heretic in my Bible Study group, when he refused to answer the Dubia. Everyone defended him. Now they all agree with me.
So is Pope Francis related to Dr. Fauci? You know, Fauci says he is “science” and the Pope says he is “The Truth”? Or does the Pope thinks his is “God”?
Sounds like his “I am the science” moment.
No way the Devil makes television that is that boring.
Rather, it is exposed as another producer of a plethora of prevaricating propaganda when promoting distinctive Catholic teachings that are not manifest in the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, in particular Acts through Revelation, which best shows how the NT church understood the gospels).
Yet TradCaths act essentially like SS evangelicals in the sense that rather than practicing the broad assent that so much pope teaching requires*, the TradCath makes the veracity of modern RC teaching (which purports to understand and clarify the past) subject to his personal judgment of conformity with past church teaching as they understand it, contrary to how modern Rome does in cases wherein they find conflict. The difference here btwn the TradCath and a SS evangelicals is that for the latter Scripture is the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed.
* 'the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors," "to suffer themselves to be guided and led in all things that touch upon faith or morals by the Holy Church of God through its Supreme Pastor the Roman Pontiff," "of submitting with docility to their judgment," with "no discussions regarding what he orders or demands, or up to what point obedience must go, and in what things he is to be obeyed... not only in person, but with letters and other public documents ;" and 'not limit the field in which he might and must exercise his authority, " for "obedience must not limit itself to matters which touch the faith: its sphere is much more vast: it extends to all matters which the episcopal power embraces," and not set up "some kind of opposition between one Pontiff and another. Those who, faced with two differing directives, reject the present one to hold to the past, are not giving proof of obedience to the authority which has the right and duty to guide them," "Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent." (Sources http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3578348/posts?page=14#14)
Indeed. If he thinks EWTN is his enemy what does he think of the likes of https://novusordowatch.org, which states.
In response to the phenomenon of the Vatican II revolution, there are three essential lines of thought that have been proposed as “solutions” to understanding the situation. This is not now the place or time to critique or justify any of them. For now, we want to just describe them: (1) despite appearances, nothing has really substantially changed, and any interpretation of Vatican II that arrives at the conclusion that there has been a substantial change must be incorrect; (2) we must oppose (resist) these substantial changes and stick to the traditional, age-old teaching instead and ignore the Vatican II novelties while recognizing, however, that the authorities in the Vatican are legitimate and genuine Roman Catholic authorities — we just cannot agree with them on these points; (3) because it is impossible for the Catholic Church to change substantially, and because Vatican II constitutes such an impossible substantial change, it is necessary to conclude that the authority which gave us Vatican II is not in fact the legitimate Catholic authority; that is to say, the “Popes” which gave us Vatican II are not true Popes, nor are their successors, who have implemented and expanded this new religion that has its roots in the council. In fact, the entire religion that now occupies the Vatican and the official structures of the Catholic Church throughout the world is false — it is not the Catholic religion at all, and its putative authorities are not Catholics but heretical usurpers.
A FR poster sums up the situation as,
1. Church Militant who chastise the Bishops but not the Pope
2. The Wanderer supporters
3. The Remnant led by the brother of the publisher of The Wanderer who now disowns The Wanderer
4. The SSPX
5. Those that believe the SSPX is a valid Catholic organization but aren't members.
6. Those who believe the SSPX is in apostasy
7. Those former members of the SSPX that believe Fellay is too deferential to the Pope
8. Sedevacantists who believe Francis is the first anti-Pope or non-Pope
9. Sedevacantists who believe John XXIII was the first anti-pope or non-Pope and that the Second Vatican Council is invalid
10. Those that believe in various conspiracy theories that the Church is now completely controlled by: The Vatican Bank, Gays, Masons, Space Aliens, the Illuminati or some combination of the above
11. Various groups of reasonable Catholics who either quietly or on record disagree with the Pope but are unwilling to go all the way and call him a heretic
12. Various groups of reasonable Catholics who are willing to call the Pope a heretic but are also willing to wait for the process of replacement to unfold in an orderly manner
(NOTE: Church Militant may have changed its position recently to be more directly in opposition to the Pope but I haven't kept track.)
I met Mother Angelica in 1980. She was something else. And I mean it in a very good and respectful way. If all Catholic clergy were more like her. In fact, I was a Catholic at the time.
It is a shame and an affront to Jesus for the Pope to cast these kind of aspersions. But it is a very GOOD thing that the Pope is indulging in such foolishness (and worse). BECAUSE it gives all believers in the Gospel of Jesus (including Catholics) an insight into the veniality and depravity of said Pope.
I'm just saying that at least for now, the traditional Catholics are our allies in the culture war. It's not Catholics who are making it hard to be Christian in the U.S. -- it's the worldly people and the "mainline" Protestants. It's not Protestants who are telling Catholics to let the Chicoms pick their bishops in China -- it's the commie pope. It's not the Catholics who are trying to force Christians to participate in other people's abortions and gay "marriage", it's the atheists and the "mainline" Protestants.
IMHO this is a time when the devout Christians of both Protestant and Catholic to unite against the blatantly worldly people and the worldly people infiltrating our churches (the Vatican and the "mainline" Protestant leaders).
word is “dilettantes”?
I would reply but you have posted three threads this year and failed to re-engage them, as is your regular habit. It is bad enough to be a blog pimp, but to also be a hit-and-run blog pimp affirms those who term your kind ‘blog pimps’.
Actually it is the majority of Catholics which are liberal and vote that way, versus TradCaths, while "mainline" Protestants usually are those closest to Catholicism, while TradCaths count us as their primary theological enemies in the West (and the feeling is much mutual). And while they (as well as the Mormons, etc.) are allies in fighting for traditional values, the dream for many of them is not for a Constitutional Republic reflective of Christian values, liberties and limits, nor for the 1,000 reign of Christ (which Catholicism does not believe in) but the establishment of a Catholic monarch under which we would be censored, or worse.
But that may be more indicative of our engineering/system designing culture where we're more into making stuff work in reality than we are about presentation or aesthetics -- including in our personal lives.
That seems to be the way with that pope.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.