Posted on 01/24/2023 7:39:47 AM PST by ebb tide
Hey, Pope...better refresh yourself with John 8:26
(Jesus) I have many things to say and to judge of you...
Back in the 1960's, when the Decadence first erupted into the open, its stooges proclaimed a "new morality", which the honest and wise recognized as nothing but immorality, their "higher truth" nothing but untruth, their "compassion" nothing but licentiousness, their "sexual revolution" nothing but depravity.
There's nothing new about all this, though its proponents tend to assume that they have discovered something.
There is nothing new about their proclamations or their behavior. It's all old: old, tired self-deception that inevitably leads to misery and destruction.
Decadence is decay.
One glance at Democrat-run American cities reveals where it's going.
How would you know, popester?
And they make tens of millions of dollars aiding human trafficking into the US.
Anti pope francis
Day late and a dollar short...
And that’s is why the church is dying...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No, that is just ONE example of the devastation caused by the attack upon the Church that was planned and launched by the Satan Council (Vatican, 1962-1965). And Satan’s Pope, leader of what is now the Conciliar Church, is another such example. Meanwhile the remnant of the true Catholic Church has been banished and retreated once again to the catacombs. It is still functioning for the faithful through the missions of the various Tridentine Mass communities around the world such as the SSPX. Check in the area where you live to see if there is one of its communities in your neighborhood.
And they make tens of millions of dollars aiding human trafficking into the US.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Yes, and Catholic Charities is one of our Constitutional Republic’s most dangerous enemies. It has been for at least the last 15 years. I became aware of this in 2008, because I had an apartment rented to one of its employees.
“Run in” or “run the” ... a big difference if it is the latter.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Probably would be more accurate to just delete “in” and not replace it at all.
If Benedict knew this, why didn’t he do something about it?
Rampant iniquity among the clergy is far from new* yet even if such did not exist it remains distinctive Catholic teachings 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).
Catholic historian Paul Johnson additionally described the existing social situation among the clergy during this period leading up to the Refomation:
“Probably as many as half the men in orders had ‘wives’ and families. Behind all the New Learning and the theological debates, clerical celibacy was, in its own way, the biggest single issue at the Reformation. It was a great social problem and, other factors being equal, it tended to tip the balance in favour of reform. As a rule, the only hope for a child of a priest was to go into the Church himself, thus unwillingly or with no great enthusiasm, taking vows which he might subsequently regret: the evil tended to perpetuate itself.” (History of Christianity, pgs 269-270) •Cardinal Ratzinger observed,
"For nearly half a century, the Church was split into two or three obediences that excommunicated one another, so that every Catholic lived under excommunication by one pope or another, and, in the last analysis, no one could say with certainty which of the contenders had right on his side. The Church no longer offered certainty of salvation; she had become questionable in her whole objective form--the true Church, the true pledge of salvation, had to be sought outside the institution.“
"It is against this background of a profoundly shaken ecclesial consciousness that we are to understand that Luther, in the conflict between his search for salvation and the tradition of the Church, ultimately came to experience the Church, not as the guarantor, but as the adversary of salvation. (Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, head of the Sacred Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith for the Church of Rome, “Principles of Catholic Theology,” trans. by Sister Mary Frances McCarthy, S.N.D. (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1989) p.196). http://www.whitehorseinn.org/blog/2012/06/13/whos-in-charge-here-the-illusions-of-church-infallibility/)
• Dickens: In the summer of 1536, Pope Paul III appointed Cardinals Contarini and Cafara and a commission to study church Reform. The report of this commission, the Consilium de emendanda ecclesiae, was completed in March 1537. The final paragraphs deal with the corruptions of Renaissance Rome itself:
“the swarm of sordid and ignorant priests in the city, the harlots who are followed around by clerics and by the noble members of the cardinals’ households …”
“The immediate effects of the Consilium fell far below the hopes of its authors and its very frankness hampered its public use. … the more noticeably pious prelates [note: this the “noticeably pious” clergy] had no longer to tolerate the open cynicism of the Medicean period, and when moral lapses by clerics came to light, pains were now taken to hush them up as matters of grievous scandal.” (G. Dickens, “The Counter Reformation,” pp. 100,102)
• In the same frank spirit is the following statement of de Mézeray, the historiographer of France: [Abrege’ Chronol. VIII. 691, seqq. a Paris, 1681]
“As the heads of the Church paid no regard to the maintenance of discipline, the vices and excesses of the ecclesiastics grew up to the highest pitch, and were so public and universally exposed as to excite against them the hatred and contempt of the people. We cannot repeat without a blush the usury, the avarice, the gluttony, the universal dissoluteness of the priests of this period, the licence and debauchery of the monks, the pride and extravagance of the prelates, and the shameful indolence, ignorance and superstition pervading the whole body...
These were not, I confess, new scandals: I should rather say that the barbarism and ignorance of preceding centuries, in some sort, concealed such vices; but,, on the subsequent revival of the light of learning, the spots which I have pointed out became more manifest, and as the unlearned who were corrupt could not endure the light through the pain which it caused to their eyes, so neither did the learned spare them, turning them to ridicule and delighting to expose their turpitude and to decry their superstitions.”
Bossuet* in the opening statements of his “Histoire des Variations,” admits the frightful corruptions of the Church for centuries before the Reformation; and he has been followed in our own times by Frederic von Schlegel [Philosophy of History, 400, 401, 410, Engl. Transl. 1847.] and Möhler. [Symbolik, II. 31, 32, Engl. Transl.]
While all of them are most anxious to prove that the Lutheran movement was revolutionary and subversive of the ancient faith, they are constrained to admit the universality of the abuses, which, in the language of Schlegel, “lay deep, and were ulcerated in their very roots.” — Charles Hardwick A History of the Articles of Religion; http://www.anglicanbooksrevitalized.us/Oldies/Thirty-Nine/hardwick39.htm
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.