(05-18-2011, 12:45 PM)Bakuryokuso Wrote: [ -> ]Gerard the Silver Surfer - I saw Bob Larson in person, wayyyyyy back inna day.
What did you think of him? BTW, is that "Puck" from Alpha Flight as your current Avatar?
The Exorcist Fr. Malachi Martin said something very interesting in an interview that might be relevant to this thread. He said that he knew of a secret Luciferin prophecy which stated that they had to fully install their dark prince in the Vatican by 1999 and if they failed to do so their long planned takeover of the Catholic church would fail. The important part is where Fr. Martin said that Pope John Paul II had to be removed, for this to take place. As time has shown us the Pope hung on past that date. So maybe JPII by disrupting this plan did more for his Church than we know.
Quote from Fr. Amorth:
“I have asked the demon more than once, ‘Why are you so scared of John Paul II and I have had two different responses, both interesting. One, ‘because he disrupted my plans.’"
Quote: “I have asked the demon more than once, ‘Why are you so scared of John Paul II and I have had two different responses, both interesting. One, ‘because he disrupted my plans.’ And, I think that he is referring to the fall of communism in Russia and Eastern Europe. The collapse of communism.”
Well, the chief exorcist just screwed up. You are NOT supposed to question a demon.
(05-18-2011, 12:45 PM)Bakuryokuso Wrote: [ -> ]Gerard the Silver Surfer - I saw Bob Larson in person, wayyyyyy back inna day.
You saw Bob Larson? Wow, I used to listen to him daily way back when. What a trip.
(05-18-2011, 12:45 PM)Bakuryokuso Wrote: [ -> ] (05-18-2011, 11:11 AM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: [ -> ]If anything, the possibility of John Paul II being in heaven makes traditional Catholicism look rather spurious, that's all.
Vetus, I know you've created a very "tight" narrative for yourself about traditionalism in the light of Vatican II but we're the laity, we're not going to be able to know everything. For us to obey Christ in the light of traditional church teaching should be sufficient.
Traditional Catholicism is true religion, so I don't really think anything can make it spurious. I think all questions will be answered one day and it could take decades and centuries to sort some of this nonsense out so I wouldn't worry too much about it.
The whole point of the Christian religion is to give glory to God and to offer the faithful the entrance to Heaven and eternal life. That's why belonging to Christ's Church is essential, among other things that our religion infallibly teaches us because it proceeds from God Himself who cannot deceive nor be deceived.
John Paul II, however, is the antithesis of this traditional Catholicism which we believe to be the truth. He incarnated in very public terms what we can call "liberal Catholicism", a corruption of the faith that excommunicated the Church's past and her hard teachings concerning salvation that had bothered those outside the Church for so long.
If an impenitent man like that can be saved, why even bother with traditional Catholicism at all? Certainly, it becomes at least irrelevant, if not spurious. After all, you can lead a regular Novus Ordo Catholic life, indistinguishable from a Protestant, and be on the road to salvation. Heck, even a Muslim or a Jew can!
(05-18-2011, 03:32 PM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: [ -> ] (05-18-2011, 12:45 PM)Bakuryokuso Wrote: [ -> ] (05-18-2011, 11:11 AM)Vetus Ordo Wrote: [ -> ]If anything, the possibility of John Paul II being in heaven makes traditional Catholicism look rather spurious, that's all.
Vetus, I know you've created a very "tight" narrative for yourself about traditionalism in the light of Vatican II but we're the laity, we're not going to be able to know everything. For us to obey Christ in the light of traditional church teaching should be sufficient.
Traditional Catholicism is true religion, so I don't really think anything can make it spurious. I think all questions will be answered one day and it could take decades and centuries to sort some of this nonsense out so I wouldn't worry too much about it.
The whole point of the Christian religion is to give glory to God and to offer the faithful the entrance to Heaven and eternal life. That's why belonging to Christ's Church is essential, among other things that our religion infallibly teaches us because it proceeds from God Himself who cannot deceive nor be deceived.
John Paul II, however, is the antithesis of this traditional Catholicism which we believe to be the truth. He incarnated in very public terms what we can call "liberal Catholicism", a corruption of the faith that excommunicated the Church's past and her hard teachings concerning salvation that had bothered those outside the Church for so long.
If an impenitent man like that can be saved, why even bother with traditional Catholicism at all? Certainly, it becomes at least irrelevant, if not spurious. After all, you can lead a regular Novus Ordo Catholic life, indistinguishable from a Protestant, and be on the road to salvation. Heck, even a Muslim or a Jew can!
Wow. "If John Paul II might be in heaven, what's the point?" If you get to the pearly gates and St. Peter tells you that John Paul II is inside, will you still want to go in?
(05-18-2011, 03:39 PM)Christus Imperat Wrote: [ -> ]Wow. "If John Paul II might be in heaven, what's the point?" If you get to the pearly gates and St. Peter tells you that John Paul II is inside, will you still want to go in?
As far as I can see the thing is: unless he had deathbed conversion, there's no way John Paul II, a man who publicly forfeited Catholic teaching in the name of Ecumenism, be in Heaven.
It's the same thing as saying Luther is in Heaven, and so forth.
Unless, of course, God has changed the rules and faith is no longer a requisite for salvation.
(05-18-2011, 04:20 PM)Adeodatus01 Wrote: [ -> ]Matthew 18:21-35
Does not say one is dispensed from having the virtue of faith in order to be saved.
