Poll: How did B16 become Pope?
You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
43
0%
0 0%
10
0%
0 0%
11
0%
0 0%
Total 0 vote(s) 0%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Do You Think the Holy Ghost Chose Pope Benedict XVI....
(10-06-2011, 04:07 PM)SaintRafael Wrote: Whether or not the Holy Ghost chose Benedict, God allowed Ratzinger to become Pope. He is a transitional Pope. A bridge between the bad Popes and the future good Popes of restoration.
the Popes, bishops, and priests we deserve.

Your prophecy will be confirmed if we get Burke next.
Reply
(10-05-2011, 02:57 PM)archdiocesan Wrote: "Holy Spirit" and "Holy Ghost" are both names for the same person of the Trinity, and neither is unorthodox, dubious, questionable etc. The 1903 English translation of Leo XIII's encyclical on the Holy Spirit was titled... "The Holy Spirit". As were subsequent English translations.

From the Baltimore Catechism:
Quote:Q. 420. Who is the Holy Ghost?
A. The Holy Ghost is the third Person of the Blessed Trinity.

Q. 421. Did the Holy Ghost ever appear?
A. The Holy Ghost appeared at times under the form of a dove, and again under the form of tongues of fire; for, being a pure spirit without a body, He can take any form.

Q. 422. Is the Holy Ghost called by other names?
A. The Holy Ghost is called also the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, the Spirit of Truth and other names given in Holy Scripture.

It's one thing - a laudable thing - to be stubborn in adherence to the truth. It's another to be stubborn in error.

If you'd read what I posted, you'd have read that I said they both mean the same thing.
Reply
(10-06-2011, 02:18 AM)jovan66102 Wrote:
(10-05-2011, 06:55 AM)Stubborn Wrote: The SSPX quotes don't mean a thing - for all anyone knows they were copied and pasted from various sources. And there are occasions that trads use HS - but not like the NO. The language change was totally obvious in the late 60s - and still is if you listen.

I already stated the facts. You people, particularly jovan, who should know better, miss the obvious as a matter of practice. Avoid the NO completely for a few years then perhaps you'll begin to understand.

I have never disputed the point you make here. What I do dispute is your claim to Godlike omniscience that you know what every SSPX priest in the world does. Dan, who has personal experience of the Priest in question, says one thing. You, who admit to never having attended the Priest's Masses, say another. Who am I going to believe? The man who, on many Sundays sits in the pews listening to the Priest, or the man who admits he has no personal knowledge of the situation?

What God like omniscience?
You feel free to take the word of a person who, on many Sunday's, sits in the pews listening to the NO Priest - not seeing that it is not the Holy Sacrifice yet believes it is good enough and encourages others to participate with it. Believe that a trad priest always speaks the language of a NO priest - fine. I do not believe he heard what he thinks he heard because he practices seeing what is not there.

Indifferentism professes unconcern about belief as well as practice, indifferentism is what the NO breeds. HS or HG's meaning is no different - most NOers seem to even be indifferent to the actual language - as I think is the case with dan.

When one primarily attends the NO, one *will* become indifferent to some extent, that's the way it is and no one needs to have God like omniscience or a degree in theology to learn that - just "look around".  All one need do is stay exposed to tradition and away completely from the NO and when they hear a speaker consistently using HS, it will make itself as obvious as a Jersey accent that the speaker has roots in the NO i.e. roots in error. From that moment on, listeners should turn it off or be on guard for error. It just that simple. A priest who always uses  HS in place of HG *distinguishes himself* as a NOer. That's the way it has been since the revolution began. That is just reality - I am pointing this out because I've been where a lot of folks are these days - - wondering if Fr. "X" is reliable etc . . . . . well, now they have one tell tale sign to watch for.

At any rate, no doubt dan will listen for it specifically next time he goes to SSPX.
Reply
(10-07-2011, 07:25 AM)Stubborn Wrote: When one primarily attends the NO, one *will* become indifferent to some extent, that's the way it is and no one needs to have God like omniscience or a degree in theology to learn that - just "look around".  All one need do is stay exposed to tradition and away completely from the NO and when they hear a speaker consistently using HS, it will make itself as obvious as a Jersey accent that the speaker has roots in the NO i.e. roots in error. From that moment on, listeners should turn it off or be on guard for error. It just that simple. A priest who always uses  HS in place of HG *distinguishes himself* as a NOer. That's the way it has been since the revolution began. That is just reality - I am pointing this out because I've been where a lot of folks are these days - - wondering if Fr. "X" is reliable etc . . . . . well, now they have one tell tale sign to watch for.

At any rate, no doubt dan will listen for it specifically next time he goes to SSPX.

I notice that several FSSP-ers say 'Holy Spirit' while SSPX-ers and others in 'irregular' status consistently say 'Holy Ghost'.
Reply
(10-07-2011, 01:57 PM)vakarian Wrote:
(10-07-2011, 07:25 AM)Stubborn Wrote:
(10-06-2011, 02:18 AM)jovan66102 Wrote:
(10-05-2011, 06:55 AM)Stubborn Wrote: The SSPX quotes don't mean a thing - for all anyone knows they were copied and pasted from various sources. And there are occasions that trads use HS - but not like the NO. The language change was totally obvious in the late 60s - and still is if you listen.

I already stated the facts. You people, particularly jovan, who should know better, miss the obvious as a matter of practice. Avoid the NO completely for a few years then perhaps you'll begin to understand.

I have never disputed the point you make here. What I do dispute is your claim to Godlike omniscience that you know what every SSPX priest in the world does. Dan, who has personal experience of the Priest in question, says one thing. You, who admit to never having attended the Priest's Masses, say another. Who am I going to believe? The man who, on many Sundays sits in the pews listening to the Priest, or the man who admits he has no personal knowledge of the situation?

What God like omniscience?
You feel free to take the word of a person who, on many Sunday's, sits in the pews listening to the NO Priest - not seeing that it is not the Holy Sacrifice yet believes it is good enough and encourages others to participate with it. Believe that a trad priest always speaks the language of a NO priest - fine. I do not believe he heard what he thinks he heard because he practices seeing what is not there.

Indifferentism professes unconcern about belief as well as practice, indifferentism is what the NO breeds. HS or HG's meaning is no different - most NOers seem to even be indifferent to the actual language - as I think is the case with dan.

When one primarily attends the NO, one *will* become indifferent to some extent, that's the way it is and no one needs to have God like omniscience or a degree in theology to learn that - just "look around".  All one need do is stay exposed to tradition and away completely from the NO and when they hear a speaker consistently using HS, it will make itself as obvious as a Jersey accent that the speaker has roots in the NO i.e. roots in error. From that moment on, listeners should turn it off or be on guard for error. It just that simple. A priest who always uses  HS in place of HG *distinguishes himself* as a NOer. That's the way it has been since the revolution began. That is just reality - I am pointing this out because I've been where a lot of folks are these days - - wondering if Fr. "X" is reliable etc . . . . . well, now they have one tell tale sign to watch for.

At any rate, no doubt dan will listen for it specifically next time he goes to SSPX.

I notice that several FSSP-ers say 'Holy Spirit' while SSPX-ers and other in 'irregular' status consistently say 'Holy Ghost'.
It works both ways as the terms to refer to the Third Person are interchangable.
I have heard a diocesan pastor use "The Holy Ghost" frequently and I have heard other priests including SSPX priest say Holy Spirit.
My FSSP spiritual confessor always says "Holy Ghost.
Reply
Ah, I see. Thanks Dan. I guess it really is more of a case-by-case basis among TLM-attending Catholics.
Reply
(10-07-2011, 06:23 PM)vakarian Wrote: Ah, I see. Thanks Dan. I guess it really is more of a case-by-case basis among TLM-attending Catholics.
it seems to be so, sir.
Reply
During Holy Hour at my SSPX chapel last Friday we used a book published in 1943 for the prayers.  It had Holy Spirit every time.
Reply
(10-12-2011, 08:41 PM)Jesse Wrote: During Holy Hour at my SSPX chapel last Friday we used a book published in 1943 for the prayers.  It had Holy Spirit every time.

Stubborn was wrong about something!  :o  I may never recover from the shock.
Reply
(10-12-2011, 08:43 PM)JayneK Wrote: Stubborn was wrong about something!   :o  I may never recover from the shock.
:laughing: :laughing: :laughing:
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)