Francis Cardinal George talks about Vatican II
#1
Francis Cardinal George talks about Vatican II:



If this is not a "new religion", then I don't know what is. His Eminence's idiocy is intellectually offensive.
Reply
#2
LOL...it gets even worse when His Eminence talks about Obama and abortion:

Reply
#3
I think he was just BS'ing.

Anyone notice he said JPII called the Council?
Reply
#4
(01-04-2011, 02:03 AM)CollegeCatholic Wrote: Anyone notice he said JPII called the Council?

That was a lapsus linguae. The rest wasn't.
Reply
#5
In the first video, His eminence seems to mix some truth with some inaccuracies.  Yes, the world was divided by class, nationalities, race, etc. However, this predominated the 1700s and 1800s; and existed prior thus, for centuries.  The calling of a council due to this, is inane.  These problems already existed; it was the modernists, who hijacked the council.
Reply
#6
Who's side are these bishops on? It's certainly not Our Lord's side.

Reply
#7
(01-04-2011, 02:31 AM)Petertherock Wrote: Who's side are these bishops on? It's certainly not Our Lord's side.
Not for you, to judge their souls, Darryl.
Reply
#8
Okay, let me get this straight.  

When confronted with the idea that Bishops voted for Obama.  He claims ignorance of any knowledge of the bishops voting and then accuses the questioner of detraction against the bishops.  

So, I guess the crime of detraction is associating bishops with the sinful voting of Obama.  

But then he says that people who vote for Obama need a very, very, very good reason to vote for a pro-abortion politician.   So....if bishops voted for Obama and had a very, very, very good reason for it, I suppose it wouldn't be detraction since a very, very, very good reason would mitigate any sinfulness according to his eminence.  

So, how is it detraction to ask the reasons why bishops would have voted for Obama?  Especially if it was a "Hobson's Choice" election as his eminence describes?  

But then, his eminence talks about Catholics who voted for Obama.   How does he know Catholics voted for Obama?  He claimed ignorance to anyone's vote at the beginning of the question.   So, why isn't he engaging in detraction against Catholics by implying Catholics voted for Obama?  

(unless they had a very, very, very good reason of course.)  

But he says it's incumbent on Catholics who voted for Obama to let the administration know that they aren't keen on pro-abortion policies and they want them to reverse them.    In other words, it's morally incumbent on Catholic voters to reveal their votes (guaranteed to be secret)  in order to influence the policy.  

But....didn't the U.S. bishops vote in the election?  And if they voted for Obama, isn't it incumbent on them morally to follow the Cardinal's directive in the same way he directs the faithful to reveal their votes in order to influence the policy of the pro-abortion administration?  
Reply
#9
(01-04-2011, 02:37 AM)Virgil the Roman Wrote:
(01-04-2011, 02:31 AM)Petertherock Wrote: Who's side are these bishops on? It's certainly not Our Lord's side.
Not for you, to judge their souls, Darryl.

How do you tell whether someone is a friend or enemy of Our Lord?  What methodology do you employ?
Reply
#10
How do you going about judging men's souls?  I am urging caution; not pride or the judging of souls, which our Saviour condemned.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)