Posts: 627
Threads: 50
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Dec 2008
John XXIII is innocent because................he didn't finish the council - actually, he had very little to do with it as he died early on, so he may not have changed things so much.
John XXIII is guilty because................he started the whole council in the first place. It was totally his idea. And maybe if he lived, he would have made bigger changes than we could ever have imagined....
Paul VI is innocent because................the council wasn't his idea, and he would never have started it to begin with - thus things would never have changed at all.
Paul VI is guilty because...........he was the one who oversaw the majority of the council and approved the changes, and if he wanted, he could have never started the council back up after John XXIII's death.
What do you think?
![[-]](https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/images/fisheaters/collapse.png)
•
Posts: 3,601
Threads: 313
Likes Received: 56 in 43 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
John the 23rd disobeyed Our Lady and didn't reveal the 3rd secret and consecrate Russia, he opened the door to the world allowing all kinds of evil and errors to flood the church from outside and for the enemies inside the church to be outspoken and bold. Pope Paul 6th allowed dissent to flourish, appointed dissenting bishops, changed the mass etc etc etc.......
•
Posts: 140,599
Threads: 9,964
Likes Received: 6 in 6 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Jun 2017
Reputation:
0
I know I've said my goodbyes here but I was curiously indulging myself in looking some recent threads and I logged in to say:
This thread is bad news. What good fruit can this bring? It's devil-inspired IMO. "Hey, let's see how much blame we can pin on which Pope - whoever says the worst thing about him wins!" How will this thread bring us to greater love of Christ? How will it lead others to Christ? This kind of speculative gossip incites anger and disturbs the soul as we search our memory for the greatest fault of someone else.
Here is the only answer to the question "Who do you blame for post-Vatican II issues":
Romans 3:23 - For all have sinned, and do need the glory of God.
Thank you and God bless (see you all in a few weeks)
•
Posts: 5,206
Threads: 109
Likes Received: 2 in 2 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Aug 2009
(01-31-2012, 11:54 AM)salus Wrote: John the 23rd disobeyed Our Lady and didn't reveal the 3rd secret and consecrate Russia, he opened the door to the world allowing all kinds of evil and errors to flood the church from outside and for the enemies inside the church to be outspoken and bold. Pope Paul 6th allowed dissent to flourish, appointed dissenting bishops, changed the mass etc etc etc.......
This. They were both bad... a "Terrible Twosome," if you will...
...so, equal blame on them, and the (other) damned modernists who swayed the Council their way and kept it from denouncing Communism.
•
Posts: 1,886
Threads: 130
Likes Received: 31 in 15 posts
Likes Given: 36
Joined: Aug 2010
I blame Satan most of all, if the story of Pope Leo XIII's vision was true.
•
Posts: 9,780
Threads: 204
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Dec 2008
I blame all the 20th century popes, just to be on the safe side.
•
Posts: 1,887
Threads: 689
Likes Received: 74 in 41 posts
Likes Given: 15
Joined: Mar 2008
I would have to say it was all within God's PERMITTING WILL.
•
Posts: 1,886
Threads: 130
Likes Received: 31 in 15 posts
Likes Given: 36
Joined: Aug 2010
(01-31-2012, 01:51 PM)Magdalene Wrote: I would have to say it was all within God's PERMITTING WILL.
Yeah, this is what I was getting at.
Though I always wonder if God wasn't preventing something even worse by only permitting John Paul I a 33 day reign...
•
Posts: 4,655
Threads: 96
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Mar 2007
(01-31-2012, 12:43 PM)SPB Wrote: I know I've said my goodbyes here but I was curiously indulging myself in looking some recent threads and I logged in to say:
This thread is bad news. What good fruit can this bring? It's devil-inspired IMO. "Hey, let's see how much blame we can pin on which Pope - whoever says the worst thing about him wins!" How will this thread bring us to greater love of Christ? How will it lead others to Christ? This kind of speculative gossip incites anger and disturbs the soul as we search our memory for the greatest fault of someone else.
Here is the only answer to the question "Who do you blame for post-Vatican II issues":
Romans 3:23 - For all have sinned, and do need the glory of God.
Thank you and God bless (see you all in a few weeks)
I agree. All the Popes are guilty of the the failing of the post Conciliar errors. Piux XII even has to take some of the responsibility. It's not WHO is responsible, but rather WHAT is responsible. And I say that a very very very good case can be made that Vatican II itself is to be blamed the most for the post conciliar errors.
•
Posts: 3,635
Threads: 180
Likes Received: 17 in 10 posts
Likes Given: 13
Joined: Jul 2010
Water under the bridge and perhaps better left alone. But, if forced to make a choice I would say John XXIII was Good Pope John, and he was old and perhaps ill advised to call for a new council.
Paul VI, was a very weak man and inherited a mess in the making and caved in more easily. The tradgedy may have been in the chainging of hands during the Council.
We will never know, and if God allows us protection and grace to make it to our Heavenly home, I doubt we will care when we find the answer.
But it does sound like the discussions would be never ending in Hell. Whether with others or with yourself for eternity.
A word to the wise.
•
