The following comes from a May 29 Breitbart article by Dan Riehl:
Cut through the niceties couching the rhetoric of Democrat House Minority Leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) on Friday’s MSNBC Live, and it’s hard to interpret otherwise than Pelosi saying Republican Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) and any other Catholics who might not endorse gay marriage are hateful homophobes out of step with so called “mainstream” Catholics like herself.
Naturally, it’s of no surprise that an MSNBC host conveniently set her up for the opportunity to denounce Rubio, as well as define Catholicism for everyone.
“I thoroughly disagree (with Rubio’s opposition to gay marriage), being raised in a Catholic family, raising a Catholic family, mainstream Catholic – well, the Baltimore catechism, to get back to our hometown of Baltimore, was what we were raised on. And I think that this statement by Senator Rubio is most unfortunate. It’s a polarizing statement. The fact is, is that what we’re taught was to respect people in our faith and to say that this endangers mainstream Christian thinking is so completely wrong.”
Based upon the above, it would seem the only Catholics Pelosi “respects” are those who agree with her. Yet, she goes on to paint Rubio as the divisive and polarizing one.
“And, again, it’s polarizing and I would hope that – perhaps he believes what he says, and I assume that he does – but I hope that we can persuade him differently because the country is going in a completely different direction now. And it’s very, very exciting.”
She concluded her rant by presuming to speak for the Vatican: “I don’t even think that Pope Francis would subscribe to what Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) just said.”
Let’s rephrase that…
She concluded her rant by presuming to speak for the Vatican: “I don’t even think that Pope Francis would subscribe to what I just said.”
Vatican:
“And, again, it’s polarizing and I would hope that – perhaps Nancy believes what she says, and I assume that she does – but I hope that we can persuade her differently because her soul appears to be going in a completely heretical direction now. And it’s very, very worrying.”
How typical for this woman! She “visited” Pope Benedict a few years back, primarily because she wanted to “straighten him out” regarding the RCC doctrine on abortion, expecting him to see it her way; enlightened Catholic that she is…
Evidently, the Holy Father didn’t think much of her ideas at the time because he refused to have any official pictures taken with her; that pretty much says it all.
Now if we could just get one gigantic response in unison from the bishops renouncing her public statements and identifying them as the voice of a non-Catholic mad woman.
Mainstream? Hardly. “Don’t judge the Catholic Church by those that fail to practice its teachings.”
Anonymous i may have misunderstood you but there is nothing wrong with Alice judging the lack of actions from those in charge. It is rather disappointing to hear of what this woman is up to. I have read of some bishops publically admonishing her, bet she just ignores it. Just for the record, she has been admonished and since our church leaders know that the faith doesnt revolve around her, then we must put our energy on those who do listen. Once a person rejects graces, then we can not choose for them. They must, out of free will, choose to obey. She has automatically excommunicated herself. She must be ignored now but with continued prayers for salvation.
Alice, unfortunately or fortunately depending on the issue – each Bishop is responsible ONLY for Catholics, Catholic Schools, and Catholic organizations within their OWN DIOCESE.
When you (or anyone else) can document scandalous behavior (public actions) of any politician – contact the appropriate Diocese Bishop.
For example, Biden’s Diocese is Wilmington DEL.
Dan Reihl just doesn’t get it. He attempts to portray Nancy Pelosi as somehow deluded and marginal, but based on about every poll conducted, the majority of Catholics agree with Nancy Pelosi on this issue. The problem is not Nancy Pelosi; she’s just one not-very-unusual symptom. The problem is that Nancy IS MAINSTREAM! Catholics are the most supportive religious demographic for SSM. When is Church leadership going to wake up to this?
All literate Catholics must be urged to read the two most important books in the Catholic Faith.
1) a Catholic Bible;
2) Catechism of the Catholic Church (aka CCC; 1997, dark green cover in USA.)
“He attempts to portray Nancy Pelosi as somehow deluded and marginal.” No “attempt” needed, Nancy Pelosi IS deluded and marginal. And if American Catholics are as deluded as she is, what befalls the Catholic Church in America will be the result of that delusion. The Catholic Bishops are failing to educate and mobilize American Catholics against the blasphemy of homosexual “marriage,” The mainstream media and Hollywood glorify the perversion and the “Catholics in name only” just mindlessly go along. If the Catholic Church in America descends into heresy and schism, the fault will be that of the leaders of the Church and the “Mainstream” sheep who mindlessly follow them. The ranks of the SSPX will surely grow.
The SSPX has nothing to do with the heretical and schismatic actions and words of Pelosi, Biden, J. Kerry, A Cuomo, etc.
The simply do not adhere to the CCC of 1997.
And by definition in the CCC, they are heretics and schismatics.
Nancy Pelosi is still claiming to be a Catholic? What’s next? Obama claiming to be a conservative?
Unfortunately, it is the Catholic Bishops and Archbishops here in the US that have allowed Pelosi to continue to claim that she is Catholic. One has to ask why her local Bishop/Archbishop or District of Columbia Bishop/Archbishop had not excommunicated her years ago.
We see this repeated over and over again by the weak men who oversee our dioceses and archdioceses. Pelosi is only the tip of the iceberg.
If Nancy Pelosi does not repent, she will burn in Hell.
She is purposely using her “hate” for the teachings of the Church, and her “love of power” in the Democratic Party in the public forum.
Remember that Pelosi, Obama, Hillary Clinton and other Democrats learned part of their trade from marxist community organizer Saul Alinsky who wrote “Rule for Radicals”.
https://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/communism/alinsky.htm
My guess is that she is speaking to the low information voter and the low information Catholic. The important thing, for the power grabbing, cultural changing liberals, is to get THEIR narrative out to the public. Lies told over and over again tend to be the “truth” for slothful citizens and Christians.
This is a sound bite aimed at discrediting Marco Rubio. Any conservative running for president will be receiving weekly doses of this abuse from the radical left.
Thats true Tracy.
How do people of this mentality ever reach such high places? Goes to show she is not only in the world, but she is also of the world. With all due respect, she has no business deceiving people into believing she is someone she is really not. Only a real Roman Catholic will love God, and out of their immense love for Him, follow His Commandments and teachings! She appears to defy God and replace His Catholic teachings with Pelosi’s policies. To disobey God’s Commandments and teachings show those who don’t truly love Him and in turn, don’t deserve Heaven as this disobedience offends God and by another name is called sin and iniquities. Now that doesn’t mean we are all doomed for our failing to turn away from sin and not…
And because of the additional mortal sins of Scandal – Pelosi, J. Biden,
J. Kerry, Cuomo, J. Brown and others – help send other Souls to Hell.
How do people like this get to such high office, Bruce? Pelosi’s dad was a mayor of Baltimore and a prominent politician and she married somone with money. Like Hillary Clinton, you would never have heard of either of them had it been on their own. Kerry, Brown, and so many others, had rich and often prominent parents and not one of them would have amounted to anything on their own. Bill Clinton, no matter what you may think about his morals and philosophies, is a self-made man and has a right to be proud of his accomplishments. I think had he married the right person, he might have become truly great. Anyway, it’s a common enough story…these rich, spoiled, priviledged people have NO IDEA what it truly is to be poor, abused or…
…ignored. Their heartless arrogance and phony compassion is utterly contemptible. They pretend to love the poor but only Bill Clinton has any idea what being truly poor and scorned by society truly is. I wouldn’t change places with any of them, would you?
This is America. Anyone over a certain age can run for office. They get in if more people vote for them.
You can do it too.
To answer your first question – because Catholics and others supposedly of good will VOTE for them.
….and priests and religious are among that number, too. I wonder why when nothing is changed and/or is unclear in Church documents/understanding.
Nancy Pelosi should have been straightened out years ago– by a true Archbishop of San Francisco, who had the guts to EXCOMMUNICATE her, and not take her and her type seriously! Let her rant, scream, cry, whatever— all silly crocodile tears, because she is no Catholic, and no Christian, even!! Why do our Church leaders make such FOOLS of themselves, and of the Church– by failing to do their duty by Christ, and try to correct the sinner, and if it fails– then, HONESTLY tell them, “IT’S OVER!! YOU ARE EXCOMMUNICATED! ” And ignore any babyish stunts they may then pull — rants, crocodile tears, etc.! GROW UP!!
The appeal to “everyone is doing it or believes it” — the mainstream — does not justify evil Exodus 23:2 “You shall not follow the crowd in doing wrong. When testifying in a lawsuit, you shall not follow the crowd in perverting justice.” Justice is what is due the other based on God’s law, not on Nancy’s whim. All those involved in lustful sin need justice in the truth that there is healing in forgiveness and chastity.
Fr. Perozich– excellent post! Why doesn’t a good representative of the Archdiocese, go and knock repeatedly on Mrs. Pelosi’s door– and seek continuously to evangelize her, and correct her– and convert her?? If the Church is not willing to excommunicate these “bad Catholics”– why in the world, don’t they not instead, constantly seek to CORRECT their ignorance and sins, and DEMAND it of them?? Keep on teaching the Truth– until they drop!!
Father Perozich i agree. I see her actions also as a person selling moral relativism. That is being promoted today especially when they defy Christ and His church. Moral relativism is continuing to spread in these challenging days. With the internet, media etc all bad having magnitude power in their deceptive and undermining story telling against the truth.
Nancy Pelosi IS nothing more then a HERITIC. She is not a Catholic.
Git wid it. Wz ur prblm.
Nancy just knows the new lexicon, and in that she joins the new Babel. How long will God allow this Babel to continue? What will happen should SCOTUS redefine marriage, which, if one actually KN)OWS the meaning of the Constitution, (read Ferrrara’s Liberty; the God that Failed) may actually happen.
God promised not to destroy the world again by flood. Did HE say the same re Babel?
‘
There will be no sanity until the pope and bishops abide by the Fatima mandate to consecrate RUSSIA to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
Of, course – Fatima.
Russia.
That will solve all problems.
Anonymous Says, what do you suggest?
Baltimore Catechism – Why did God make you?
Answer: God made me to know Him, to love Him, and to serve Him in this world, and to be happy with Him forever in the next.
Nancy Pelosi’s intellect is darkened due to her many years of habitually promoting mortal sins. Sister Lucia of Fatima warned the world that if men did not repent then the world would be swept up in a “diabolical disorientation.” Nancy is giving us a clear example of what can happen when we choose sin over God. How extremely diabolical to use to the Baltimore Catechism as a weapon to twist the Truth. Nancy Pelosi is choosing to have her false temporary idea of heaven right here on earth. Nancy is not serving God because she fell for the devil’s tempting…
Catherine– excellent post! I have always loved the Baltimore Catechism! What a shame, that Nancy Pelosi is so ignorant about it! She ought to act like a good Catholic, and truly read this Catechism— and also, go on a pilgrimage, to Fatima!!
So true, Catherine. God’s first commandment…YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND Thanks for the reminder. Everything else pales in significance. If we truly love Him, it will change how we see the world and stop us from pleasing ourselves no matter how it offends Him.
Yee i agree. Shame on Nancy Pelosi.
Many call for the bishops to act and take corrective action with this scandalous woman and others like her for literally decades but they either play dumb or cowardly refuse to do so. To the world she loudly and publicly proclaims to be faithful while blatantly pushing sinful and murderous behaviors totally against church beliefs and teachings. Her influence whether big or small still have done much harm and I blame most of it on the cowardly bishops. The irony of this is that like us she will die and how much do you want to bet, like Kennedy, like Cuomo and other promoting baby killers she will be given a huge grand incensed filled Catholic cathedral funeral with many abortionists/same sex marriage politicians present along with probably…
It almost seems like MONEY is the real issue.
Remember that the USCCB’s – CRS, Catholic Charities, and CCHD get about $63 Million annually from federal Government Grants.
Pelosi and other like her are in a position to influence federal legislation regarding Grants.
Hey but she like Joe Biden and other “Roman Catholics” are in full communion with the Church and the Franciscans of The Immaculate and the S.S.P.X. who adhere to ALL of the teachings of Holy Mother Church are treated like lepers.
Right now, I don’t think it is right to knock Joe Biden. He is going through terrible suffering that no one who has not lost a child can possibly understand. Please pray for him and his family as he goes through another terrible loss. It wasn’t that long ago he lost his daughter and wife in an auto accident.
Well I would have to agree with Dana. But let us correct the idea or assumption that they are in full communion, because they are not. We cant just go around spreading untruths that mistepresent the spiritual reality of things. We neer to pray for the conversion of all sinners. Begining with self.
And yet Joe Biden still actively promotes death of the body as well as death of the Soul –
Abortion & Sodomy Marriage.
Wake up calls from God ?
Dana, Joe Biden married his second wife Jill in 1977 (to present).
Biden by his public example helps to send Souls to Hell. He does not deserve a pass.
Janek, SSPX shoul dnot be treated like lepers, however it is not correct to say that they” adhere to ALL of the teachings of Holy Mother Church. They don’t, and that is the problem.
YFC, what teachings of the Catholic Church does the SSPX not adhere to?
” The fact that the Society of Saint Pius X does not possess a canonical status in the Church is not, in the end, based on disciplinary but on doctrinal reasons.
As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church.
There needs to be a distinction, then, between the disciplinary level, which deals with individuals as such, and the doctrinal level, at which ministry and institution are involved.
In order to make this clear once again: until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church,
and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do not legitimately exercise any…
Janek, read the OFFICIAL position from the Magisterium of the Church regarding the lack of status of the SSPX within the Church.
How many times to people have to post if for you ?
Directly from the VATICAN web site, by Pope Benedict XVI –
https://w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/letters/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20090310_remissione-scomunica.html
If you keep acting like Jen Saki, giving little more than approved statements instead of answering questions and being logical instead of useful to current administrations, you’ll be posting for eternity, MAC.
Malley, the Pope’s statement about the SSPX is not merely “approved”.
The POPE’s written statement posted on the Vatican web site is the OFFICIAL STATEMENT of the CATHOLIC CHURCH regarding the SSPX.
https://w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/letters/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20090310_remissione-scomunica.html
When/if the SSPX is recognized by the Vatican as holding a valid ministry within the Church – the Pope will let us all know – officially and in writing.
The point is, “B”, that the only thing you come back with when discussing the SSPX is that there is no official ministry. Nobody is debating that, “B”. That is why when you come back with the same answer to varying questions – especially when that answer doesn’t apply to the question that has been posed – you come of like a flustered press secretary who hasn’t the liberty to actually discuss the issue real time.
And, obviously, the Vatican will let Catholics know when their official position changes. That is not the question at hand, friend.
Janek that is incorrect. They are NOT in full communion. Stop spreading rumors.
…the only rumor that seems to be spread is that there is a lack of Catholic practice on the part of very faithful Catholics. I, for one, would love to have those naysayers here give distinct examples when asked, “…What teachings of the Catholic Church does the SSPX not adhere to?”
Merely reiterating not being in “full communion” when that in itself is rather a novel term is not helpful. Why? It is unclear and doesn’t answer the question.
The SSPX holds ZERO ministry within the Catholic Church at this time.
https://w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/letters/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20090310_remissione-scomunica.html
Admit it, and get it over with.
I acknowledge the official statement, MAC. Where have you been? I just find it odd that those who consider themselves faithful defenders have no idea how to answer the questions posed.
Its a simple answer Ann. They do not adhere to the teachings of the documents of the Vatican II Council, and want to be able to be excluded from those pastoral teachings. They do not recognize the authority of the Pope. They are Protestants dressing and playing catholic.
You are incorrect if you think the Society doesn’t recognize the authority of the Pope. And again, what pastoral teachings are not being adhered to?
If VII changed no doctrine as is claimed then how is adhering to pre-VII teachings in error?
The Church has been through crises before, Bob One. No doubt those clerics of his time condemned St. Athanasius for being outside of obedience for not adopting Arianism – but hey – it was in conflict with what the Church always taught and needed to be rejected in order to keep the Faith.
Ann, why haven’t we answered your questions? 2 Reasons, first Rome hasn’t answered SSPX questions to its satisfaction and they are the teachers not us.2) I find your questions to be shell games. Ex of that shell game is right below when you say the SSPX doesn’t recognize the authority of the pope. BY DEFINITION if the pope directly and proactively pleads with you to not ordain bishops and priests, and asks you to cease training priests, you do not obey the authority of the pope. By definition! Only a shell game like yours tries to hide that reality.
Ann M once the SSPX is regularized it will be so great to shut these Church liberals up… their parishes are closing, with “all are welcome” (except the Latin Mass) signs, and rainbow flags…
The Vatican has made it clear that there are DOCTRINAL errors on the part of the SSPX.
(Since the SSPX can change their position, for the most accurate facts, it is best to write to the Vatican regarding the latest DOCTRINAL positions of the SSPX that differ from the Church.
According to the Vatican the doctrinal level is that which “ministry and institution are involved”.
https://w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/letters/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20090310_remissione-scomunica.html
Ann Malley, it is NOT the position of the laity to determine which Order does and does not hold a “Ministry within the Catholic Church”. God did not make us Pope.
The OFFICIAL Church statement from the Pope is that the SSPX has NO canonical STATUS in the Church, and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do NOT legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.”
https://w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/letters/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20090310_remissione-scomunica.html
They refuse obedience to the Pope and to the Authority of the Church.
Hence there are but three classes of persons excluded from the Church’s pale: infidels, heretics and schismatics, and excommunicated persons. .. Heretics and schismatics are excluded from the Church, because they have separated from her and belong to her only as deserters belong to the army from which they have deserted. It is not, however, to be denied that they are still subject to the jurisdiction of the Church, inasmuch as they may be called before her tribunals, punished and anathematised.
It is the unanimous teaching of the Fathers that this visible head is necessary to establish and preserve unity in the Church. .. One is elected that, by the appointment of a head, all occasion of schism may be removed… Following no chief but Christ, I am united in communion with your Holiness, that is, with the chair of Peter. I know that on that rock is built the Church. Whoever will eat the lamb outside this house is profane; whoever is not in the ark of Noah shall perish in the .flood.
the Prophets spoke more plainly and openly of the Church than of Christ, foreseeing that on this a much greater number may err and be deceived than on the mystery of the Incarnation. For in after ages there would not be wanting wicked men who, like the ape that would fain pass for a man, would claim that they alone were Catholics, and with no less impiety than effrontery assert that with them alone is the Catholic Church.
Pope Benedict xvi lifted the excommunication of the 4 bishops who were illicitly consecrated: This gesture was possible once the interested parties had expressed their recognition in principle of the Pope and his authority as Pastor, albeit with some reservations in the area of obedience to his doctrinal authority and to the authority of the Council.
Bishop Fellay of the SSPX has stated publicy that his position on Pope Francis is “Consider him as Pope, but don’t follow him.”
Catholic Family News 10/14/13
Definitely not Tradition
ANNE, nobody is stating that it is the job of the laity to determine who does or who doesn’t hold an official ministry within the Church. I am certainly not asserting as much.
As for doctrinal errors, ANNE, when writing is unclear and/or open to misinterpretation as it can/is being used to do the opposite of what has always been the position of the Church, that is a problem. If you’re comfortable going with that, I will respect your liberty to take that position. Others, however, by way of conscience cannot sign on the dotted line to the integrity of compromise and/or a lack of clarity.
That’s why the Church may be better served if you employed the whole of Pope Benedict’s official statement.
This is what Cardinal Burke says:
“…I now say to people that, if they are experiencing some confusion from the method of teaching of Pope Francis, the important thing is to turn to the catechism and to what the Church has always taught, and to teach that, to foster it at the parish level, beginning first with the family. We can’t lose our energy being frustrated over something that we think we should be receiving and we’re not.”
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/03/exclusive-cardinal-burke-interview-with.html
….another good reason why the supposedly non binding VII council should be revisited and clarified for if it proposed at the outset to not define anything new and/or to not be binding but pastoral, then following that which came before VII shouldn’t pose a rupture. And yet it obviously does. An interesting catch-22, but there we are.
Who ever said Vatican II is non-binding. It IS binding, you just refuse to be bound to it.
Pope John XXIII himself stated in his Opening Address at the beginning of Vatican II that the Council was not intended to be a doctrinal council concerned with defining any articles of Faith; rather it was to be a “pastoral” council that was concerned with representing the Catholic Faith in a manner acceptable to the modern world.
Paul VI did much the same when he reopened the council.
Sadly, the only manner acceptable to modern man is having enough wiggle room to interpret at will. That is why sticking to what the Church has always taught – clearly – is a safe way to go.
God bless
Ann Malley – Both popes were clearly talking about the principle reason for the council. They were not convening the council with their fingers crossed to claim that any teachings were not binging or had no doctrinal import. Every council has been both pastoral and doctrinal, and there is nothing in church teaching that allows you to say that this or any other ecumenical council was not binding. In fact, to say so is itself heresy. I know you have an agenda to push here, but it isn’t a faithful one.
Ann Malley, have you ever read the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church? or the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation?
Have you ever read ANY of the Vatican II Documents?
Where do you find wiggle room to interpret at will?
Both were clearly stating that VII was pastoral in nature. Period. To state the truth regarding the council and what it set out to be/do is not heresy. It is reality.
As to agendas, YFC, the only agenda is what the Church has always taught. Your vehement opposition and hope for “development” is evidence of your being a change agent – not faithful. At least not fidelity to what the Church has always taught.
Same for you, Anonymous. For it is not what “I” think that is at issue, but rather what the Church has always taught as compared to the division represented today – via interpretation. Thanks again, however, for posting as you make your position ever clearer despite the protestations of fidelity.
So the answer was “no”. You have never read them. Am I understanding you correctly?
I do not know how you are misinterpreting my questions to you as a “position?’
Maybe I am just detail minded, but I cannot even begin to understand your posts when you do not say anything concrete. You make vague referrals to things, then when asked for further explanation, you besmirch the fidelity of the person asking you questions. Please, if you have any real complaint, let’s hear it. With specifics.
What exactly do you mean by non-binding? All ecumenical councils that are promulgated by the Pope (like Vatican II) are binding on all the faithful.
What do you mean by pastoral? Or maybe what do you think it means?
Honestly, what you just said makes no sense at all.
Anonymous— you re taking NONSENSE! Not one Pope or bishop is clear, regarding the Council— they are all individually interpreting as they please! It is all very vague! Ann Malley is correct!
Linda Marie, why do you think that?
Q. What precisely are the “new dogmas” stated at Vatican II to which Catholics must adhere? Could we specify exactly what these mysterious creeds are?
Steve Phoenix among the things that Vatican II developed was a fuller concept of the Church. As Anony pointed out, the DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION on the Church. If you read that and other VII documents, they are a perfect jumping off point from the ecclesiological discussions and pronouncments of Vatican One. To say that VII was pastoral simply means that it wasn’t convened out of a necessity to combat a heresy of the day, as for example Trent was, but rather to put forward positively the development of doctrine.
Ann Malley, VATICAN II is binding. A Legitimate Council.
4 DOGMATIC CONSTITUTIONS;
9 DECREES,
and 3 DECLARATIONS
and were all signed by Pope Paul VI and published.
https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/index.htm
You can read them all on the Vatican web site.
Anyone who says anything different is a heretic and schismatic.
Are you are product of the teaching of today’s SSPX ?
If you cannot understand the concepts and/or don’t want to explore why even those you would consider in full communion with Rome are calling for a clarification of certain VII documents, then I cannot help you, MAC. You also need to try and understand that this not an SSPX thing, but a Church thing. (Think about why the CCC 1st edition was revised and now we have a CCC 2nd edition. There’s a reason for that. Even if you don’t feel comfortable discussing realities.)
Ann Malley, you can not help anyone until you learn to start telling the truth.
V II Docs are binding.
I still haven’t understood why you think the pastoral teaching of the Church would not be binding. It is binding if the Church says you should not go to Communion in mortal sin.
It is binding if the Church teaches that you must consume Holy Communion immediately.
If something is not binding they usually say so. They may use words such as “We exhort you to pray the Rosary.”
The precepts of the Church are binding. That is pastoral.
ED, you cannot help anyone – mostly yourself – until you learn the truth that ambiguity or that which negates what the Church has always taught is not binding. Until then you are just a mouthpiece for what you have been told. Much like those watching Joan of Arc being burned at the stake were told the “truth” about why she was killed. Spout away.
Where, Ann Malley, does it ever say that a person is freed from the binding authority of the magisterial teachings of the Church if a member believes it to be contradictory? That she can go off and ordain her own bishops and her own clergy if she thinks there are problems with doctrine? This notion that Church teaching is not binding if you don’t agree with it, because you think you hold to some higher, purer form of church, is very Lutheran, actually. How exactly, does your ecclesiology differ from Luther’s anyhow?
This is not the “notion” that if one doesn’t agree with Church teaching that one can ignore it, but the response of what one does when Church teaching by all appearances looks – or is interpreted as – contradicting itself. (There’s no “me” or “she” in there.)
That is why there is such anticipation over what the synod will do/say with regard to communion for the divorced and remarried. That is why Cardinal Burke says that he would be compelled to resist any document/decision that goes against what the Church has always taught. That’s the Faith, Anonymous, not follow the leader.
Ann Malley, please provide any OFFICIAL Church link that states Vatican II is “not binding”.
Your personal blabbering, nor mine means anything.
Provide the Documentation.
Ann Malley V II Docs are binding.
The reason that CCC has a “second edition” is not because of your lies.
There were language errors in the French to the English versions.
Therefore the second edition was “revised in accordance with the official Latin text promulgated by Pope John Paul II” as stated on the cover.
https://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/updates.htm – not according to Ann Malley, but a site licensed by the Vatican.
Ann Malley start providing links to Official Church Documents.
Some of your personal assertions are so outrageous and in error that your credibility is in the toilet.
The CCC was “revised” because of translation errors.
https://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/updates.htm
The SSPX holds zero ministry within the Church until the Pope says otherwise. End of Subject.
The Pope has the authority, you and the SSPX do not.
When the Pope determines that the SSPX has become doctrinally correct, he will let us all know.
Catholics do not fight with the Pope in these matters. Only heretics and schismatics deny the right of the Pope to proclaim that any Order does NOT have the authority to be legitimate ministers within the Church. Others have…
The CCC was revised because the writing was unclear and open to misinterpretation, Andrew. So for the sake of argument, perhaps we could say that certain portions of VII suffer from translation problems. That’s why they need revising/clarification.
That is also why many in conscience cannot state in truth that the documents are in perfect line with the traditional teachings of the Church – because they are not.
Example: One could state, “I’ve been fighting with the Cardinal for years!” This was stated on CCD by one of the Anonymous posters. Now, Andrew, you may say that it is okay for us to just let something like that go because we do not have the authority to determine what it means. But, Andrew, does the statement mean that one has been fighting against the Cardinal? Or fighting by his side against the same foe?
If we are to look at such a statement as binding in teaching, one could be either for or against the Cardinal and still be in line with the instruction. Why? Because the wording is unclear, friend. That’s the problem.
MAC– all this “blabbering” (that is YOUR word for it!) of you and other posters– about things like “demanding that you provide documentation,” or, “threatening that Vatican II documents are binding,” or, “you are a HORRIBLE person for pointing out the good that the SSPX may do,” etc.etc. — so, in the end– WHERE is the common bond of our Faith and Morals, daily, amongst one another, as Catholics?? Good priests, bishops, cardinals, and Popes– do not talk like this, to each other!! They uphold their common bond in Christ, and many also fight corruption and evil as they should, for Christ!
Malley, Vatican II Documents are binding from a legitimate Ecumenical Council.
Others have told you this many times with direct links to the Vatican web site – 16 official Documents promulgated by the Pope.
Stop with your errors. If you are a product of SPPX teaching, it is clear why the SSPX still holds no ministry within the Church.
Vatican II = 4 DOGMATIC CONSTITUTIONS; 9 DECREES; and 3 DECLARATIONS
were all signed by Pope Paul VI and published.
https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/index.htm
You can read them all on the Vatican web site.
ED – or should I shorten it to “D”, or maybe E-dude, what you have posted has been communicated to me many times. That’s what makes your schoolyard attempt to play the man whose gonna step in and use last names as a way of intimidation rather foolish looking. Especially when you this particular tactic with a woman.
How long oh, Lord? How long?
ED welcome aboard. Ignore the EDude disrespectful comment. They attack and dialogue in that style. Which truly provokes others to do the same in return. They are a poor witness of their own cause.
Yes, Abeca, ignore the disrespectful comment when ED was disrespectful in calling me “Malley” like a schoolyard bully. Would that you could be the witness of fidelity that you claim to be.
Your inconsistency in looking for respect mirrors your understanding of fidelity. That is why so many who post here, doing little more than copying links of “official” positions minus any understanding of what those things mean, save for “I’m okay and you’re not”, is such a sad example of ideology – not Catholic Faith.
That is why folks are so easily misled.
For your information, YFC and others– heresy is a rejection of some of the teachings of our Faith, by a Catholic who is still actively practicing their Faith, and stating publicly, that they are a Catholic. (Such as Nancy Pelosi, for example.) Apostasy, on the other hand– is a formal and TOTAL PUBLIC REJECTION of the Catholic Faith, by a FORMER Catholic. Cardinal Kasper, in publicly proposing that divorced and remarried Catholics (who have no legal Church annullments) to be eligible to receive Holy Communion– is heading towards heresy! And Cardinals who state their acceptance of gay “marriage,” likewise– are heretics!! God help the “wayward” modern Church!!
Linda Marie, while I agree with you that Kasper, Danneels, and others are heretics, they are not the entire Church.
Be more specific in your postings.
You find the teaching of Christ and His Church in the Bible and the CCC.
MAC– The SSPX fully upholds the Bible and the Catechism! But they feel that Vatican II contains some serious problems! They also uphold our Sacred Tradition, and Tridentine Mass, of over 2000 years— while Vatican II knocks it to the ground! Very painful, for some people! A Catholic’s lovely, ancient Church, sacred Traditions, and holy Mass— suddenly discarded, and replaced by— what?? Such little respect for our religion, overall! Well, so much for legal facts– the SSPX is NOT ACCEPTED! TRUE!
Linda Marie, it does not matter what the SSPX does or does not do at this time. They hold no ministry within the Catholic Church.
Do you understand that ?
Until the SSPX holds a legitimate ministry in the Catholic Church, Catholics should not attend their services.
Any only a Pope can give us an official statement when/if that happens.
https://w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/motu_proprio/documents/hf_ben-xvi_motu-proprio_20121111_caritas.html
Linda Marie, you clearly have never read the V II Documents which state the Latin should be retained.
VII Document, Dogmatic Constitution, “Sacrosanctum Concilium”
“36.1 Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.”
If you are a product of the SSPX teaching, no wonder they hold no ministry within the Church. Your ignorance gives them a bad name.
…it is ignorance to purport that 5 or 6 points on teaching documents of the Church is no cause for concern. It is apparent by what you post – especially the last about VII upholding the use of Latin – that you have no concept of what people are discussing here. (And that is a huge part of the gross absence of proper catechesis within the Church. Catholics, especially adult Catholics, should be well versed in these subjects, not just be able to recite talking points.)
God bless you, Ann Malley!
God bless you, Linda Maria! Enjoy your weekend :)
Dana, I wouldn’t change places with any of them either. I wouldn’t want to be in their shoes. Eternity is forever, and the time in their lives is but an infinitesimally short period. To relish sin in that flash of time at the expense of potentially eternal damnation, suffering in hell only a devil would want.
Sandy, Let me suggest you consider much higher quality copies of the Roman Catholic Catechism over the fraud you are recommending. They are the Catechism of the Council of Trent and THE CATECHISM EXPLAINED, AN EXHAUSTIVE EXPOSITION OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION, WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE PRESENT STATE OF SOCIETY AND THE SPIRIT OF THE AGE. A PRACTICAL MANUAL by Fr. Francis Spirago. Now they are catechisms, official as…
The “Catechism of the Council of Trent” of 1566AD (aka Roman Catechism) is the first official catechism of the Church.
The “Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition” of 1997 (aka CCC) is the only other official Catechism of the Catholic Church.
The Holy See owns the copyright of the CCC.
(All other catechisms have been local or regional written by many others.)
For quotes from our Popes regarding the CCC go to:
“What Catholics REALLY Believe SOURCE”
https://whatcatholicsreallybelieve.com/
Any Catholic who votes for politicians such as:
N. Pelosi; J. Brown; H. Clinton; J. Kerry; A. Cuomo; J. Biden; B. Obama – commit a Mortal Sin and may not receive Holy Communion without repentance and the resolution not to vote for politicians of this ilk again.
They work for EVIL within our society – both the politicians as well as those voters who put them in office.
Anonymous, what you are saying about voitng for these specific candidates being a mortal sin directly contradicts the teachings of the catholic church. It is important to not mislead and misrepresent aobu tthe teachings, so if you are simply unawares, may I recommend some education?
YFC- YOU are the one desperately in need of education, not Anonymous! What Anonymous says, is TRUE!! Are you afraid of the truth?
A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons. (Cardinal Ratzinger)
To “different Anonymous”– I think one has to be very careful, with this statement of Pope (emeritis) Benedict, which I, too, know well!! I would say, as a general rule– it is always a sin, no matter what– to deliberately cast a vote, for a BABY KILLER! Of course– the dear Pope is trying to include perhaps a very highly unusual circumstance– but such circumstances, are truly rare! Also, I refuse to cast a vote for any candidate, who stands for ANYTHING immoral! NO EXCUSES!
Linda Maria,
Excellent post! When an innocent baby survives an abortion attempt, Barack Obama cruelly voted to make sure that the killing job gets done thoroughly by allowing this helpless baby to die alone in a cold steel pail. Many shepherds and many Catholics voted for Barack Obama. Many were aware and yet they STILL completely turned a blind eye to this most evil atrocity.
How unbelievably arrogant to think that you can enable the murdering of babies and still be in God’s favor In the same measure that they showed no mercy to the most helpless, then until they publicly repent, consider the reality that our nation’s blessings will now be remote.
….I’m with Linda Maria and Catherine on this one.
Ann Malley, Linda Maria, and Catherine, are all cafeteria catholics, believeing what you want to believe and ignoring what the Church tells you.
….and Anoymous is among the group that seems to believe that removing the signposts that lead to the Catholic Cafeteria means that wandering into ambiguity now equals the Catholic Faith.
YFC – so that you lead no one astray –
“WORTHINESS to RECEIVE HOLY COMMUNION. General Principles” –
Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) – regarding VOTING.
https://www.priestsforlife.org/magisterium/bishops/04-07ratzingerommunion.htm
There is nothing in the USA today proportionate to the annual torture and murder of approx. 1 MILLION innocent human beings through abortion.
You are NOT to receive Holy Communion if you voted for those people, until you go to confession and promise not to vote for supporters of abortion again.
Yes, MAC– so why do you and Caritas hypocritically persecute good Catholic posters, on this website– who are concerned that the Church really must discipline any Supreme Court Catholic justice, as well as all other “bad” Catholic politicians, etc.– who are destroying our Nation, promoting the sins of ABORTION, Same Sex “Marriage,” etc.?? Discipline of those who do terrible sins, and destroy a Nation– is a big responsibility! It is a necessity, to tell these unrepentant “bad” Catholics, that they are SEVERELY HARING CHRIST!! And that they must not receive Holy Communion!
Good Catholics ?
Good Catholics do their best to adhere to Sacred Scripture and the CCC in entirety to the best of their ability.
They adhere to Christ and the Magisterium of the Church.
They do not make up their own Faith, based upon their own opinions and the opinions of others.
…good Catholics do not shy away from inconvenient truths because facing them feels icky, MAC. Or would you have condemned those faithful during the time of the Arian crisis for resisting the shift in teaching/position despite what “most” bishops were saying?
Or should the faithful have just said, no biggie. It’s only one point of teaching (not 5-6 sentences). And if anyone wants to reject Arianism outright, and stick with the Catholic teaching, we’ll just say “they” are making up their own Faith. That way the “problem” just disappears.
Anyone who does not adhere to the CCC in entirety is a heretic and or schismatic.
Those who do their best to adhere to the CCC are “Faithful” and “Good” Catholics.
And if you do all this, Candice, but have not charity – sorry – no good.
For those readers who may be unaware YFC, aka Your Faithful Catholic is not a faithful Catholic.
He openly supports sodomy and sodomy marriage.
YES Anonymous whoever you may be– this is the TRUTH, what you are saying!!
Anonymous– I will add something to your statement, about the immoral politicians and those who vote for them– who work for evil, in our society! When my traditional Catholic doctor got older, and finally retired, I went and found another doctor, who kindly answered my questions, as to moral beliefs– and the new doctor, whom I have now had for about fifteen years, believes only in man/woman Traditional Marriage and Family, no gay sex, no birth control, no abortions, no sex outside marriage, no euthanasia, no IVF, etc. etc. He is a truly MORAL doctor, who believes in God (he’s Protestant)– and has very high medial recommendations, too! I will not go to any immoral doctor or nurse, for any reason!!
Your Doctor probably has read the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition” – – – – – – and adheres to it.
No one who adheres to the CCC condones or supports any immoral lifestyle or any mortal sin.
Ava is correct. We have Dr Delgado, a very holy and devout Catholic faithful to the Magisterium, he is very humble and caring pro-life doctor. He adheres to the CCC and is super solid in the faith and morals. We are blessed to have him near our area. Also Dr Seroki, also faithful Catholic doctor. Also we have a Catholic OBGYN in Fallbrook area, Dr Stigen, who is very faithful and pro life. All faithful.
God bless our lay faithful who speak the truth. May God end all the confusion that heretics and schismatics promote. We pray for the conversion of all sinners.
We have just witnessed the funeral Mass for Beau Biden. If you watched it you know that it was the celebration of a very strong good family. The President gave one of his most impressive orations, celebrating the work of this young man. When you watched the celebration of the Mass, you had to be impressed with the reverence at the altar, the great music and the family comments. You also had to be impressed with the high ranking members of other denominations on the altar. Also impressive was the number of Bishops in the sanctuary, including Archbishop Vigona (sic) the Apostolic Nuncio to the U.S. (Vatican Ambassador) and Cardinal McCarric(sic) retired Archbishop of Washington, a family friend, who conducted the committal service at the…
I saw OBAMA – the most pro-abortion, pro-contraceptive, pro-homosexual acts, anti freedom of religion President in the history of this Country standing at the PULPIT giving a eulogy in a Catholic Church.
Jesus will judge Beau Biden.
But JOE Biden is also pro-abortion, pro-contraceptive, pro-homosexual acts, anti-freedom of religion. This is enough to send Joe to Hell for eternity if he does not repent before his own death.
When and EVIL man – OBAMA – is at the PULPIT in a Catholic Church, and on public TV (C-SPAN) there nothing good about it.
In fact, the entire funeral becomes a Scandal.
I hope that this is not a bad sign reflecting on Beau’s life therefore effecting his eternal life ? ? ? ? ?
Beau Biden’s wife should have forbidden Obama to speak from the PULPIT.
You can blame all this mess and mass confusion on one thing: Vatican II. Since this council, the main ones who are being persecuted are loyal Catholics. Heretics such as Pelosi and Biden are a scandal to the Church. Unfortunately, because of the silence of most bishops, the majority of Catholics share the same heretical views.
Pilar, please provide the name of the Vatican II Document,
and the paragraph number, where ABORTION, CONTRACEPTION, HOMOSEXUAL ACTs and/or HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE, EUTHANASIA are condoned or supported in anyway.
Otherwise go to Confession for your public lies.
The Church is very clear on their teachings on these subjects. They are contained in the DOCTRINE of the FAITH – “Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition”.
In the future, read the teaching of the Church on a particular topic before you post. It is a sin to lie about the teachings of the Church in the public media, and gives grave Scandal.
Here goes ANNE playing Lord High Inquisitor again.
Thanks again for your common sense posts, Pilar. The real scandal are those who are so blinded as to be unwilling to admit the fruits are rotten and do something about it.
Ann Malley, since you are so smart, you answer the question asked.
Why are you supporting those who lie ?
Malley, now you please provide the name of the Vatican II Document,
and the paragraph number, where ABORTION, CONTRACEPTION, HOMOSEXUAL ACTs and/or HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE, EUTHANASIA are condoned or supported in anyway.
MAC, take your brick and hammer someone else. Pilar never said that your capital letter brigade was mentioned by name in VII documents. And those particular abominations do not need to be mentioned by name in VII documents. But loosening language and asserting pastoral sensitivity over teaching sound doctrine has led to the current mess.
You remind me of an absentee father who would yell at his wife saying, “When did I ever tell Junior he could go get into trouble!” Then proceed to bully her protestations of having needed him there if only to cover his own negligence. Disgusting.
MALLEY (since you seem to dislike your last name for some reason),
you are becoming very illogical and interfere in the logical questions asked of others.
Why ?
Are you afraid they (and ultimately you) will have to defend your unCatholic positions?
The CCC is very clear regarding all Mortal Sins. Perhaps you should read it before sticking foot in mouth, and lying.
And the changes had nothing do with your lies.
The changes were due to language issues from French to English in the 1992 version. That is why the Pope used Latin for the 1997 version.
Here are all the language changes to prove you are a liar.
https://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/updates.htm
You have been told all this before but you continue lying.
Anne, you should know better! Since Vatican II– the Church has been in a pitiful state of CHAOS!! The Pope and bishops refuse all authority and discipline! The Church is a mess! That is why we have “Pope Pelosi,” a “Pope” and a “God” to herself!! She’s immoral and totally NUTS, just as YOU are, with your insane post!! GROW UP!!
Linda Marie, go back and study accurate documents about our Catholic Faith. Since the time of Christ there have always been heretical and/or schismatic Clergy – high ranking and otherwise within the Church.
In fact we have had 12 bad Popes.
V II has nothing to do with it.
If you bothered to read the CCC (1997), you would know for a fact that the Church has not changed its teachings regarding Abortion, Divorce, Adultery, Homosexual acts, fornication, Heaven, Hell, Mortal Sin, etc., etc., etc.
Stop blaming V II for the sins of men. Your anger is misplaced, and therefore is not put to good use.
MAC– I know a much older and better Catechism– the Baltimore Catechism! Excellent! Try it sometime! As for the “sins of men”– MAC, the Church has been in a state of extreme, diabolic confusion and chaos, since Vatican II, and has some really bad problems! Before the Council, everything was quite orderly, with proper Church government! Also, Catholic parents could rely on good Catholic schools and universities, for their children! Not so, today! What did you think of the Notre Dame situation, with Obama, and the persecuted pro-life Catholics??? Very sad!!
Amen to that MAC. ☺
God bless you, Linda Maria, for maintaining patience with those who refuse to see anything but roses despite the sour smell.
Linda Marie – the Baltimore catechism is a local/national catechism.
It is wonderful for children.
The “Catechism of the Catholic Church” second edition (aka CCC, 1997) – is part of the “Apostolic Constitution” which all Catholics – world-wide must adhere to. There have only been two Catechisms via the Magisterium in the history of the Church.
Here is a site with quotes from our Popes regarding the CCC.
https://whatcatholicsreallybelieve.com/
Too bad that there are many Bishops and Priests who do not pass on the words of our Popes.
Sandy– you should not belittle the Baltimore Catechism! Perhaps you do not know it? It was the Catechism of general use, for ALL American Catholics, from 1885, I think, up until the Vatican II Council, in the 1960’s! It is excellent! The Baltimore Catechism was also adapted for use in Catholic schools and Catechism classes. Some good churches and Catholic schools, still use it! It is really EXCELLENT!! I, and many other faithful Catholics, much prefer it!
Linda Maria the Baltimore Catechism is a good one, I use it too as well and if she SOUNDS TO YOU like she is belittling, it is because you provoke such things by your continued belittling on church truths. She is not belittling. I;m sorry you feel that way.
I offer you the infinitely precious and noble heart of Jesus to protect our lay faithful who speak the truth even if others perceive some ill, for perception is not always reality. May we continue to most faithfully serve God as best we can. Honorably and with love.(Charity) Amen!
No Linda Marie, the Baltimore Catechism was regional / local.
It was written for children. And is still very good.
There have only been two catechisms in the history of the Church for the entire world promulgated from the Magisterium of the Church.
1) Catechism of the Council of Trent (1566 AD, aka Roman Catechism);
2) Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition ( 1997, aka CCC).
Nathan, the Baltimore Catechism was NOT a children’s catechism! It was the Catechism in general use, for all American Catholics, until Vatican II– it was adapted for use in Catholic schools. Some churches and Catholic schools still use it! It is very good! Your terms, “regional/local,” are not correct. Some of you posters do sound belittling of a very excellent, standard Catechism, revered by our Church!
Linda Maria, you have no clue what you are talking about.
The Baltimore Catechism was never and still is not used world-wide.
It always has been a “regional/local” children’s Catechism produced in the USA.
No one is belittling the Baltimore catechism, which is great for kids K through 10th grade.
Prior to V II – the only Catholic Church world wide Catechism was the “Catechism of the Council of Trent” aka Roman Catechism of 1566 AD.
No one is belittling the Baltimore by speaking the truth. It is considered a primer, the contents of which all Catholic children should know by age 15, or Catholic parents are not doing their jobs teaching the Faith.
To Sidney and others– the ORIGINAL Baltimore Catechism, was taken by many different clergy in the Church— and adapted and arranged, for different grade levels, in Catholic schools, as well as for specific needs, such as First Communion or Confirmation classes, etc. Different Catholic clergy and publishers, adapted it, abridged it, and arranged it. Regardless– ALL Catholics, of ALL ages, from 2 to 92– always referred back to the SAME Catechism, lifelong!! Same questions, and same answers, exactly! GOOD FOR LIFE!!
To Sidney, and other posters — Nancy Pelosi, and many other “wayward” Catholic politicians– could greatly benefit from correct use of the Baltimore Catechism– RIGHT NOW! I just got out from my closet, the No. #3 Baltimore Catechism, arranged as a two-year course for post-Confirmation classes. Nancy could read through this edition, and greatly benefit from it, if she tried hard enough! It’s NOT “baby stuff,” like what many in our Church publish today, for kids!
Linda Maria, V II had nothing to do with the very sinful behavior of Pelosi or the other heretics and schismatics behavior.
Neither they (nor you) can quote one official document of V II where their mortal sins are not condemned – as intrinsic evil.
Perhaps you have not read the CCC from cover to cover.
They probably have not read it either.
Btw, there have been documented heretical and schismatic clergy going back to the Arian heresy abt 335 AD – where most Bishops taught against the Trinity.
And what about the sins of Christ’s chosen 12 Apostles?
….the shift in approach does have much to do with the behavior of “Catholics”, Ava. A law that is not enforced is no law. The saying, liberal to a fault, is a saying for a reason.
God Bless you ANNE, you are a true church militants. Wonderful witness to the truth. Defending the church is defending Jesus and His truths that holy mother Church contains. Praise Be Jesus Christ.
Abeca, my reply to Sandy, above, was not intended for YOU! It was also not intended to hurt anyone!
Your use of the word belittle tells the opposite of what you say. No one is hurt here, its not the question, its your misuse of words to insinuate malice from our lay faithful who love the faith. So yes expect a correction when you choose to use words that insinuate ill. No one wants to belittle. Nothing was wrong to say that you are wrong to think its a belittlement. Its not.
God bless you, Linda Maria, for dealing so patiently with these individuals. They have no concept and no accountability for what they do, say, and enable.
Before the Council, Catholics often used to face questions from neighbors, friends, and co-workers, about their Faith. Discussions, however, never were about moral issues, like today! Almost everyone believed in basic Biblical morality! Instead, the questions were of an intellectual nature, such as “Why ask the intercession of Mary and the Saints, instead of going directly to God?” Or, “Why do you believe in the Real Presence, in your Eucharist? We only believe it to be symbolic!” Etc. Many Catholics had some trouble, answering some of these questions. So– it was handy, to refer to the old Baltimore Catechism!
Pilar, what you say is true! The Catholic Church has been a big mess– with NO DISCIPLINE– by the Pope and bishops– since Vatican II! Everyone does what they want! That is how they run the Church– everyone to his own way, and “discipline” is unwanted! A pitiful situation! Most of us can hardly function, as a result!
Linda Marie, you do not know Church history.
There have always been heresies and schisms and scandals even within high ranking Clergy.
Have you ever heard of Judas Iscariot?
Have you ever heard of the Arian heresy (against the Trinity) which most Bishops were part of ?
Have you ever heard of Pope Alexander VI (Borgia0 ?
Have you ever heard of Pope Benedict IX a playboy who was so bad that there were riots in Rome?
Etc ”
Do not knock our entire Church. Knock only those who sin against Christ and His Church.
You cause grave scandal and drive people away from the Church.
MAC– this is nothing but nonsense!
….have you the capacity to understand what you yourself write, MAC? To paraphrase you, “….it’s only 5 or 6 sentences that need clarification.” And yet you would leave that lack of clarity firmly in place to be made use of by those seeking to promote heresy. Wake up, MAC. Put down the brick.
Catholics died rather than offer even a few grains of incense (5 or perhaps 6 grains) to false gods.
And, yes, we know of the Arian heresy. But if most bishops were effected by the Arian heresy which would/did effect their judgment, what makes you believe that bishops at the council effected by modernism were not similarly compromised.
To MAC continued:
You may think others are driving people away from the Church, but what you are doing is attempting to drive logic from the Church and the use of reason. That does not build up the Faith, friend, and makes those in the Church little more than Simon-says followers.
MAC you are correct. And for the record their reasons are what drives logic and truth away because they preach their truths which promote moral relativism. They tell Christ’s church “its our way or its no way at all” God bless you for standing up for the truth. As much as its been shown to them, it is their own bad will pride that blinds them.
“Their” truths are nothing more than what the Church has always taught, Abeca. Or are you also intimating that Bishop Athanasius Schneider is pushing moral relativism?
Wherever it is you are receiving your talking points, you seem to tell Christ’s faithful that it is okay to change His words so long as the proper piece of paper is ambiguous enough to allow for misinterpretation.
Where is the logic and truth in doubling down on what is admittedly in need of clarification? Is it bad will pride to agree with Bishop Schneider?
Ahh yes, the Titular Bishop of the ancient city of Celerina. A junior bishop in a small diocese in Kazhakstan. One junior bishop surrounded by thousands of other bishops who have no questions.
Ann Malley, this “what the Church has always taught” crap-That is their marketing. Protestant Churches can say that too. The truth is that they teach what the Church has always taught when it suits them and ignore what the Church has always taught (like union with the Pope) when it suits them.
There is one, holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. This Church has ongoing talks with the SSPX leaders and priests to try to bring them into the Catholic Church. The SSPX has always refused to join the Catholic Church.
Linda Maria, God did not make you Pope.
You are obliged to follow the Pope in matters of Faith and Morals in all that is not sinful.
Get over it. And stop bad mouthing the Catholic Church and our Popes all the time or leave and start your own Faith.
Pilar, you are 100% wrong, and therefore leading people astray from the Church.
Pelosi, Biden, and others who support abortion, contraception, homosexual acts & homosexual marriage are NOT products of Vatican II.
In fact they are heretics and schismatics using CCC definition.
Point to one paragraph in the CCC or any V II document and show me where these are not stated as being grave sins.
Stop lying about V II, and or the CCC.
Pelosi and Biden et al have NOTHING to do with Vatican II.
Do not lie.
Their sins are their own. And they alone are responsible for them.
Your actions are similar to me blaming you for the adultery of my next door neighbor. Pure stupidity.
The CCC calls abortion, contraception, homosexual acts intrinsic evils.
If the person you are blaming had the duty to teach the next door neighbors the reality that adultery is a grave sin against God, then that third party would be partly culpable, Candice. To pretend otherwise is not only stupid, but wrong.
This naive defense of a council in obvious need of clarification is pure foolishness. You give teachers a complete pass to obfuscate and/or skate around the truths of the Faith. I wonder why.
Ann Malley, what needs clarifying?
In sharp contrast to Nancy Pelosi– St. Thomas More, the Chancellor of England, and second-in-command to King Henry VIII– gave his life, rather than sign his name agreeing to King Henry’s new laws, regarding divorce, and breaking from the Pope, to form the Church of England!! Many clergy of the Church,and men of the King’s government– did sign their names, but not St. Thomas More! St. Thomas More, and Bishop St. John Fisher, both met a horrible fate, of death!! St. John the Baptist, Christ’s cousin– likewise gave his life, after constantly prophesying against the evils of King Herod– until Herod killed him for it! How many people today, would do likewise?? Even to risk perhaps not their life– but everything else, short of…
I will finish my above post. How many of us today, would think it important, to give up a great deal for God, in standing up for His Truths– perhaps not to risk death– but to lose everything else, short of death?? Or– is it maybe a “waste of time,” and “too much for God to ask of us,” to do such a thing, in America?? Babyish, self-centered liberals, of the “Me-Generation,” all seem to want an easy, lazy life, of “rights” and “entitlements” handed to them on a golden platter— whether such “rights” are legitimate and moral, or not!
You’de be surprised by the answer. I also know that today sin blinds souls. There for even if not many do, we must pray and fast for all sinners. Sin blinds people spiritually and some have to suffer much before they can finally receive those precious graces that help them be freed up from being slaves to their sins. How many souls ended up in hell due to the hardened hearts who did not do what Jesus asked them to do, which is to pray and love those whom are hard to love. To love our enemies. Our love is imperfect. But we musy love them with the truth. Even if the truth hurts.
What a sad state of affairs. There is not one Church based on the widespread difference of opinions. I have observed so many many times on this website the battles where there is a great divide, a great polarization between those who rightly know in their hearts that Roman Catholic traditional sacraments, prayers, and practices established by Christ should be preserved and followed but are persecuted by those protestant CINOs who love the changes, stand rigorously behind them and the V2 Council that initiated all of the modern reform, a reform far surpassing that which Martin Luther himself did and he was excommunicated for it!
I firmly believe with all my heart that the SSPX follows the teachings of Jesus Christ, but not the V2…
Harv, there is one Catholic Church.
Faithful Catholics who adhere to
1) Sacred Scripture and
2) the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition” from the Magisterium and which is part of the Apostolic Constitution.
Unfortunately there are heretics and schismatics who think they know more than the Christ and His Church, and a few of them post on this site frequently.
For quotes from our Popes regarding the CCC:
“What Catholics REALLY Believe SOURCE”
https://whatcatholicsreallybelieve.com/
…and there are Catholics posting here who consider 5-6 sentences of ambiguity causing problems within the Church acceptable despite the damage they are doing to the integrity of the deposit of the Faith. To get along and feel good about themselves, they disparage others who are doing nothing more than following what the Church had always taught prior to a pastoral council that ushered chaos into the Church.
Even Paul VI said that the smoke of Satan had entered the Church following the council. Unfortunately, however, time has passed and there are those that have cozied up to the smell and don’t want to rock the boat to root cause the source of the problem and get rid of it. Too much trouble, I suppose. Much easier to call names…
Ann Malley, what do you personally intend to do about it.
Start now, and do something constructive.
When will you learn that – Your personal opinions mean absolutely NOTHING.
Your ranting means absolutely nothing.
Start quoting OFFICIAL Church documents giving paragraph or page numbers etc., so that those of us who are interested can check out your statements.
Other people do it. What makes you think you are so entitled that people will believe you only on your own opinions ? ? ? ? ?
Good job Candice!
Check out the statements of Bishop Athanasius Schneider, Candice. He’s called for a clarification of VII documents. Will you shout him down with capital letters? And if you did, would Abeca “Christian” applaud your good job? Probably.
Try giving up the ideology and go for the Catholic Faith.
Why doesn’t Bishop Schneider clarify them?
Ann Malley since you love to twist and cause more confusion, to correct your false notion against my intentions, my good job to Candice was due to her informing you, a person who does not attend a faithful church in union with Christ’s Magisterium, that your opinions are ones she describes. She did a good job at pointing them out. The rest, its no use explaining because as we already know, you wont listen.
Ann Malley, please tell us the sentences that are damaging the Faith.
If you really think that the issue with “independent” Catholic chapels is that they follow what the Church has always taught, then you have been brainwashed.
….call it brainwashing if you’d like, Anonymous. It is willful ignorance that gives VII a pass when it comes to understanding the crisis within the Church today – not Catholic Faith.
Ann Malley, Vatican II is Church Teaching. Willful DOUBTS about Church Teaching are a sin.
As far as I have been able to tell, you have never defined this so-called crisis within the Church. You cannot even say what you do not like about VII and you don’t even go to a Catholic Church. To say that this stretches your credibility is an understatement.
Be wary of people who use the word ‘crisis” without defining what exactly that “crisis” is. Listen to people who can spell out what is wrong and have proposals for solution. Many are working on “reforming” the Church. They have particular problems and particular means of attempting to solve them. People who think the TLM will solve things are naive. People who think clarifying some of Vatican II (seriously, WHAT?) will solve the “crisis” are probably inventing their own “crisis”. None of that will solve the problems in the Church, although there is nothing wrong with people who need something clarified asking for it and it would be a boon to have more EFs available, even if only a small group attends.
The usage of the TLM is only the beginning with regard to addressing the crisis of silent apostasy – that is leaving the Catholic Faith – within the Church.
No doubt that is why you try so hard to dispel and/or undermine any specifics regarding what ails Mother Church and any attempt to associate a timeline and/or make any rational analysis of the deleterious effects of the new slant on ecumenism, religious liberty, and collegiality. VII, while not the birthplace of these novelties, is most assuredly the most visible demarcation point of change and therefore should be thoroughly examined… and clarified.
Vatican II was very contradictory in many parts. I have read and studied the documents. Basically they are modernistic in tone, as one sentence often contradicts the previous one. Example;’ Latin must be retained in the Mass. However, bishops may use the vernacular’. While there is nothing really heretical contained in the documents, they are confusing. This confusion has led to most of the problems present in the Catholic Church today. You cannot refute me; these are the facts.
I saw an interview recently, with a Vatican spokesman, who was asked about all the contradictions, of the Vatican II documents. He replied, that the documents were intended to please all those present, as the bishops themselves had diverse ideas and opinions, so they did what they could, to include everyone, and write up basic summaries– the documents!
But nearly every single bishop voted for ALL the words in the docs. Nearly every single one! Of coursesome bishops thought a draft should emphasize one part of the teaching, and another bishop thought the document should emphasize another part of the teaching. So they write a document that has both parts of the teaching, and it gets near unanimous approval including the approval of the Pope. So what is wrong with that? How would YOU have drafted hundreds of pages of documents in a committee of hundreds of learned individuals??
….the result is that divergent opinions when acted upon lead in different directions. Differences that are increasingly apparent.
Your Fellow Catholic– they did not all agree, is the whole point! Also, at that time, all the clergy were under strict obedience, when it came to Church matters– and disagreement with their superiors, would cost them a great deal! The results? Very sloppy, vague concepts, which the leaders wanted most– set down into writing, in the the documents, as best as could be done, under the circumstances! It is much better, for very important matters– for the Church to go slowly, be very careful, and to take a great deal of time and care, even many decades– when considering especially extremely radical ideas and decisions!
Here are the votes, I”m tired of your bullying, LM. Read the votes of the BISHOPS and stop with your insinuation that there are major disagreements with the language of Vatican II, and all were promulgated by the Pope. Please stop trying to degrade the Church and her ecumenical councils. We aren’t talking about priests, you just made that up. We are talking about BISHOPS. And they weren’t sloppy, they spent half a decade on it for crying out loud.
https://www.vatican2voice.org/4basics/sixteen.htm
Change agents regularly describe the truth as bullying. Why? Because they desire to change people’s understanding of reality. So good on ya, YFC, for at least being consistent in being a recognizable plant for overthrow within the Church.
As to sloppy bishops, I’d posit that they were just exhausted and overwhelmed by the militant modernism being shoved down their throats at every turn. Much like other militant associations that are wreaking politically correct havoc to the ruination of Church and country and the common sense of even small children. Talk about degrading.
Linda Maria –
Many of your statements are uneducated or untrue. In charity I would propose uneducated.
If you read the CCC starting on page 720 you will a list of each of the 17 Ecumenical Council and the dates.
6 of them took less than one year. Only 3 of them took more than 3 years.
Vatican II took 3 years.
And never in the history of the Church did all Bishop agree on all points in any Council.
The majority of the Councils took less than 1 year. Check it out before you reply wrongly.
Candice, thanks for your post, one small point: You are correct that the Bishops of VII sat for 3 years. But the preparations and writing and consultation started 3 years before the Council actually sat. So really it was at least a 6 year effort.
Cardinal Kasper is on record saying exactly the same.
Why would you believe anything Walter Kasper says ? He supports mortal sin for pastoral reasons.
There are 16 Documents in V II. There are only 6 or so sentences that need clarification.
MAC – you keep quoting the “its only 6 or so sentences.” But MAC it only takes a little bit of poison in a meal to kill somebody. It only takes one or two words, even a shift in punctuation to change what something MEANS.
Let’s eat grandma!
Let’s eat, grandma!
Much like the difference between translating “many” to mean “all”. There is a very big difference, MAC, and it changes what Catholics are led to believe. And whether you take Kasper’s word or not, he’s taking advantage of compromise formulas – that which can and to often is NOT interpreted by way of tradition. That is why writing, especially doctrine, needs to be crystal clear, friend.
So Ann Malley, other than constantly complain to us
what do you personally intend to do about it ?
Go do something ‘constructive’ and leave the rest of us alone.
Kasper is a heretic, and no Catholic in his right mind pays any attention to him.
Bravo Leigh!
It’s amazing how deceived some V2 protestants are, take for example the blog by Bob One when he said on June 8, 2015 at 2:14 pm: “Its a simple answer Ann. They do not adhere to the teachings of the documents of the Vatican II Council, and want to be able to be excluded from those pastoral teachings. They do not recognize the authority of the Pope. They are Protestants dressing and playing catholic.”
The truth of the matter is the opposite happened. The V2 Church is a grave facade. The V2 Church doesn’t resemble even vaguely what the Roman Catholic Church does look like. Thank God for the true Roman Catholic clergy and laity who preserved the Roman Catholic faith and sacraments and didn’t go along with the modernist’s revered…
And who might those people are, Harvey? I have a strong suspicion you not only deny that Vatican II was a legitimate and binding ecumenical council, but are also a sedevacantist. The divisions among those who deny Vatican II – the dozens of camps all claiming to hold on to the truth – is a pretty good reason for believing that Rome actually has it pretty much right.
…and I strongly suspect that you, YFC, are little more than a change agent intent on overthrowing the Church from within. Keeping the name of Catholic while tossing out the Faith in lieu of a false obedience to whomever and whatever will give folk a pass on hard teachings…. or any teaching for that matter.
Quite frankly YFC, you’ve shown repeatedly your desires to transform the church to accepting more of your heretical views. It certainly hasn’t changed enough as far as you seem to be concerned. Apparently not only homosexual acceptance, but encouraging it too are your ways, your goal. Your way is defiance of God. Rather than continue to transform (destroy) the church from within, why stick around? Why not get out? What good is it to hold on calling yourself a catholic when you can’t stand it and want to transform it? Are you a hypocrite?
More destruction has gone on in the church, and it can easily be proven with one simple measure, loss of the faithful, than all of the protestant reformation. You can thank V2, liberation…
The Lord gave me a sexuality that you may not like, Harv, but he gave our entire Church an even greater gift, the wonderful 21st ecumenical council. You blaspheme the work of the Holy Spirit in the life of her Church when you belittle Vatican II, as you and others do here regularly. Vatican II is a wonderful gift, a beautiful rediscovery of ancient understandings of Church and Revelation, bringing the Church into dialogue with people of other faiths and the world as a whole.
St. Thomas (II-II:11:1) defines heresy: “a species of infidelity in men who, having professed the faith of Christ, corrupt its dogmas”. “The right Christian faith consists in giving one’s voluntary assent to Christ in all that truly belongs to His teaching. There are,therefore,two ways of deviating from Christianity: the one by refusing to believe in Christ Himself, which is the way of infidelity, common to Pagans and Jews; the other by restricting belief to certain points of Christ’s doctrine selected and fashioned at pleasure, which is the way of heretics. The subject-matter of both faith and heresy is, therefore, the deposit of the faith, that is, the sum total of truths revealed in Scripture and Tradition as proposed to our belief…
St. Thomas: ” in none of these does the will play an appreciable part, wherefore one of the necessary conditions of sinfulness–free choice–is wanting and such heresy is merely objective, or material. On the other hand the will may freely incline the intellect to adhere to tenets declared false by the Divine teaching authority of the Church. The impelling motives are many: intellectual pride or exaggerated reliance on one’s own insight; the illusions of religious zeal; the allurements of political or ecclesiastical power; the ties of material interests and personal status; and perhaps others more dishonourable. Heresy thus willed is imputable to the subject and carries with it a varying degree of guilt; it is called formal, because to…
Schismatics, says St. Thomas, in the strict sense, are they who of their own will and intention separate themselves from the unity of the Church. The unity of the Church consists in the connection of its members with each other and of all the members with the head. Now this head is Christ whose representative in the Church is the supreme pontiff. And therefore the name of schismatics is given to those who will not submit to the supreme pontiff nor communicate with the members of the Church subject to him. Since the definition of Papal Infallibility, schism usually implies the heresy of denying this dogma. Heresy is opposed to faith; schism to charity; so that, although all heretics are schismatics because loss of faith involves separation…
Good quote Abeca.
There are some posters who want to undermine the God given authority of our Popes.
Thank you Leigh. God bless you.
YFC, God didn’t make you a homosexual, you chose that on your own. God gives us all free liberty to love and obey Him according to His 10 Commandments, and through the teaching of our Lord and Savior in the gospels and epistles. We know very clearly God’s position on homosexuality from St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans in Chapter 1 verses 26 through 31.
Harv, you may be correct, but today’s science leans toward the notion that most homosexuals were born that way, and didn’t choose it. Of course, we must always remember that we are to treat homosexuals with dignity and hospitality, welcoming them into our church communities. They are are not, by nature, sinful people. Even when they have same-sex relations, how is that any different than heterosexuals having sex outside of marriage? Do we keep heterosexual couples who live together out of our churches and refuse them communion?
Bob One I can personally attest to you the homosexuality is a choice as I witnessed it in my own family. “Even when they have same-sex relations, how is that any different than heterosexuals having sex outside of marriage?” Here’s how sexual relations between a man and a woman do not cry out to heaven for vengeance as sodomy does. “Do we keep heterosexual couples who live together out of our churches and refuse them communion? “” until they repent and conform their lives to that of Christ’s will the answer is yes… What is it about basic Catholic moral theology that you do not understand….??
Bob One, you can not point to one credible study that says homosexuals are born that way – either through genes or mentally.
The US Center for Disease Control tried for years to find any medical correlation and there is none.
Fornication, Adultery, and Homosexual Acts are all Mortal Sins, and you know it – IF you are a Catholic.
All may and should attend Mass, and pray for the grace to give up their mortal sins.
NO ONE in the state of MORTAL SIN of ANY KIND can receive Holy Communion without committing grave sacrilege against the Body of our Lord.
BobOne,
1. ALL are welcome to attend Mass as long as they are respectful to the Catholic Faith while at Mass, and dress properly/modestly.
2. Only those in the state of grace may receive Holy Communion
without committing another mortal sin – that of Sacrilege.
3. Those who are obstinate in their sin and choose – Fornication or Homosexual Acts or Adultery are to be REFUSED Holy Communion – if known by the Priest.
Those in mortal sin must repent, go to Confession,
and resolve not to commit that moral sin again – – – – BEFORE receiving Holy Communion.
Harv, no one would choose a life of harrassment and hatred that people like you inflict upon us. Being gay is certainly not a choice, and nothing in Church teaching even hints that it is.
A, there is no life of harassment and hatred toward gays in the Catholic Church.
No one would even know your sexual preference unless you acted out or told them.
If you are Catholic, go to Mass. Do not receive Holy Communion if you are choosing homosexual acts, fornication, or adultery.
Pray to do God’s will (not yours) so that you may be with Him for eternity.
Bob, Your luminous comment was so bright it qualifies to be a black hole. Homosexuality is simply a behavior issue. God would not create people to defy His Holy Will and it is impossible and illogical for Him to do so; but as part of our test for our eternal reward, He does allow us to disobey Him. He allows us to follow the devil who is the father of all lies, deception, and homosexuality. If we so choose to sin, He has told us what the consequences will be — hell for eternity! If He won’t welcome sinners in Heaven who won’t repent before death their death, then why if they don’t repent and amend their lives would He want us to welcome them in His House on earth? Does this not make sense? Read St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans…
Bob, Of course I am correct. Glad to see there is a glimmer of hope for your opening your eyes. Let me ask you this, do you believe in hell? Do you believe the Baltimore Catechism and the reason for our existence? Do you believe our lives on earth are a test for how we spend our eternal reward Heaven or Hell? Do you believe in the sacred scriptures, especially St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans Chapter 1, verses 26-32 in the most accurate English written Roman Catholic Bible? If God won’t let defying and unrepentant sinful souls like homosexuals into Heaven and instead send them to hell for eternity, do you think He will welcome them into His church if they defy Him and won’t repent for their sins and amend their lives? Does this…
Religion like politics has liberals (modernists) and conservatives (traditionalists). Liberals love to smear traditionalists and can’t stand on their illogical so they respond the only way they can by attacks from other avenues, trying to keep the traditionalist on the defensive and off balance. It was plain and simple that the liberals who created the V2 church set out to appease sinful man countering God’s Holy Will. The traditionalists on the other-hand remained loyal, refusing to change what God established, holding onto the true faith and sacraments that Christ Himself established. After nearly 50 years of changes, the young and old are out of touch with the Roman Catholic faith. It is especially foreign to the young having…
Not true today Harvey. There is no such thing as a liberal or conservative Catholic.
There are “Faithful Catholics”, “Heretical Catholics”, and “Schismatic Catholics”.
It would be helpful if you would call people by their correct description.
CCC: 2089 …..
HERESY is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; ……
SCHISM is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.”
Leigh – some need to read your post – the CORRECT – official definitions.
And if the shoe fits, wear it.
Those who bad mouth all aspects of V II,
who blame V II for the sins of any individuals,
and discourage others from reading the CCC – are both Heretics and Schismatics.
Bob One, this is DOCTRINE of the FAITH – – –
CCC: ” 1415 Anyone who desires to receive Christ in Eucharistic communion must be in the state of grace.
Anyone aware of having sinned mortally must not receive communion without having received absolution in the sacrament of penance. ”
.
CCC: ” 1451 Among the penitent’s acts contrition occupies first place.
Contrition is sorrow of the soul
and detestation for the sin committed,
together with the resolution not to sin again. ”
SEE – 1 Cor 11:27-30 regarding condemnation for receiving unworthily.
Code of Canon Law:
” Can. 915 Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty
and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion. “
St. Paul’s Epistle to Timothy, 4.18 . . . “For there shall be a time when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears, and will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables. But be thou vigilant, labor in all things, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill thy ministry. Be sober. Source: Marian Missal (pre-Vatican II — i.e. the Tridentine Latin Mass), the Mass Common of a Doctor.
From the very same Marian Missal, the Gospel of the Holy TLM for a Common Doctor: Matthew 5.13-19. . . . “Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For amen I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall not pass of the law, till all be fulfilled. He therefore that shall break one of these least commandments, and shall so teach men, shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but he that shall do and teach, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven”. Notice that Jesus will not change God’s Laws! Only fools would believe otherwise! Also, this doesn’t imply all go to heaven! It is meant for sorrowful repenters. Those who…
Homosexuals need to know they are playing with eternal fire. Not only the homosexuals, but as St. Paul says, those that sympathize/support them. Eternity is forever! I don’t make God’s laws and revelations to the saints, I just share them for the sake of helping people save their own souls, because I do care.