Has anyone changed there mind here?

[ghost8108]

It would have been better I had never been born, than to be born into a world absent of the Traditional Latin Mass.

 

[latinmasslover]

I think the SSPX have hi-jacked the Traditionalist position on the Latin Mass.

They have no real interest in a latin liturgy - we all know that is going no where. The Church doesn’t have priests who are available and/or interested in this. They look at you if you ask them.

SSPX needs some legitimate issue to hang their hat on. They oppose Vatican 2 and they oppose Ecumenism. And they are excommunicated. So they need something to grasp at so their followers can argue in public about something.

The Latin Mass is a false issue for them.

Please tell me that none of you are buying into his “intuitive” hateful opinions as fact? Please?!?!?!

 

[latinmasslover]

Admittedly, Chris Ferrara is slightly more reliable than Fr. Martin at least, but that doesn’t say much. To begin with he is neither a theologian nor a canon lawyer, but a mere layman and civil lawyer (and one with an agenda at that). He is thus not qualified to write critiques of the decrees of ecumenical councils.

Then of course there is his obsession with the whole “Fatima cover-up” thing. That certainly doesn’t help his credibility. Fact is everything is a conspiracy to Ferrara, and it somehow influences nearly everything he writes.

Sorry, you’re going to have to do better than this, Gerard.

“From the mouth of infants, I have perfected praise.” Note, He does not say from the mouth of the learned.

So there’s no problem in the Church? You don’t believe that the Devil is using those in authority to destroy (as if it were possible) the Church? Jesus Christ Himself warned of this, do you suggest He is a conspiracy theorist?

 

[elt1956]

elt1956, I have noticed that rudeness and lack of manners has gotten worse in all aspects of society, and I am only 38. Some people act like their cellphones are a permanent attachment to their bodies. I do own a cellphone, but I turn it off while I am at church. I am not a medical or emergency professional, so if anybody calls, they can leave me a voicemail.

The cellphone, unfortunately, has become a major source of rudeness for many people. I feel bad for a cashier who cannot even check out a customer because he or she is talking on the phone, not even acknowledging the cashier who is right in front of him/her. One barista at a coffee shop I go to will not even serve a customer who refuses to get off the phone.

Hi Lak611. How do you think this rudeness began and what can we do about it as individuals?

 

[elt1956]

That is an excellent point you make there. People do base much of their preferances, one way or another, on their own emotional response.

Yep. We’re only human. God made us that way. I suppose what we have to do is seek a balance between the emotional responses and intellectual ones.

 

[Brother_John]

Hi Lak611. How do you think this rudeness began and what can we do about it as individuals?

It no doubt started as a result of Vatican II :newidea:

NOT

 

[pnewton]

Please tell me that none of you are buying into his “intuitive” hateful opinions as fact? Please?!?!?!

I have already drawn the ire of the kid here who is playing games. No. I am not buying into it.

 

[Your_Abbott]

It would have been better I had never been born, than to be born into a world absent of the Traditional Latin Mass.

Talk about your exaggerations. Jube, domne, benedicere!

 

[lak611]

Hi Lak611. How do you think this rudeness began and what can we do about it as individuals?

People are just too impatient and too accustomed to “multi-tasking”. I put some of the blame on employers for expecting employees to do 10 things at once. Also, the telephone CSR’s are either non-existant (computer instead) or located in a foreign country. Refusal to put up with that stuff and education are about the only solutions I can think of.

 

[elt1956]

People are just too impatient and too accustomed to “multi-tasking”. I put some of the blame on employers for expecting employees to do 10 things at once. Also, the telephone CSR’s are either non-existant (computer instead) or located in a foreign country. Refusal to put up with that stuff and education are about the only solutions I can think of.

Hi again. I am thinking about solutions close to home. How about parents seeing that their children are raised with the idea that respect for others is important? When I was a child eons ago, I was taught to “respect” my elders. One may not have agreed with them, but I did respect them for their life experience. How about parents teaching their children that each human has an inate dignity and deserves to be treated with diginity. I could go on and on and on, but I won’t. I tend to get my dander up the more I write about it and I don’t want you to think my dander is directed at you. Peace.

 

[lak611]

Hi again. I am thinking about solutions close to home. How about parents seeing that their children are raised with the idea that respect for others is important? When I was a child eons ago, I was taught to “respect” my elders. One may not have agreed with them, but I did respect them for their life experience. How about parents teaching their children that each human has an inate dignity and deserves to be treated with diginity. I could go on and on and on, but I won’t. I tend to get my dander up the more I write about it and I don’t want you to think my dander is directed at you. Peace.

Oh, I agree with you. The problem is most of the people who are rude with the cell phones are adults, not children, such as the ones grocery shopping and ordering coffee.

 

[elt1956]

Oh, I agree with you. The problem is most of the people who are rude with the cell phones are adults, not children, such as the ones grocery shopping and ordering coffee.

That’s true. I guess the problem of rudeness started several decades ago. Can’t change adults. Peace.

 

[Your_Abbott]

I have already drawn the ire of the kid here who is playing games. No. I am not buying into it.

Do you have anything to say, or do you enjoy attacking people personally. Post on the topic, or stop wasting people’s time and space.

 

[Your_Abbott]

“From the mouth of infants, I have perfected praise.” Note, He does not say from the mouth of the learned.

So there’s no problem in the Church? You don’t believe that the Devil is using those in authority to destroy (as if it were possible) the Church? Jesus Christ Himself warned of this, do you suggest He is a conspiracy theorist?

Have you no faith? Don’t you remember the promise Christ made to be with his Church til the end of time, through the presence of the Holy Spirit. How can the devil be speaking through the mouths of his Vicar on earth, and the bishops, the successors of the Apostles?

 

[latinmasslover]

Do you have anything to say, or do you enjoy attacking people personally. Post on the topic, or stop wasting people’s time and space.

No need to get mad at pnewton, you bring these comments on yourself by ignorant and presumptuous statements/accusations.

 

[latinmasslover]

Have you no faith? Don’t you remember the promise Christ made to be with his Church til the end of time, through the presence of the Holy Spirit. How can the devil be speaking through the mouths of his Vicar on earth, and the bishops, the successors of the Apostles?

I didn’t say the Devil was speaking throught the Vicar.

Keep in mind Judas, one of the 12…it’s not exactly impossible.

 

[Aragorn1]

Uh, oh. Looks like I really stirred up the hornet’s nest!

Yes he is. You don’t really want to get into a debate with me about Fr. Martin.

Oh, dear, I’m shaking in my boots!

Well, it’s plainly obvious that you haven’t read any of his books. You’ve taken two fiction books and one current events books and falsely described them. None of those books were particularly sensationalistic or apocalyptic. Have you actually read any of them? Nevermind. I know you haven’t.

I must admit that I have not read them. Nor do I wish to, based on what I’ve read about them. Similarly, I have not read The DaVinci Code or the Left Behind series or other such fictional nonsense, yet you wouldn’t accuse me of prejudging a book in those situations.

Take Keys of This Blood, for example.

I quote from a review posted on the Amazon page by Publisher’s Weekly:

In Martin’s apocalyptic scenario, Pope John Paul II is a geopolitician, whose aim is a New World Order, the Grand Design of God on earth, a global government rooted in a recognition of universal interdependence. The other chief players in the “millennium end-game” are “hardcore Leninist” Gorbachev, bent on world domination, and the West’s rulers, said to be eager to maintain the status quo as they condone “sinful structures” such as Third World exploitation. Martin . . . contends that the Pope has allowed the Church to split into politicized factions and willfully ignores “rampant decadence and unfaith” among churchmen. He spins a dramatic tale in this long, unpersuasive saga, which purports to be a behind-the-scenes probe of the Vatican’s role in the collapse of the Iron Curtain.

And also, from Library Journal:

A former Jesuit, Martin . . . contends that Pope John Paul II, Mikhail Gorbachev, and international business leaders are in competition to establish one world government and that this competition will end by the end of this century. The book claims to be an inside account of what the Pope is doing to win this geopolitical struggle and how he played an instrumental role in the collapse of the Iron Curtain. Martin’s previous works, all highly critical of Vatican, have provoked discussion and disagreement. Written with all the intrigue of a spy novel, this is an interesting and controversial commentary.

amazon.com/Keys-This-Blood-Versus-Control/dp/0671747231/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1205468242&sr=1-4

It is interesting to note that the book is listed under the following categories on Amazon: “Christianity, Church Institutions & Organizations, Conspiracy Theories, Controversial Knowledge, Cults & Demonism, New Age, Occult, Politics, Religion & Spirituality, Rites & Ceremonies, Roman Catholicism, True Crime, and World”. All of which begs the question, “Have you read his books, GerardP???”

I rest my case.

Depends on what he said, doesn’t it? Your disparaging remarks don’t do anything to discredit him. I don’t understand how a little “rolleyes” smiley is supposed to support you position.

And I don’t understand how your straw man attack on my “rolleyes” smiley is supposed to support your position (what, like you’ve never used smilies or something?)! I notice how you completely evaded the point I made about Fr. Martin being on the Art Bell show (and just his being on it gives one an inkling of his credibility or lack thereof). Didn’t you seem to notice how I pointed out that according to that article he made a claim that is obviously false, namely that he read the “real” third secret, which he described as being something that ultimately turned out to be nothing close to what we got in 2000 from the Vatican. So who’s the liar here: Pope John Paul II and then-Cardinal Ratzinger, or Fr. Malachi Martin who tries to excite people’s curiosity on national TV??? (I think I know where my money is ) Hasn’t it occurred to you that authentic prophets throughout history have not sought attention and publicity at all, much less a TV audience of over a million? (I think it was St. John of the Cross (?) who visited the house of an alleged seer one day and asked if this was the home of “the saint”. When answered in the affirmative he turned right around and walked away!)

As far as Fr. Martin’s predictions go, He always prefaced that he wasn’t a prophet and that he was not a gambling man. But he managed to correctly predict the election of Albino Luciani as Pope John Paul I in 1978,

He predicted in 1993 that “we’ve only had a foretaste of what’s to come with what they’ve done with the World Trade Center…They’re going to blow it up.” (Fr. Martin died in 1999 by the way.)

In 1972 in “Three Popes and the Cardinal” he predicted that by the year 2000 as a cliche’ date the Church would be so changed from what it had been in 1960’s that it would be virtually unrecognizable.

He stated in 1995 that “Actuarially speaking, John Paul II has 7 to 10 years left to live.”

In 1996 in an interview with Bernard Janzen, he blew the whistle on a number of prelates who were protecting priests who were sexually abusing Children. Among the problem bishops he cited, “Bernard Law is NOT a conservative, Bernard Law is interested in one thing and that’s Bernard Law.” Virtually all of the names he cited in those interviews have since been named and removed for their sees or positions after their scandals broke.

[continued…]

 

[Aragorn1]

…continued]

I note your failure to cite sources for these alleged “prophecies”.

Besides, plenty of alleged prophets claim to have prophecies that have been fulfilled. Most are eventually exposed as frauds. And let me know when the revelations of Fr. Malachi Martin become approved by the Church and he becomes St. Malachi Martin! Oh but that will never happen only because of all the bureaucrats and Freemasons in the Vatican who will block any attempt to canonize him!

But let’s take a look at some of your individual examples:

In 1972 in “Three Popes and the Cardinal” he predicted that by the year 2000 as a cliche’ date the Church would be so changed from what it had been in 1960’s that it would be virtually unrecognizable.

And this was fulfilled when? What objective criterion can we use to determine whether this guesswork passed off as “prophecy” has been fulfilled?

He stated in 1995 that “Actuarially speaking, John Paul II has 7 to 10 years left to live.”

Textbook application of the classic “fuzzy method” used by alleged “psychics”, that. (So-called “psychics” make predictions that are so vague as to make their eventual “fulfilment” inevitable.) If he were a real prophet he could have simply said “in ten years”. As it is, “7-10 years” is pure guesswork, and a probable guess at that. JP2 had already reigned for 17 years; it wouldn’t be too far off the mark to limit the rest of his pontificate to ten more years, 27 years being one of the longest pontificates in history. This is about as much of a prophecy as the weatherman’s prediction that “there will be a 50% chance of precipitation tomorrow”.

In 1996 in an interview with Bernard Janzen, he blew the whistle on a number of prelates who were protecting priests who were sexually abusing Children. Among the problem bishops he cited, “Bernard Law is NOT a conservative, Bernard Law is interested in one thing and that’s Bernard Law.” Virtually all of the names he cited in those interviews have since been named and removed for their sees or positions after their scandals broke.

This is without question interesting, if it’s true. But it could signify nothing other than that Fr. Malachi had inside information on Bernard Law and those other people.

So, yes. He actually does have a good track record.

Track record indeed! I like how you boast about his “track record” when you don’t even cite sources!

Ah, guilt by association, another cheap debating tactic.

Throughout history there have been plenty of people who, either for money or publicity or both, have passed off scams on the people with their predictions of the end of world. (Edgar Whisenant is a prime example of this.) With thousands of predictions so far and a .000 batting average, there is no reason at all to believe that Fr. Martin was not just another sensationalist. And this is not something unique to Fundamentalists or New Age psychics. Catholic priests have failed in their predictions before (an example would be Fr. Stephano Gobbi). We need to keep in mind that we “know not the day nor the hour” of Christ’s return. Despite past fraudulent “prophets”, last time I checked the world is still here; and when 2017 rolls around as it likely will then we’ll know that Fr. Martin was wrong.

Oh by all means elighten us all. You know so much. How could I have been such a fool? You’ve totally debunked the myth of Fr. Martin being a scholar with your question mark and “roll on the floor” smiley.

There you go with the smiley thing again. And I never even addressed Fr. Martin’s being a scholar (though I freely admit in retrospect that my sarcastic comment was presumptuous and premature at this stage). But on the contrary, I debunked your presumption of Fr. Martin’s credibility with common sense thinking and the prudence to avoid false prophets (whom Our Lord warned against) and their silly predictions of the end of the world.

It’s interesting, in that interview of Fr. Kramer, he said that “war will probably break out in 2008”. Quite a few traditionalists I know have been convinced that China is going to attack the U.S. “no later than 2008”. Well we’ll see if that happens. If it doesn’t then it’s just more proof in the pudding that you can’t trust the scams of these self-proclaimed prophets.

Just who is insulting who’s intelligence here?

OK, fair enough, I retract what I said about “insulting intelligence”. And I apologize; I guess I came across as a little harsh.

Now how 'bout you run along now and learn something and get back to me when you have something other than childish derision to present as an argument. Okay??

Okay!!

 

[Aragorn1]

“From the mouth of infants, I have perfected praise.” Note, He does not say from the mouth of the learned.

You’re prooftexting just like a Protestant. I gather from this that you believe intelligence or competence in a relevant field is not required if one is going to presume to bash Holy Mother Church?

So there’s no problem in the Church? You don’t believe that the Devil is using those in authority to destroy (as if it were possible) the Church? Jesus Christ Himself warned of this, do you suggest He is a conspiracy theorist?

I never said any of the things you imply here. Of course there are problems in the Church. And I think there’s a major difference with how we’re defining “conspiracy theorist” here.

 

[I_Believe]

I guess that sort of comment goes over well when Satan is in control.

Notice I did not say “Satan **is **controlling you.” But can you at least understand why this can be perceived as an insult. If not, then at least accept that others can see it that way.

Well, I’d read it as sarcasm first, then ask myself why it was said.
Could actually be the truth, whether the one saying it even realizes it.

That’s the trouble with the internet though. We can’t be stopped and asked " what do you mean by that ?" like we could if we having a discussion in person. If we get upset over something posted here on the net, we are too quick to go ahead and assume we know what they meant. We either ignore it or “fire back”. I say fire back because we assume we are being “fired upon”.

I’m guilty of it as are many here. And my post to Cat was indeed uncharitable. But what I said about Heavy Metal was MY humorous opinion, and really, Satan may very well have been in control of my imprudence in saying it. There is nothing funny about the black mass and joking about it is probably not too pleasing to God. Ironically, you’re example is the truth, applied to the matter at hand.