Taylor Marshall's Twitter feed has disappeared

  • Thread starter Thread starter gracepoole
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Emeraldlady said:
Future Catholics will recognise that in the light of time. Sadly we have to endure through the blind anti VII doomsayers until then.
Click to expand...
Actually I believe the opposite is true. Catholics have awakened to the problems that have arisen as a result of the council and are attempting to bring back the traditions and teachings that have been forgotten.
 
Seriously, he is saying that parishes that have female altar servers are heretical. You are doing what I am saying.
 
Crusader13 said:
I think the problem is that when you say the Church, many would argue that it’s not the Church per se, but certain clergy that have advocated for these changes and allowances.

I would not argue that the Church itself would permit heresies but individuals could. No different than saying it’s not the Church which is allowing the idols in the churches right now, but instead it’s certain clergy and even Pope Francis himself.
Click to expand...
From the Code of Canon Law:
Lay persons can fulfill the function of lector in liturgical actions by temporary designation. All lay persons can also perform the functions of commentator or cantor, or other functions, according to the norm of law.
Click to expand...
Female lectors are not the result of “certain clergy.” They’re the result of Catholic teaching.
 
I’m well aware of the code of canon law and the changes that were made. There was a time when no women were allowed to serve at the altar and no laymen were allowed to serve in these capacities.

The changes after VII opened the door for them. So for the previous Popes and documents which held this longstanding belief, to have them changed in this manner, has been and continues to be a point of contention.

I can’t speak for Dr. Marshall and I don’t need to defend him, because he has numerous sources for anyone to look up what he believes.

But it appears that he’s drawing a correlation between the changes and the direction that we’re headed.
 
Crusader13 said:
I’m well aware of the code of canon law and the changes that were made. There was a time when no women were allowed to serve at the altar and no laymen were allowed to serve in these capacities.

The changes after VII opened the door for them. So for the previous Popes and documents which held this longstanding belief, to have them changed in this manner, has been and continues to be a point of contention.
Click to expand...
I don’t think anyone here is disputing this. As I’ve said, it was the Church Herself that instituted the changes.
Crusader13 said:
I can’t speak for Dr. Marshall and I don’t need to defend him, because he has numerous sources for anyone to look up what he believes.

But it appears that he’s drawing a correlation between the changes and the direction that we’re headed.
Click to expand...
Again, no one here is claiming anything contrary to this reading of Marshall. The problem instead seems to be that you haven’t responded to posts 229 and 234:
But again, as you note here, these things are allowed . By the Church. Is the Church permitting heresies? Would she permit something that leads to heresy?
Click to expand...
 
Some of the changes were to be rare and only done out of complete necessity but have gone beyond that to the routine.
 
gracepoole said:
But again, as you note here, these things are allowed . By the Church. Is the Church permitting heresies? Would she permit something that leads to heresy?
Click to expand...
Church is also “allowing” idols in Churches so I don’t think that’s the sole factor of consideration when a Catholic assesses something
 
You know what, I am burnt out by the whole thing, and this post is directed to no one in this thread, especially since I have only read about a third of it.

I have been following the whole amazon synod and Vatican affairs, vague statements, infighting the whole bit, and I have had enough. I am fairly conservative. I don’t like clapping, I receive on the tongue, but for the most part, I mind my own business. This whole business though about pachamama though has pushed me over the edge.

Now I find myself not enjoying the mass, so when I got home, I unsubscribed all my youtube subscriptions, unsubscribed all Catholic press in email having to due with church politics. I am taking a vacation from all of it. I am going to find a nice boring parish with no hand clapping, no holding hands, and go back to minding my own business.

When all of this news starts creeping in between me and Christ, it is time to take action. Total blackout, and go back to reading stuff from the Saints. I have to wonder if anyone else is getting burnt out about all of this.
 
Aquinas11 said:
40.png
gracepoole:
But again, as you note here, these things are allowed . By the Church. Is the Church permitting heresies? Would she permit something that leads to heresy?
Click to expand...
Church is also “allowing” idols in Churches so I don’t think that’s the sole factor of consideration when a Catholic assesses something
Click to expand...
So the Church has permitted heresy by allowing altar girls, female lectors, and/or female Eucharistic ministers?
 
Crusader13 said:
I’m well aware of the code of canon law and the changes that were made. There was a time when no women were allowed to serve at the altar and no laymen were allowed to serve in these capacities.

The changes after VII opened the door for them. So for the previous Popes and documents which held this longstanding belief, to have them changed in this manner, has been and continues to be a point of contention.
Click to expand...
Based on that, the ‘rot’ would have started with allowing women to speak in Church and to wear slacks etc.

1 Cor 14 33 For God is not a God of disorder, but of peace. As in all the congregations of the saints, 34 women are to be silent in the churches. They are not permitted to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. 35 If they wish to inquire about something, they are to ask their own husbands at home; for it is dishonorable for a woman to speak in the church.
 
Crusader13 said:
it only served as another stepping stone towards women deacons and possibly women’s ordination, which is what some clergy support.
Click to expand...
Pope John Paul II has declared that “the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women” and that his “judgement is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful”

CCC 1577
“Only a baptized man validly receives sacred ordination.” The Lord Jesus chose men to form the college of the twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators to succeed them in their ministry. The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ’s return. The Church recognizes herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord himself. For this reason the ordination of women is not possible

Canon law. 1024 A baptized male alone receives sacred ordination validly.

And pope Francis said “that door is closed” regarding women’s priestly ordination.
For Taylor Marshall it’s become all doom and gloom, and for him the only thing that’ll “save” it is a traditionalist stance

And deacon has different meanings
 
Last edited:
This is from an article published recently by The Washington Post, the same statement was reported by other sources too. Why you don’t believe the Pope but listen instead to people (like Marshall and Voris) that are making of ‘conspiracy theories’ and Church scandals their source of income and fame?

‘Francis insisted that the carved wooden statues of naked pregnant women were brought to the Vatican for display during his Amazon synod “without any intention of idolatry,” undercutting conservative claims that they were symbols of pagan, idolatrous worship.’
 
gracepoole said:
But again, as you note here, these things are allowed . By the Church. Is the Church permitting heresies? Would she permit something that leads to heresy?
Click to expand...
The Church allowed Communion on the Hand, but we can all agree that was a mistake, right?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top