Who would be happy if every parish had to have a TLM Mass

[piouswoman]

You state this in response to:
And then you have the nerve to criticize those you call Modernist Popes and Bishops? Maybe Bishops, but Popes? Just how great do you think you are?

So are you suggesting that piouswoman is as great as St. Catherine or that she thinks she is? I do not recall St. Catherine committing slander in her opposition to things the popes did. She was critical of actions, but seemed to have a love for her pope.

But I, piouswoman, have committed slander? When? Where? And I, piouswoman have no love for my pope? By what do you base this insinuation?

 

[elt1956]

But I, piouswoman, have committed slander? When? Where? And I, piouswoman have no love for my pope? By what do you base this insinuation?

I love the way people who can’t handle the truth have to ask silly and impertinent questions…so here is my answer:

No, not angry. I simply follow the true doctrines of our faith as have popes, bishops, martyrs, saints, and doctors of the church for almost two thousand years. How are you going to square your argument with that? It isn’t hard for me to adhere to my faith, but evidently, it is for countless modern Catholics who have been led astray so shamelessly by MODERNIST BISHOPS AND POPES.

From this it would appear to me that you pick and choose which Pope you wish to follow. Benedict apparently leans to the more traditionalist, whatever that is, view, while Pope John Paul II of all things was “caught” kissing the Koran. Is this what you mean by a Pope being a Modernist? What about Pope John XXIII. Is he beneath your idea of faithfulness too?

 

[piouswoman]

I love the way people who can’t handle the truth have to ask silly and impertinent questions…so here is my answer:

No, not angry. I simply follow the true doctrines of our faith as have popes, bishops, martyrs, saints, and doctors of the church for almost two thousand years. How are you going to square your argument with that? It isn’t hard for me to adhere to my faith, but evidently, it is for countless modern Catholics who have been led astray so shamelessly by MODERNIST BISHOPS AND POPES.

From this it would appear to me that you pick and choose which Pope you wish to follow. Benedict apparently leans to the more traditionalist, whatever that is, view, while Pope John Paul II of all things was “caught” kissing the Koran. Is this what you mean by a Pope being a Modernist? What about Pope John XXIII. Is he beneath your idea of faithfulness too?

It would be nice if you hadn’t evaded answering my questions.

And from what you have written it appears to me that **you **pick and choose which pope **you **wish to follow. You disregard what 262 previous popes have taught to follow the modernist whims of the popes of the last forty years. It is hypocritical to say what you have. To disregard the teachings of the church and popes for nearly two thousand years, but to embrace error being foisted upon you for the last forty years is illogical. The church did not begin with Vatican II. One can recognize the pope as the pope, although he is teaching error. It is our duty as Catholics to know and defend the truths of our faith. We must pray for the pope.

 

[pnewton]

But I, piouswoman, have committed slander? When? Where? And I, piouswoman have no love for my pope? By what do you base this insinuation?

You have used the phrase “modernist Popes” and stated,
“Thank you JPII, for the confusion and misdirection of countless Catholics worldwide, at the expense of their faith.” In fact, you can only speak to your own personal level of confusion or loss of faith. You know not one individual that has been confused or lost faith because of JPII, unless you are in a position to judge the hearts of other.

As to the second question, I did not say you have no love for your pope. I only stated that it was one of the marks of St. Catherine. For those that love to quote her in her criticism of a pope, should also emphasize her attitude in doing so, lest one become a banging gong.

 

[piouswoman]

You have used the phrase “modernist Popes” and stated,
“Thank you JPII, for the confusion and misdirection of countless Catholics worldwide, at the expense of their faith.” In fact, you can only speak to your own personal level of confusion or loss of faith. You know not one individual that has been confused or lost faith because of JPII, unless you are in a position to judge the hearts of other.

As to the second question, I did not say you have no love for your pope. I only stated that it was one of the marks of St. Catherine. For those that love to quote her in her criticism of a pope, should also emphasize her attitude in doing so, lest one become a banging gong.

No, I can speak for others too. I can speak for my husband, my daughter, my sisters, by brothers, my parents, and other relatives and friends too many to number. So you are quite wrong about that.

Although I *have *singled out JPII, it is right to mention him as he has had such a long pontificate that the brunt of the damage to the church can be considered to be his main contribution as pope.

 

[Silver_Thread]

Sorry. I posted this before finishing the thread & seeing that tje definition had already been offered as an explanation of the fact that the Church says Gregorian Chant should have ‘pride of place’ i.e. come BEFORE other music in our liturgical celebrations.

Discuss all you want, nit pick as you will, Those who implemented VII had an agenda altogether different than what anyone in the pews know about Our Bishops past and present have an agenda and could care less what the faithful know or understand. Wake up!!1 the church is in Schism. .

 

[EasterJoy]

Discuss all you want, nit pick as you will, Those who implemented VII had an agenda altogether different than what anyone in the pews know about Our Bishops past and present have an agenda and could care less what the faithful know or understand. Wake up!!1 the church is in Schism. .

Do I understand you correctly? Are you saying that the princes of the Church, under the leadership of the last five Popes in succession by now, got together on the occasion of the 2nd Vatican Council and colluded to abandon their faith and to deceive the laity into doing the same?

That doesn’t sound like a schism. It sounds as if you believe that Rome and most if not all of the bishops still in communion with her have fallen squarely into heresy, and a heresy of the most hard-hearted variety. These are very serious charges.

 

[elt1956]

It would be nice if you hadn’t evaded answering my questions.

And from what you have written it appears to me that **you **pick and choose which pope **you **wish to follow. You disregard what 262 previous popes have taught to follow the modernist whims of the popes of the last forty years. It is hypocritical to say what you have. To disregard the teachings of the church and popes for nearly two thousand years, but to embrace error being foisted upon you for the last forty years is illogical. The church did not begin with Vatican II. One can recognize the pope as the pope, although he is teaching error. It is our duty as Catholics to know and defend the truths of our faith. We must pray for the pope.

Give me a couple of examples of dogmas/doctrines where each those whom you call Modernist Popes have gone against the doctrines and morals of the Church or have taught a dogma ex cathedra that is not in line with the Church I know. You have very forcefully expounded negatively on " some things", but have not clarified what you are talking about. I am willing to listen, but I want to know what I am listening to. Peace

 

[elt1956]

It would be nice if you hadn’t evaded answering my questions.

And from what you have written it appears to me that **you **pick and choose which pope **you **wish to follow. You disregard what 262 previous popes have taught to follow the modernist whims of the popes of the last forty years. It is hypocritical to say what you have. To disregard the teachings of the church and popes for nearly two thousand years, but to embrace error being foisted upon you for the last forty years is illogical. The church did not begin with Vatican II. One can recognize the pope as the pope, although he is teaching error. It is our duty as Catholics to know and defend the truths of our faith. We must pray for the pope.

Give me a couple of examples of dogmas/doctrines where each of those whom you call Modernist Popes have gone against the doctrines and morals of the Church or have taught a dogma ex cathedra that is not in line with the Church I know. You have very forcefully expounded negatively on " some things", but have not clarified what you are talking about. I am willing to listen, but I want to know what I am listening to. Peace

 

[elt1956]

It would be nice if you hadn’t evaded answering my questions.

And from what you have written it appears to me that **you **pick and choose which pope **you **wish to follow. You disregard what 262 previous popes have taught to follow the modernist whims of the popes of the last forty years. It is hypocritical to say what you have. To disregard the teachings of the church and popes for nearly two thousand years, but to embrace error being foisted upon you for the last forty years is illogical. The church did not begin with Vatican II. One can recognize the pope as the pope, although he is teaching error. It is our duty as Catholics to know and defend the truths of our faith. We must pray for the pope.

Give me a couple of examples of dogmas/doctrines where each of those whom you call Modernist Popes have gone against the doctrines and morals of the Church or have taught a dogma ex cathedra that is not in line with the Church I know. You have very forcefully expounded negatively on " some things", but have not clarified what you are talking about. I am willing to listen, but I want to know what I am listening to. Peace

 

[elt1956]

It would be nice if you hadn’t evaded answering my questions.

And from what you have written it appears to me that **you **pick and choose which pope **you **wish to follow. You disregard what 262 previous popes have taught to follow the modernist whims of the popes of the last forty years. It is hypocritical to say what you have. To disregard the teachings of the church and popes for nearly two thousand years, but to embrace error being foisted upon you for the last forty years is illogical. The church did not begin with Vatican II. One can recognize the pope as the pope, although he is teaching error. It is our duty as Catholics to know and defend the truths of our faith. We must pray for the pope.

Give me a couple of examples of dogmas/doctrines where each of those whom you call Modernist Popes have gone against the doctrines and morals of the Church or have taught a dogma ex cathedra that is not in line with the Church I know. You have very forcefully expounded negatively on " some things", but have not clarified what you are talking about. I am willing to listen, but I want to know what I am listening to. Peace

 

[elt1956]

It would be nice if you hadn’t evaded answering my questions.

And from what you have written it appears to me that **you **pick and choose which pope **you **wish to follow. You disregard what 262 previous popes have taught to follow the modernist whims of the popes of the last forty years. It is hypocritical to say what you have. To disregard the teachings of the church and popes for nearly two thousand years, but to embrace error being foisted upon you for the last forty years is illogical. The church did not begin with Vatican II. One can recognize the pope as the pope, although he is teaching error. It is our duty as Catholics to know and defend the truths of our faith. We must pray for the pope.

Give me a couple of examples of dogmas/doctrines where each of those whom you call Modernist Popes have gone against the doctrines and morals of the Church or have taught a dogma ex cathedra that is not in line with the Church I know. You have very forcefully expounded negatively on " some things", but have not clarified what you are talking about. I am willing to listen, but I want to know what I am listening to. Peace

 

[elt1956]

Do I understand you correctly? Are you saying that the princes of the Church, under the leadership of the last five Popes in succession by now, got together on the occasion of the 2nd Vatican Council and colluded to abandon their faith and to deceive the laity into doing the same?

That doesn’t sound like a schism. It sounds as if you believe that Rome and most if not all of the bishops still in communion with her have fallen squarely into heresy, and a heresy of the most hard-hearted variety. These are very serious charges.

Dear Silver Thread. Please give examples of how you feel the so called, by some, Moderneist Popes have erred in matters of Faith and Morals. What dogmas and doctrines have they so skillfully and evilly proposed? If any of these Popes have not erred when giving an infallible decree ex cathedra, how can you say they have truly erred. A matter of personal opinion whether given by Pope or laity is not dogma. Peace.

 

[elt1956]

No, I can speak for others too. I can speak for my husband, my daughter, my sisters, by brothers, my parents, and other relatives and friends too many to number. So you are quite wrong about that.

Although I *have *singled out JPII, it is right to mention him as he has had such a long pontificate that the brunt of the damage to the church can be considered to be his main contribution as pope.

If Pope John Paul II , this man who is among the first to try to bring reconciliation to the world, has caused so much confusion and chaos to the Church, why is he being hailed as “The Great”? This man will be given saintood above all your protestations. Not because he was, as you call him, a Modernist Pope, but because he was an inspiration to those of us who believe ALL Popes are the head of the Roman Catholic Church and have the FINAL say in matters of Faith and Morals. Study your Church History and you will see there were many, many Popes in the past 1600 years or so who TRULY did not deserve the title IL Pappa, BUT they were still deemed infallible in their authority regarding dogma and doctrine…

 

[elt1956]

I am a traditional Roman Catholic. After forty plus years of abuse, confusion, error, blasphemies, sacrilege, watching my church fall apart, watching my family leave the faith, watching my friends live in sin and leave the faith, I think I am entitled to DEFEND my faith. And if you want to come on here and write a sanctimonious letter belittling me, then just go right on ahead. I KNOW THE TRUTHS OF OUR FAITH, AND I WILL DEFEND THEM IN THE FACE OF THOSE WHO WILL TEACH ERROR. It is about saving my soul and those of my family, and if you don’t like it, then that is too bad, I can live with it. If you want to call me by any other name than my chosen screen name, then go right ahead, no one is stopping you.

Dear Woman. Now that you have given a reason for your anger other than what you think are errors of the hierarchiy of the Church, including the Pope, I can understand where you are coming from much better. I will pray for you and yours. Please pray for me and mine. :hug3: Peace.

 

[elt1956]

I am a traditional Roman Catholic. After forty plus years of abuse, confusion, error, blasphemies, sacrilege, watching my church fall apart, watching my family leave the faith, watching my friends live in sin and leave the faith, I think I am entitled to DEFEND my faith. And if you want to come on here and write a sanctimonious letter belittling me, then just go right on ahead. I KNOW THE TRUTHS OF OUR FAITH, AND I WILL DEFEND THEM IN THE FACE OF THOSE WHO WILL TEACH ERROR. It is about saving my soul and those of my family, and if you don’t like it, then that is too bad, I can live with it. If you want to call me by any other name than my chosen screen name, then go right ahead, no one is stopping you.

Here is another case:

the-tidings.com/2005/0902/communion.htm

Still, even Pope John Paul sometimes gave a blessing in place of Communion to non-Catholic leaders, most famously to a group of Lutheran bishops in Sweden in 1989. Though unauthorized, the practice has grown considerably since then, in part because people pay attention to what their church leaders do.

From the hands of the Holy Father himself.

So why couldn’t Ratzinger, the Traditionalist" give the blessing instead of communion to Brother Roger? Pope John Paul II, the "Modernist? did.

 

[elt1956]

Dear Woman, I think 2000 years is a bit tooooo far back. Peace.

Dear Whoever you are,

I don’t. And for you to state that, you may as well say you are in disagreement with all of the popes, bishops, saints, martyrs, and doctors of the church for two thousand years. An interesting position to take, as it puts you in a group that disagrees with their own Catholic faith.

Dear Woman. Whew, talk about the splinter and the beam!!! As I posted before, it was some three or more hundred years before Latin became the vernacular of the Roman Catholic Church. The apostles probably communicated in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek.

 

[elt1956]

Dear Woman, I think 2000 years is a bit tooooo far back. Peace.

Dear Whoever you are,

I don’t. And for you to state that, you may as well say you are in disagreement with all of the popes, bishops, saints, martyrs, and doctors of the church for two thousand years. An interesting position to take, as it puts you in a group that disagrees with their own Catholic faith.

MrS;3463932:

Pardon me, but the link you posted is nothing more than a book and is merely speculation and opinion of its author. It was not written by a pope, a saint, or a doctor of the church as you would have anyone believe. What I have posted is taken from the Catholic Catechism

, before Vatican II. I also noticed under “about this book” there were links to other books related to the issue and one of them was this:
mostholyfamilymonastery.com/
If you scroll down they give the true definition of “no salvation outside of the Catholic Church”.

For you to say that I have no intention of learning that my position is wrong, you are also denying the position of popes, bishops, priests, saints, martyrs, and doctors of the church for the past near two thousand years. That is simply erroneous of you. Your argument is based on falsehoods.

Dear Woman. I visited the website you suggested . www.mostholyfamilymonastery All I have to say is that it is pure evil… After reading the titles of topics, I was afraid to go further. How do you know who has sponsered this website? YOU take care. Peace.

 

[pnewton]

Although I *have *singled out JPII, it is right to mention him as he has had such a long pontificate that the brunt of the damage to the church can be considered to be his main contribution as pope.

I was only answering the questions you asked. I am sorry to hear you live in such a vacuum of faith. I consider myself fortunate to live in a place where the Catholic Church is alive and growing, as it is in much of the world. If your particular circle is so damaged of faith, you might consider that it could be something else rather than blaming the loss of faith on modernist popes. After all, many other so not have such a disparing circumstance with the same leadership in the Vatican.

 

[pnewton]

Wake up!!1 the church is in Schism. .

I do not think it is fair or ever even accurate to say the Church is in schism. Sure there is a miniscule percentage of people that adhere to schism, but how can the Church said to be separate from the Church?