We were unable to load Disqus. If you are a moderator please see our troubleshooting guide.
If we're to place the One True Religion on par with every false religion (which ecumenism does, along with a few other things), does that say more about the One True Religion or the many false ones?
It means you need to get out of false religion claiming to be the true one and actually join The One True Religion, which has nothing to do with any of the false ones.
It is becoming very clear that the plan all along was to make Christ and his bride just another "path" one of many. Matthew 10:22 Tells us we will be hated of all men "for my names sake". It is interesting that you can refer to God in general conversation and be mildly excepted but if you mention the Name Jesus in a positive vain you can almost feel the daggers pointed at you.
If every religion is "on par", then religion doesn't really matter; it is simply one's choice. That is their belief and their teaching.
If a person can follow Luther to heaven, then a person could follow anything or anybody to heaven. Luther may have been the most foul human being to have ever breathed air on this planet. His blasphemies and heresies show a level of depravity that is likely unmatched by anyone.But then there was The Deuce, JPII, who called Luther a "profoundly religious man" and "a great reformer." And now Jorge tells folks that Lutherans have the true Christian faith, and he has put out a commemorative stamp of Luther.Therefore, if Luther and Lutheranism is a way to heaven, as "saint" Wojtyla and Jorge teach, then you may as well abandon all religion, become an avowed hedonist, and do whatever you want.
The gaseous emanations from Berg-oglio could fill the Hindenburg.
The part about "Pope" Balogne and his grammar is so funny!! This a great article. But, sadly the sheeple who believe "Pope" Balogne is the "pope" will all say "It doesn't matter, he is still the pope." Sometimes I feel like I am in a version of 'The Never Ending Story' or 'Ground Hog Day'.
"here is the reason for this trip — with our brothers, children of Abraham like us, the Muslims. We must not be scared by the difference: God has permitted this." Francis
He teaches that because God permits something, it need not be feared, that “it’s okay”. N.O.W.
This reminded me a while back when Francis told Juan Carlos that God made him like that (gay). But hey, according to Francis one should not fear because the Bergoglian love experience is here:https://novusordowatch.org/...
What a total apostate and those who love what he stands for are as bad as him.
Since the Vatican II sect pushed the Church into the catacombs it has been perfect vehicle for those evil powers that wanted to hide the truth and the path to salvation from those that need it most,
Vatican II clearly was the conduit Satan used to get "inside" the gates, substantially knocking down wall after wall, until he thinks, the entire foundation will finally be destroyed. We know the final victory belongs to Christ but we also know many souls have been and will be lost to him forever.
Yes, and to think that this collapse is being orchestrated by a once great religious order, the Society of Jesus (Jesuits), makes it all the more scandalous. Back in the 40's and 50's, it was the Jesuit theologians that opened the doors of the Church to the smoke of Satan.
Corruptio optimi pessimum est.
Rev. John P. Markoe, S.J. enumerated 89 heretical sects from the Simonians and Cerinthians in the first century, to the Modernists and Dowieites in the 20th century, in his Pamphlet entitled "The Triumph of the Church" which was accompanied by an Historical Chart which is very informative. The Pamphlet was from 1926. So, instead of talking about Muslims, Jews, Hindus, and Buddhists, I wish Jorge would spout more heresies concerning Nestorians, Eutychians, Waldenses, Anabaptists, Zwinglians, Mennonites, et al. After all, doctrine is not important. I think Jorge would say that none of the various religions (nominally Christian, or otherwise) have a lock on the truth, and that we are all groping in the dark. Therefore, all religions are good, and no religion is just as good as any religion. Jorge is a Modernist, which means that agnosticism is a main constituent of his religion. Ultimately, Modernism is a denial that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, and that the Catholic Church is the one, true church, which was founded by the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity to be the infallible teacher of all mankind concerning all things pertaining to God, and all things pertaining to man's salvation.
Here is another good book https://www.goodcatholicboo...
An excellent resource. Thank you for providing it. Plus, its free!
No problem. It's very much to the point and detailed from the 1st century until his time period. Enjoy
Thanks for that. It certainly is a much more complete treatment than the small pamphlet I referenced. I will put that one into my computer, and then read it in bits and pieces. Excellent!
No problem. While you're at it, plug this into your bookmarks as well and read any of St. Alphonsus books online for free:
He is one of my favorites. I read through his Sunday sermons book a long time ago and it scared me so bad that the more I read them the more I couldn't help but continue because his writings have so much important meaning. I don't know how he wrote so much and with such precision while at the same time fulfilling his duties as a bishop. Amazing. St. Alphonsus Liguori, Pray for us!
I agree with you completely. A lifetime could be spent reading, contemplating and digesting his writings.
With the multitude of orthodox writings and spiritual guides, meditations, sermons, papal writings (from the true popes), devotions, Catholic hymns (which do teach the true religion) as well as our Holy and Sacred Scripture, not to mention the valid ecumenical council teachings so readily available to us, there is really no excuse for anyone not to know the true faith.
I used my search engine (NOT GOOGLE) to research the pamphlet you cited. I found it available at the Novus Ordoite, The Sister Servants of the Eternal Word website. This led me to click on the "free talks" bar. I listened to a "homily" given by one of EWTN's "priests" introduction to a retreat on Lent. The only time he mentioned sin was to inform his retreatant's that their sins were washed clean at their baptism. After that, there is merely this "rust" (like the rust on the bottom of a car is how he referred to it) that needs a thorough cleaning rather than a surface cleaning. Lent is the time of preparation for Easter but as nothing was mentioned about sin, (maybe it will be in other of his talks) we just need to be reminded that we are sons and daughters of God and need to reflect on our "rust" rather than the sins we have committed against God to rejuvenate our "spiritual" life.
I had forgotten why I stopped going to a Novus Ordo church until hearing this "homily".
The graphical chart that came with the pamphlet, sometimes known as "the famous Markoe Chart" is a good thing to get. My chart is tattered and torn, but still useful.
The pamphlet was re-issued in 1960 or in the 60's, and then referenced Vatican II, and added the Jehovah's Witnesses.
Francis mentions the visit of John Paul to Morocco in 1985. What did he say? "The Catholic Church regards with respect and recognizes the quality of your religious progress, the richness of your spiritual tradition."
The errors of this sentence jump out at the reader. "Religious progress?" A rich Islamic spiritual tradition?
Than he added "We recognize and respect the differences between us...there is a mystery about which God will enlighten us one day, we may be sure of that."
Some day God will inform us about how Catholic and Muslims differ? As if we hadn't known that since the 7th century?
Well certainly. This is Pierre de Chardin's "omega point" religion where all religions are simply evolutions of spiritual understanding (and all necessary) with the eventual turning everything and everyone into God.
That "omega point" where they all are supposed to meet is actually Hell.
They don't believe in Hell either.
Jorge is just a little bit more outlandish than The Deuce. But both were very revolutionary and very Modernist.Newcomers to all of this would do well to study what JPII said and did. He was outrageous. Although I should have become a sedevacantist earlier, I nevertheless did become a sedevacantist in the early 1980's due to Wojtyla. The December 11, 1983 sermon in the Lutheran church in Rome convinced me completely, and without doubt.
As a Protestant convert prior to Vatican II, as soon as the abomination of the New Order "mass" was foisted upon us, and I saw its Protestant/Masonic/Humanist roots, I knew something was wrong. But at that time, I had no access to a computer and could only suffer through the abomination with apologies to our Lord and fervent prayers that what I was experiencing was not His abandoning us. I knew that was not possible as I knew the Catholic faith was the one, true faith and Christ instituted only one, true Church.
Finally, with access to a computer some years later (maybe 2001, no earlier), I began to research just what I had been hearing from the pulpit, from Bible study classes, from conferences I attended, etc. and although there were very, very few at that time questioning Vatican II and its aftermath, I did finally come across the website traditio.com. That was the verification I needed to help me to understand I was not alone in my assessment that "something was very, very wrong". It was JPII's World Youth Days that convinced me he was not the leader of the Catholic Church and the rest is history.
In the late 60's and the 70's we were taught by my father what it was like before all the changes. We were taught the old calendar. We were taught the Litany of Loretto. We were taught about First Fridays, and about frequent confession, etc. We were taught about the importance of the rosary. We went to the Ukrainian Byzantine Rite Mass, or travelled about 500 miles to a place where an old priest was saying the Tridentine Mass. We would never ever have received communion in the hand. We were taught the new mass was an abomination.Yet, we did not put 2 and 2 together. We were insufficiently trained. We did not know that the Church is infallible in her general discipline, and her Liturgy. To our discredit, we did not see that if these things are evil and leading to the ruination of souls, they could not possibly proceed from the Immaculate Bride of Christ, the Catholic Church. Therefore, I was, at best, a conservative follower of the New Church and New Religion.Also, some of the underground-type sermons to which we listened, which were being passed around from priests like Fr. Gommar DePauw on cassette tapes, suggested that the evil bishops were doing all these bad things, and that Paul VI did not approve them, or at least he was not aware of them.But, by the grace of Almighty God, we became aware of Abp. Lefebvre, who was resisting the changes and saying sedevacantist things in the mid to late 70's. Ultimately, due to his USA priests and proper training using traditional manuals from before the rot, it became glaringly obvious that these new popes could not possibly be valid office holders of the papacy.I say all this to point out that it was due to my sinfulness and my ignorance (whether culpable or not) that I stayed within the New Religion for so long. If I had known my faith, I would have come to the sedevacantist conclusion during the usurpation of Montini. Therefore, I hold the opinion that ignorance of the Catholic Faith, was an integral part of why I did not become a practical sedevacantist until 1981, and 100% sure of it in 1983. And, that is why I think that those who are conservative or R&R, are either ignorant of the faith with regard to the Church and the papacy, or they refuse to accept what the Church teaches regarding these things. N.O.W. does a good job at pointing out the Church's teaching versus the modernists' teaching.It seems that Jorge was given to the world, by the Providence of God, as a last ditch effort to draw the distinction even more clearly between the Catholic Faith and non-Catholic faiths. If Montini, and The Deuce (JPII) were not patently obvious non-Catholics, and thus non-popes, surely Jorge will jostle the consciences of those who are disposed to cling to the truth. By the grace of God, may Jorge be the occasion for the conversion of more souls to have nothing to do with the New Religion, and to practice and adhere to only Catholicism.
Thank you for sharing your road to "recovery".
I simply cannot say why each of the R&R's hold that opinion as my road to the truth was long and painful. Let us pray daily that each of them is moved by the Holy Ghost to accept the truth and let us thank God for the graces He has given to us, unworthy sinners that we are.
What do you think, do Jews worship the same God as Catholics/Christians? Did Abraham, Moses, David, etc. have the same true God?
To answer both of your questions:(1) No, they don't.(2) Abraham, Moses, David, etc. worshipped the true God, who, at that point, had not yet clearly revealed Himself as a Trinity. The people known today as Jews do not worship the God of Abraham, Moses, David, etc.
OKWhat about faithful Jewish priests and scribes at the time of Jesus - before and after encountering and rejecting the revelation of Christ? What about those who have not met Jesus and His Word in history but still hold the "unclear notion of God"?
If they reject Christ's revelation, then they are not faithful, so I don't understand the question. Anyone who worships something or someone that is explicitly NOT the Trinity (like Muslims and Jews) do not worship the true God, regardless of their intention. He who through no fault of his own has not encountered God's revelation about His own Nature (Trinity) can worship the true God through the light of natural reason.
Well, then, can I assume that many moslims and Jews have, through no fault of their own, NOT encountered Christ's revelation? It is really not their fault if they are falsely indoctrinated and do not meet the Gospel in a convincing way.
First, keep in mind that I haven't said anything regarding salvation (which I suspect is where you're going with this), only regarding the nature of the true God and how he can be known. Both Judaism and Islam teach a god who is explicitly not the Holy Trinity, so anyone who adheres to their doctrine is not worshipping the true God (to what extent each Jew or Muslim is to blame for this, is not relevant to the question at hand).
This is in contradiction with your prior answer:
He who through no fault of his own has not encountered God's revelation about His own Nature (Trinity) can worship the true God through the light of natural reason.
No, it's not. The Muslim and the Jew *has* encountered that revelation, and rejected it. That's because Islam and Judaism preach one god who is explicitly not Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.
I see. So it is the rejection of a clarifying revelation that makes them idolaters: not a change in "their faith", but the changing (developing, maturing) of the faith itself.
It is their rejection of the true God that makes them worshippers of a false god. The object of their Faith must be the true God, not a false one.
I still do not see the shift between the true God (before the rejection) and the false God (after the rejection). Did Caiphas have not the same God before and after the rejection of Christ? What about minor errors about God? Do they make someone idolater? E.g. if one says: God is living above the "skys" (the primitive antic world view)?
When we're talking about who or what God is, we're talking about His Essence. Someone who rejects that Essence is necessarily worshipping something or someone else. That goes for Caiaphas or anyone else. Why is that so hard to accept? "Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father. He that confesseth the Son, hath the Father also" (1 Jn 2:23).
It's hard because trolls are willfully blind. We've run into KBen before....
And let us not forget the talmudic blasphemies (not accepted or rather not known by Abraham, Moses and David), not exactly compatible with our doctrine. So the talmudic god is not quite (or rather quite not) ours. How about En Gof (its masculine manifestation) and Shekhinah (its feminine side), and the lesser "deities" emananting from them? Demiurgos, etc.?
"Did Abraham, Moses, David, etc. have the same true God?"Yes, the same true God, but the dogm of Trinity wasn't revealed explicitly, as NOW has pointed out, because (as justified by Bp. Pivarunas and Fr. Benedict) they would have misunderstood it. So they implicitly believed in the Trinity (there are some Old Testment passages referring to this doctrine). In addition, St. Thomas Aquinas has indicated that some, like David, Isaias have believed it explicitly.
"So, we understand, for example, that today we in the Church have removed the death penalty from the Catechesim of the Catholic Church. Three hundred years ago, heretics were burned alive. Because the Church has grown in moral conscience, respect for the person, and freedom of worship. We too must continue to grow. There are people, Catholics, who do not accept what the Second Vatican Council said about freedom of worship, freedom of conscience. There are people who don’t accept it. Catholics. Also we have this problem. But, the Muslim brothers also grow in conscience. In some countries, they don’t understand well or they don’t grow like in others."
I have to say this is one of the over the top things the apostate has ever said. It was he who removed the death penalty from their catechism. To say the Church has "grown" in moral conscience, respect for the person, and freedom of worship, is to say that the Church was in error for over 19 centuries until all of sudden, in the 1960's, She "grew" significantly out of the dark and into the light. Why would it take 19 centuries for a Church instituted by Christ (as has always been taught) to realize these significant errors and finally correct them? And if Christ was wrong for 19 centuries, how can we be certain He is right now?
Against naturalism, against the apostate Jorge, in this Lenten season, the layman, G.K. Chesterton speaks what is true:
"It is enough to say that those who know the Catholic practice find it not only right, but always right when everything else is wrong; making the Confessional the very throne of candor where the world outside talks nonsense about it as a sort of conspiracy; upholding humility when everybody is praising pride; charged with sentimental charity when the world is talking a brutal utilitarianism; charged with dogmatic harshness when the world is loud and loose with vulgar sentimentalism -- as it is to this day." [And so much worse today!]
-G.K. Chesterton (“Why I am a Catholic,” The Thing"
Thank you for posting this quote.
A fan of Chesterton. The only EWTN program I watch is about G.K. Chesterton.