Ecumenism is the path that leads to atheism. The Roncalli Satanic revolution is now crystal clear to the faithful. The world has been plunged into such depravity since the time of Pope Pius XII death that only those who are blinded buy their own sin refuse to see God's truth. The Catholic faith is the pillar that holds the world up to the truth. Since the usurping of St. Peter's throne even the secular world groans with the weight of sin. This weight will eventually come crashing down bringing down the counterfeit church. In John 16-20 We are given 'The Spirit of Truth "forever. The Church will survive this revolution and rise from the catacombs in triumph. Just as it was at the time of St. Vincent Ferrer that caused the Saint to comment that his era was the most sinful since the flood. in our era we are in dire times that may exceed St. Vincent era will God abandon us? That can never happen. God sent St. Vincent into the world to preach repentance, how much more do we need a soul like his now. WE can be sure that this darkness we face now will succumb to God light of truth. Who will carry that light into the world and banish darkness we do not know but we can be confident God knows.

"Ecumenism is the path that leads to atheism."
.............................................................
Yes, it definitely can lead that way, but it can also lead in many, many other directions. However, the one place "ecumenism" never leads to is the one true faith instituted by Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Roman Catholic Church!

Referring to "Ecumenism", I found this as an Appendix (The Ecumenical Movement) in the book "Moral Theology" published in 1958 with the following:

Nihil Obstat
ELWOOD FERRER SMITH, O.P., S.T.M.

BENJAMIN URBAN FAY, O.P., S.T.LR.
Imprimi Potest

VERY REV. WILLIAM D. MARRIN, O.P., P.G., S.T.M.
Provincial
Nihil Obstat

JOHN A. GOODWINE, J.C.D.
Censor Librorum

Imprimatur
+ FRANCIS CARDINAL SPELLMAN
Archbishop of New York
New York, May 24, 1958

Obviously, no one followed the Holy Office 1949 instructions. Or was it that the Modernist's had full control?

The "Ecumenical Movement"

[placed at end of Volume I, after the preceding Appendix, in print edition]

On December 20, 1949 the Holy Office issued an instruction on the

"Ecumenical Movement" addressed to all local Ordinaries. In its

prefatory remarks the Instruction insisted upon the Church's intense

interest to attain to the full and perfect unity of the Church. It

noted as an occasion of joy the desire of many separated from the

Church to return to the unity of Christ's fold, a good intention,

indeed, which, however, in being put into practice has not been

regulated by right principles. Accordingly the Holy Office prescribed

that local Ordinaries maintain due vigilance over the associations

seeking Church Unity, that they designate well-qualified priests to pay

close attention to everything which concerns the "Movement," and that

they supervise publications on this matter by Catholics or by

non-Catholics, in as far as these are published, or read, or sold by

Catholics. The manner and method of proceeding in this work is to be

regulated by the Ordinaries, who are cautioned to prevent the growth of

indifference to Catholic truth and fallacious hopes of unity based upon

false or impossible foundations. With regard to mixed assemblies of

Catholics and non-Catholics, when there seems to be hope of spreading

knowledge of Catholic doctrine, the Ordinary is instructed to designate

well-qualified priests, to explain and defend the Church's teaching.

Special permission, however, must be obtained from Ecclesiastical

Authority if Catholic laymen are to attend. Where no hope of good

results exists, the meetings are to be ended or gradually suppressed.

The following specific instructions are given for the conduct of "Ecumenical meetings."

All the aforesaid conferences and meetings, public and non-public,

large and small, which are called for the purpose of affording an

opportunity for the Catholic and the non-Catholic party, for the sake

of discussion, to treat of matters of faith and morals, each presenting

on even terms the doctrine of his own faith, are subject to the

prescriptions of the Church which were recalled to mind in the

Monitum, "Cum compertum" of this Congregation under date of 5 June,

1948. Hence, mixed congresses are not absolutely forbidden; but they

are not to be held without the previous permission of the competent

Ecclesiastical Authority. The Monitum, however, does not apply to

catechetical instructions, even when given to many together, nor to

conferences in which Catholic doctrine is explained to non-Catholics

who are prospective converts, even though the opportunity is afforded

for the non-Catholics to explain also the doctrine of their church so

that they may understand clearly and thoroughly in what respect it

agrees with the Catholic doctrine and in what it differs therefrom.

Neither does the said Monitum apply to those mixed meetings of

Catholics and non-Catholics in which the discussion does not turn upon

faith and morals, but upon ways and means of defending the fundamental

principles of the natural law or of the Christian religion against the

enemies of God who are now leagued together, or where the question is

how to restore social order, or other topics of that nature. Even in

these meetings, as is evident, Catholics may not approve or concede

anything which is in conflict with divine revelation or with the

doctrine of the Church even on social questions.

As to local conferences and conventions which are within the scope of

the Monitum as above explained, the Ordinaries of places are given,

for three years from the publication of this Instruction, the faculty

of granting the required previous permission of the Holy See on the

following conditions:

1. That communicatio in sacris be entirely avoided;
2, That the presentations of the matter be duly inspected and directed;
3. That at the close of each year a report be made to this Supreme

Sacred Congregation, stating where such meetings were held and what experience was gathered from them.

4. As regards the colloquies of theologians above mentioned, the same

faculty for the same length of time is granted to the Ordinary of the

place where such colloquies are held, or to the Ordinary delegated for

this work by the common consent of the other Ordinaries, under the same

conditions as above, but with the further requirement that the report

to this Sacred Congregation state also what questions were treated, who

were present, and who the speakers were for either side.

As for the interdiocesan conferences and congresses, either national or

international, the previous permission of the Holy See, special for

each case, is always required; and, in the petition asking for it, must

also be stated what are the questions to be treated and who the

speakers are to be. And it is not allowed, before this permission has

been obtained, to begin the external preparation of such meetings or to

collaborate with non-Catholics who begin such preparation.

5. Although in all these meetings and conferences any communication

whatsoever in worship must be avoided, yet the recitation in common of

the Lord's Prayer or of some prayer approved by the Catholic Church, is

not forbidden for opening or closing the said meetings.

6. Although each Ordinary has the right and duty to conduct, promote,

and preside over this work in his own diocese, yet the coöperation of

several Bishops will be appropriate or even necessary in establishing

offices and works to observe, study, and control this work as a whole.

Accordingly it will rest with the Ordinaries themselves to confer

together and consider how a proper uniformity of action and

coordination can be obtained.

7. Religious Superiors are bound to watch and to see to it that their

subjects adhere strictly and faithfully to the prescriptions laid down

by the Holy See or by the local Ordinaries in this matter.

In order that so noble a work as the "union" of all Christians in one

true faith and Church may daily grow into a more conspicuous part of

the entire care of souls, and that the whole Catholic people may more

earnestly implore this "union" from Almighty God, it will certainly be

of assistance that in some appropriate way, for example through

Pastoral Letters, the faithful be instructed regarding these questions

and projects, the prescriptions of the Church in the matter, and the

reasons on which they are based. All, especially priests and religious,

should be exhorted and warmly encouraged to be zealous by their prayers

and sacrifices to ripen and promote this work, and all should be

reminded that nothing more effectively paves the way for the erring to

find the truth and to embrace the Church than the faith of Catholics,

when it is confirmed by the example of upright living

All Christian (Catholics) are united. Ephesians 4:5. Any time you see Spellman's name on a document Hells bells should go off to the reader.

These are the kind of people the R&R and Cassiciacum Thesis people believe will restore the Church.

Well stated.

Fr. Raniero Cantalamessa also said "The cross separates unbelievers from believers, because for the ones it is scandal and madness, for the others is God's power and wisdom of God (cf. 1 Cor 1:23-24); but in a deeper sense it unites all men, believers and unbelievers." (Good Friday sermon 2013). I remember this because it was right after Bergoglio was elected Antipope. Amazing... you can belong to the true religion (thumbs up!, you deserve a gold star or cookie) or you can belong to false religion (not ideal, but you know... God "positively wills" / uses them as a "means of salvation" (V2 docs)) and if not, you are still covered anyway because in some real "Deep" way everyone is united. What a disgrace to the priesthood this man is..

He isn't a true priest as no true priest would be a disgrace to his office.

No, he is a true priest. Fr. Martin Luther, OSA, was a true priest. Arius was a true priest, Nestorius was a bishop. And many true priests have disgraced their office, as revealed in the abuse crisis.

Yes they disgrace the office but they also lost the faith, committed heresy and blasphemy and consequently find themselves outside the church.

Par for the course.

Joe Biden will follow his example by packing the court with his Communist comrades.

No, Biden won’t. President Trump will be re-elected. Americans aren’t stupid enough to dump the Bill of Rights.

Face diapers do not prevent any virus, but without them we can't work or buy food. They prevent fines and hassles. That's all. But your point is well taken.

Why would you wear one at all? You can work and buy food without them depending how weak and cowardly you are bowing to their commands. You still have a country with a constitution providing security against their BS.

Jim, isn’t it wiser to pick one’s battles? Didn’t Our Lord tell us not to cause scandal?

Not sure your meaning.

I can’t stand wearing thesrs things either. But ordinances require masks indoors when out in public. Outdoors have no such requirements. these s florida socialists get pissy with me outdoors, i tell ‘em call a cop. Indoors i obey the ordinance. With an unmistakable TRUMP 2020.

If they say i can’t wear a Crucifix, they close my Church— well, there’s the reasons to ‘fight.’

Choose one’s battles, that’s all.

BTW, if early voting, they CANNOT require you to wear a mask. It is not a requirement to vote. They cannot stop a registered voter from voting.

I’m working the polls, and i’ve threatened poll workers with the cops who denied entrance to Republicans. They back down EVERY time.

There is a fair number of us who do not mask for anyone. Just say to them when they ask if you have a mask.." No I don't, but thank you very much for asking".
I can and have intimated them back when they smart off but they are cowards and do-nothings. They can't enforce stupidity and they know it. If they even touch you they pay dearly.

And Jim, please don’t think I’m arguing against you. I’m not.

You have more courage than I. 👍🇺🇸

Most who know me think I’m an affable guy; smiley, sweet, a little corny. Until they’ve crossed me.

Then they quickly learn how the money changers must’ve felt that beautiful day so long ago.

We’re in the same fight. I thank God for all of you.

I do sympathize with those who seemed cornered...hang in there...we have your backs. Should this get really nasty, we will all pay a price.

I don't feel cornered .... yet. Not until my Faith is compromised.

I do. North Broward. Slightly north of the armpit of Florida.

So, if the majority of the population suddenly started going to Black Masses, should we do that too, so as not to "cause scandal" (presumably the scandal is caused by us standing out?). The scandal thing does not work in this situation.

No Anna. I think you know me better than that, don’t you?

At the end of the day, it costs me nothing to put a mask on indoors if it means i’m spared a socialist’s whine. If it keeps the peace in my community.

I’d rather save the fight for things I, emphasize I, feel are more important.

Besides 1 week from today it will be a JOY to hear them cry.

Will you take the mandatory vaccine so you don't hear the socialists whine?
Will you take being chipped so you don't hear the socialists whine? Obey or else so it keeps peace in the community! Wear that mask even if it is slowly weakening your body. Wear that mask or else...you must obey comrade! Or else!!!

That's a point - I object to face nappies in principle but I think that they're also bad for our health.

Jim, c’mon. Please don’t spin my words.

Masks are a tempest in a teapot. I’m not getting into “it” with anyone over a mask. I’ve already told you, that’s not an issue for me. For me it’s not important enough.

I bow to those for whom it is.

to each his own...not trying to harass...it's only a mask, ya, right...see my point?

I know Jim. You’re a good guy, 👍

Ok, Jim, are you not reading my responses?

There’s a huge chasm between putting on a mask, and the scenarios you’ve described, dontcha think?

There are things that cost one nothing. If you want to raise a hurricane over an espresso cup, be my guest.

You are not welcome to talk down to me, so please back up.

Is it possible the response to me above was supposed to be to you?

'There’s a huge chasm between putting on a mask, and the scenarios you’ve described, dontcha think?'
Check this out...Great Reset...it is described everywhere online...masking and covid are part of the algorithm...to track you...limit population...enslave humanity under the elite...sicken you by wearing a mask thus suggestion that you need a vaccine...to brainwash individuals to vote democratic in order to complete the NWO...
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to follow this scamdemic and evil Godless plan. But just look around at all the sheeple going to slaughter...
:Let me admit...today I think I have covid...my nose is running a little and I feel great.

Yes, I do, III,L? I was merely being my usual provocative self 😁 The scandal thing still doesn't work, though!

🥰. It does, though, but only up to a point.

Ok, explain how because I just don't see it.

I'm not sure I understand that point either.

See response to Anna above!

Sorry Anna and 2V, i totally missed your requests to clarify. It goes back to picking the battles worth fighting, is all.

OK. So are you thinking along the lines that the scandal comes into play because we have a Catholic refusing to obey lawful authorities on a matter that does not pertain to the Catholic Faith (for example, working longer hours) vs refusing to obey lawful authorities on a matter that does pertain to the Catholic Faith (for example, working Sundays)? Wearing masks is more in line with the former?

No. You’re bringing it down to particulars. I’m speaking generally.

I don’t have a problem with the masks when I’m out in public and indoors.

When i’m outdoors and want to smoke, i find a shady spot. If there’re other people not smoking nearby, I ask if my smoking will bother them.

Some things really do come down to trying to be courteous to my neighbors.

And somethings really are important enough to stand up for. When I’m outdoors in public if someone tells me to mask i say sorry no. If they continue, and s fla is filled with ultra liberal ageing hippies, so they sometimes continue, i say nein, kamrade, call a cop. If they blather on i smile and start humming God Bless America. If that doesn’t send them away, i put my fist to my mouth and pretend to cough. It’s only gone that far once. I admit i enjoyed hippy harry’s apoplexy. I did however warn him about high blood pressure and the risk of stroke and coronary possibilities.

So i guess that must be my threshhold: my personal liberties.

When someone tries to control your behavior inappropriately, that’s when i stand up.

Our behavior is controlled daily— do you make a left turn on red when the streets are deserted? Do you make a right on red when clearly marked no turn on red?

When a legitimately elected authority inappropriately curtails my civil liberties, enshrined in law, guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, that’s when we yell Don’t Tread On Me.

When we can safeguard the peace and the Common Good by tolerating
what amounts to inconvenience, is that a bad thing? Or do we become like the libs, whining at everything that bothers meeeeeeeeeeeee!

With that said, i’ve participated in 2 these.masks are not only ineffective, but ridikilous rallies letting our Mayor know we’re sick of it. In other words, Mr demoncrat Mayor, you’re right. We should continue the hysteria- that’s the stupidest way forward possible.

Our Personal Liberties are enshrined in Law in the Bill of Rights, from our right to express ourselves, freedom of movement, Worship, to pursuit of our own happiness, while caring for others’.

I don’t have a problem with others who refuse to mask indoors. I’ve threatened poll workers with the cops from trying to prevent voters from voting. We even had our chapter’s lawyer contact the SOE, who then contacted the poll.

Each one voted. Sans mask.

I get your reasoning when it comes to not making a fuss about wearing a mask and I think that's why the majority of people are wearing masks. I don't make a big thing of not wearing a mask and I don't go out of my way to annoy other people. In fact, I've only had one argument about it and that wasn't with a shop assistant but with a Karen standing behind me in the queue.

I only feel obliged to obey moral laws that are intended for the common good. I do not feel obliged to obey a law that is intended to do harm, which is the case with the mask laws. We should all think carefully about what they are trying to achieve with these laws.

I'm probably being dense but I still don't see what scandal has to do with it.

Me too.

So, as with Anna, I'm still not seeing the connection with scandal. What action(s) or inaction(s) do you believe lead(s) others into sin? Perhaps you're using the wrong terminology to express your idea?

I think you and Anna are trying to make a lot more out of what I’m saying. I’m not talking about sin, nor am i attempting anything profound.

1) choose your battles 2) battling over petty things may prevent others- by-standers- from hearing your point. Even if they’d agree with it. Even if your point needs hearing.

That is a stumbling block , which, in it’s very simplest definition is scandal.

I don’t know how else to explain myself. The shortcoming is with the author, not the audience.

I think the confusion lies in the fact that you are not talking about sin. Typically scandal refers to leading others to sin in Catholic circles.

I still agree with your assessment otherwise.

Jim, are you telling me that I should risk my paycheck by refusing to wear the mask they require me to use at work? And that by not doing so, I am being cowardly?

I agree with those who say we need to pick our battles.

How many have challenged the 'risk' and what have been the results? I'd like to know.
Now consider this;

What Is Mass Psychogenic illness

Sometimes people in a group start to think they might have been exposed to something dangerous, like a germ or a toxin (poison). They might get signs of sickness like headache, dizziness, faintness, weakness or a choking feeling. If many people in the group start to feel sick at about the same time, we might think they have mass psychogenic illness. The group might be a class in a school or workers in an office. Mass psychogenic illness is sometimes called mass hysteria or epidemic hysteria.

And this;
Are you going to dance every time the devil plays fiddle????

And this...if masks are going to be required for the next 2-3 years as suggested, I'd be looking for another income source.

Like I said ... the reset gang are grinning ear to ear!