The Methodists are doing their best to catch up to the gay Catholic priesthood. You won't see me trying to justify them the same way you justify the Catholic perversion. I'll call you both to repentance just the same.
Catholicism: Criticism & Debate Thread
- Thread starter PurpleUrkel
- Start date
1 Timothy 2:11-15
11 A woman[a] should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man;[b] she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women[c] will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.Woman are not man. Only gays and lesbians believe in this. And weak man. They complement man. And man woman.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1 Timothy 2&version=NIV
Last edited:
How is this relevant to what I said about praying in mosques?
I want to assume youre intelligent. Maybe I´m wrong.
Ad hominem is normally a stupid person argument.
Have you been to Hagia Sophia?
Last edited:
Yes, I understood the poke.
Here we go again. Lies about catholics. And more lies. Methodists are protestants which are not protestants. And you are protestant but they are not. WTF is this bullshit? Until when did you believe this would last? Pretty lies perish. Does that ring a bell? This forum used to be a place where pretty lies perished. Go grab your calculator. And do some more math. Ask for help from the ladies section.
Convert to Orthodoxy while they still accept you. It´s the best advice I can give you. Don´t waste much time.
Here´s the list of all catholic churches in the entire world:
- Roman Catholic Church.
Incomplete of course. It should be Catholic and Orthodox Church.
A 1000 years schism? This is madness. In 1000 years they haven´t solved this. It´s not spiritual that´s for sure.
Last edited:
What does Hagia Sophia being conquered after the 4th Crusade backstab have to do with the Pope praying in mosques next to Imams?
What does Hagia Sophia being conquered after the 4th Crusade backstab have to do with the Pope praying in mosques next to Imams?
And the muslims allowed it? ahahahah
Well done for Francis. Benedicte had been there before also. The cross is visible. So he managed to enter a mosque with the cross and make a christian prayer?
But to be honest something not right. Don´t know if there are places where youre not allowed to pray. Maybe it´s to stick it to Orthodoxes. Blue Mosque and all. Any option is wrong. But it is what it is.
Dude what 4th crusade backstab? Wtf? We are in 2024. Not even woman hold so much grudge. For f sake. My wife sometimes remembers shit that happened 6 years ago with an incredible precision. But 800 years ago?
The council of Florence is the way.
It seems divisions run deep. Which is a mistake. Not only spiritual. This weakens the west to a level people might not fully comprehend until we reach it.
Last edited:
Interesting times. Francis is working hard with the Orthodox and Protestants in the spirit of ecumenism. He just approved a new document. This could be posted to Orthodox as well I suppose.
All of this, I'm sure, is not good and all done in the name of globohomo. Very strange if the "development of doctrine" mindset prevalent on the Latin side essentially leads back to a non-infallible Pope. Can he infallibly declare he's been fallible? Isn't this sort of what Vatican II essentially already laid out for its "understanding" of Vatican I?
The document lays the groundwork for granting more power to the “regional” levels of the Catholic Church, and “a continuing ‘decentralization’ inspired by the model of the ancient patriarchal Churches.”
The wording of the document is predictable:
- It calls for "renewal" and "re-reception"
- "Vatican I’s “teachings were deeply conditioned by their historical context, so a "new expression and vocabulary faithful to the original intention but integrated" is needed.
- Must be "brave", in the "modern world in which we now live.”
All of this, I'm sure, is not good and all done in the name of globohomo. Very strange if the "development of doctrine" mindset prevalent on the Latin side essentially leads back to a non-infallible Pope. Can he infallibly declare he's been fallible? Isn't this sort of what Vatican II essentially already laid out for its "understanding" of Vatican I?
The document lays the groundwork for granting more power to the “regional” levels of the Catholic Church, and “a continuing ‘decentralization’ inspired by the model of the ancient patriarchal Churches.”
The wording of the document is predictable:
- It calls for "renewal" and "re-reception"
- "Vatican I’s “teachings were deeply conditioned by their historical context, so a "new expression and vocabulary faithful to the original intention but integrated" is needed.
- Must be "brave", in the "modern world in which we now live.”
Last edited:
I was discussing this with a member through pm…in Catholicism there seems to be an air of authority and lording over people from Bishops and higher ranking clergy. I didn’t find this when I inquired at an Orthodox Church. To my knowledge, in EO it is the other way around where the priest and clergy place themselves at the bottom of the hierarchy and are there to serve the community and parish. Correct me if I’m wrong. Note that I’m not saying all Catholic clergy lord over people or EO clergy have the serve and be humble like Christ mentality.
Anyone know the reason for this? A write up for another day, but I recently visited a Catholic community and it seemed like the leadership was over the top and drunk over their power.
Anyone know the reason for this? A write up for another day, but I recently visited a Catholic community and it seemed like the leadership was over the top and drunk over their power.
Because we are not communists
You mean the orthodoxes who didn´t let Roosh inside the church?
.
The Very Reverend Hewlett Johnson, Dean of Canterbury, author of The Soviet Power, introduces himself to the reader as a “Friend of the Soviet Union,” a “progressive,” a champion of “essential truth,” “morality” and “science.” He worships the “scientific mind”; enjoys only the company of men to whom “truth (is) sacred and whose assertions are capable of concrete verification.”
These credentials together with an autobiography are presented in order to establish that he evolved, so to speak, organically towards admiration and concern for a “a great experiment in the new order of society.”
It goes without saying that to speak out, especially today, in favor of the Soviet Union is far more praiseworthy than to support Hitler, Churchill or Roosevelt. But the whole point is that this Dean is a supporter and friend of the Kremlin and the GPU and not of the October revolution. He supports Stalin and Churchill and Roosevelt. He belongs to the gifted and prolific tribe of European theologians who are past-masters at reconciling, in the interests of reaction, anything in the universe: they reconcile religion and science, communism and Fascism, Christ and Stalin, English hypocrisy with an appearance of rectitude, sincerity, humanism, and so on.
His sympathy for the Soviet Union, declares Mr. Johnson, flows solely from the highest considerations of morality. He scorns capitalism on moral grounds: “Our system lacks a moral basis.” Conversely, he is full of sympathy toward the Soviet Union: “It is the moral impulse of the new order ... which constitutes the greatest attraction and presents the widest appeal.” No doubt it is purely on moral grounds that he wants an alliance between Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt. Let us follow this latter-day Tartuffe from Canterbury through all of his grimaces and posturings.
Not that he is uncritical of the conditions in the Soviet Union. God forbid! “There is need,” he admonishes, “to guard against a too rosy and optimistic view of life in the Soviet Union.” “I have seen and heard things,” he confesses, “which have shocked and disturbed me.” If he eschews criticism, it is solely because involved are “a hundred minor points” and “chiefly because other writers have already (and with over-emphasis) done the task for me.” The Dean has been thus spared a great deal of bother, if not embarrassment.
Furthermore, “Russia has inherited,” he explains, “an evil tradition not to be eradicated in a day.” If he himself has witnessed and heard shocking and disturbing things – no matter, he can keep mum. Others have “over-emphasized” – and besides, as he says, “I have heard and learned and seen many more (things) which enthuse and encourage me.” As the Russian peasants say: If you don’t touch it, it won’t stink.
"Seeking to convince Soviet authorities to stop the campaign of terror and persecution against the Church, Sergius, acting patriarchal locum tenens, tried to look for ways of peaceful reconciliation with the government. He formed the Provisional Patriarchal Holy Synod which received recognition from the Soviet government. On July 29, 1927, together with a members of the Synod he issued his famous declaration [ru]: an encyclical letter where he professed the absolute loyalty of the Russian Orthodox Church to the Soviet Union and to its government's interests. In it, he namely stated:
Lool what a JOKE. Pray that the catholic church never falls.
Last edited:
Genealogist
Catholic
If you look at the Papal writings from roughly 1730 to 1958, you find a consistent theme... for well over two centuries, the Popes were denouncing and warning against the Masonic attempts to destroy the Church by destroying (subverting) the Papacy. Beginning in 1958, the warnings ceased abruptly and faithful Catholics suddenly found themselves persecuted precisely by the "Popes". What does that tell us?
Freemasonry is still incompatible. And a grave sin.
Genealogist
Catholic
Last edited:
Pope Francis has ordered the excommunication of Msgr. Carlo Maria Viganò, who has openly and publicly criticized Pope Francis’s leadership, agenda and direction of the Catholic Church.
Full text
Source
Article
Full text
Source
Article
Can. 1374— A person who joins an association which plots against the Church is to be punished with a just penalty; one who promotes or takes office in such an association is to be punished with an interdict.
DECLARATION ON MASONIC ASSOCIATIONS It has been asked whether there has been any change in the Churchs decision in regard to Masonic associations since the new Code of Canon Law does not mention them expressly, unlike the previous Code. This Sacred Congregation is in a position to reply that this circumstance in due to an editorial criterion which was followed also in the case of other associations likewise unmentioned inasmuch as they are contained in wider categories. Therefore the Church’s negative judgment in regard to Masonic association remains unchanged since their principles have always been considered irreconcilable with the doctrine of the Church and therefore membership in them remains forbidden. The faithful who enrol in Masonic associations are in a state of grave sin and may not receive Holy Communion. It is not within the competence of local ecclesiastical authorities to give a judgment on the nature of Masonic associations which would imply a derogation from what has been decided above, and this in line with the Declaration of this Sacred Congregation issued on 17 February 1981 (cf. AAS 73 1981 pp. 240-241; English language edition of L’Osservatore Romano, 9 March 1981). In an audience granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect, the Supreme Pontiff John Paul II approved and ordered the publication of this Declaration which had been decided in an ordinary meeting of this Sacred Congregation. Rome, from the Office of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 26 November 1983. Joseph Card. RATZINGER Prefect + Fr. Jerome Hamer, O.P. Titular Archbishop of Lorium Secretary |
Francis said he was against freemasons what do you want more? I´ve read the cannon code law recently. Because of this place. And it´s unchanged. Francis speaks but doesnt change the law.
There´s not a single comma changed in the church policy towards freemasonry. I know that Knights of Malta are freemasons. Or at least some of them. And not from internet. A friend of mine his grandfather. Anyway dude is a judge now. So better not to write too much shit in internet. But knights of malta have freemasons. But they don´t believe in the architect. They believe in Christ. And it´s the first thing which comes out of their mouth when they meet other masons: I´m catholic. Still there´s plenty of organizations inside the church. No need to go to retarded ones.
You know Francis was a ruthless anti communist when he was young right? He worked with the argentinian junta to root out commies. I didn´t knew it. But I watched the two pope movie two weeks ago. Fell asleep two times. And had to rewind that boring shit. Anyway besides the movie I did some more research on him. And got a good impression from him.
He is of course too much liberal. But I´m looking into more of this. It seems he is a peronist. He will say the same twice contradicting himself. But he never changes the written policy. Like supposedly Peron did. But I will take a look with more time. As it stands now. Francis is ok. Not perfect but ok. Better than protestants that´s for sure.
Do you think criticizing the church will change anything? There´s a power structure and if you want things to change you need to get your hands dirty. Dirty not in the sense of corruption. But in the sense of working. Like in construction. If I want a wall to be made. Either I pay for the wall to be made. Or I mix the sand and cement and do it myself. Just saying I want the wall to be made everyday and expect someone to do it for me changes nothing. Me and my older kid will now paint the door gates some punks graffited. I could bitch all day the doors need to be painted. or why punks make this ugly degrading grafitis. It´s tags. They make a stupid signature.
You cannot be against the pope and be a catholic. It´s a contradiction in terms. It´s simply not possible. If you are against the pope you are a protestant. The most conservative type. But a protestant.
To me the biggest problem with Catholic Church is it´s message is not being heard. You only hear about pedos, etc, in the news. And there´s always this idea the church is perfect and everything is perfect. And everybody live in Lalaland. Everything is perfect if you look away from problems. Or have money to make them disappear.
There´s an elite catholic private school which invites dumb or problematic students to leave. Why? because it lowers their average ranking of grades. A father commited suicide because his son was invited to leave. Imagine this. I´m leaving my hotel pool. And see a lot of fireman near a cliff. I´m like wtf is this shit? Send a picture of the scene to a family member. And she knew the family. Quite well actually. Can´t share details. But the mother was just a weak cunt manipulated by another envious cunt. And the father a useless fag. Anyway. Now the kid is without a father. A weak useless one. But still. Better than not having one. Just because the school is an elitist shithole. Almost sent my oldest kid to that school. At my mother advice. But he goes to a catholic smaller more family one. And he only have nuns there. So no sexual abuse worrying. Even though I never heard about it in all catholic schools I´ve passed. But better safe than sorry.
Last edited:
Many might say it's already fallen given what we are seeing with Francis.
Also why the Orthodox Church has multiple patriarchs, to prevent this sort of activity from being adopted across all jurisdictions.
Francis was a ruthless anti communist. Google his work with the Junta in Argentina. He burned communist books. He still is. But has to tone it down.
Pope Francis has ordered the excommunication of Msgr. Carlo Maria Viganò, who has openly and publicly criticized Pope Francis’s leadership, agenda and direction of the Catholic Church.
Full text
Source
Article
No more continental services for Vigano:
Cold war between Opus Dei and Jesuits going full steam. No killings yet.
Vigano had probably the right forum to make his accusations. He didn´t have to launder the dirty linen in public. Even if he his right or not in some stances. Sending tweets is not the right proceeding.
If he is publicly against the Pope. And also olds a position of power and responsibility. He becomes a protestant. And it´s not working much better in those places.
Last edited:
Are you sure he was a "ruthless anti-communist"? Pope Francis is a full-blown Marxist and Globalist. It is not hard to spot Marxism-Globalism patterns by Pope Francis when he interacted and met with LGBQT+, WEF Klaus Schwab, Barack Obama, Fidel Castro, etc.
Below is a portion near the conclusion of an extremely long detailed and well-researched article by Frank De Varona, "Pope Francis is a Marxist and a Globalist of the New World Order":
Are you aware that Pope Francis has tons of Marxists-Communists working for him in the Vatican?
The Pope’s Marxist Head of the Jesuits
Fr. Arturo Sosa Abascal, a Venezuelan Communist and Modernist, is carrying out Francis’s agenda.
Understanding the adage that personnel is policy, Pope Francis has been planting Marxists throughout the Church, including at the top of the troubled religious order to which he belongs. In 2016, the Jesuits, with the blessing of Pope Francis, installed as its general superior a Venezuelan, Fr. Arturo Sosa Abascal, whose communist convictions have long been known.
Sosa has written about the “Marxist mediation of the Christian Faith,” arguing that the Church should “understand the existence of Christians who simultaneously call themselves Marxists and commit themselves to the transformation of the capitalist society into a socialist society.” In 1989, he signed a letter praising Fidel Castro.
Turn down any corridor in Francis’s Vatican, and you are likely to run into a de facto communist: Francis has a communist running his order, a communist running his Council of Cardinals (the Honduran cardinal, Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga), a communist running the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences (Margaret Archer, a British sociologist who has said that she represents the “Marxian left”), and communists such as the renegade Brazilian liberation theologian Leonardo Boff and the Canadian socialist Naomi Klein drafting his encyclicals.
It is no coincidence that the only U.S. presidential candidate who made a visit to the Vatican during the campaign was a socialist who had honeymooned in the Soviet Union. Bernie Sanders turned up at the Vatican in April 2016, having received an invitation from Pope Francis’s close Argentine friend, Bishop Marcelo Sanchez Sorondo.
“We invited the candidate who cites the pope most in the campaign, and that is Senator Bernie Sanders,” explained Sorondo, who added that Sanders’s agenda is “very analogous to that of the pope.”
In this smug leftist atmosphere in Rome, Sosa’s elevation to the head of the Jesuits was inevitable. In the past, the Jesuits had been called the pope’s marines. Under Sosa, they are more like the pope’s Marxists, peddling his climate-change propaganda as a pretext for global socialism.
But Sosa’s ambitions, like Pope Francis’s, go well beyond meddling in economies. He is also pushing a moral revolution in the Church, evident in his astonishing claim that, since none of the Apostles tape-recorded Jesus Christ, his words on adultery can be elastically re-interpreted.
“You need to start by reflecting on what exactly Jesus said,” Sosa told an Italian interviewer in February. “At that time, no one had a tape recorder to capture the words. What we know is that the words of Jesus have to be contextualized, they’re expressed in a certain language, in a precise environment, and they’re addressed to someone specific.”
In other words, Sosa is confident that he understands Jesus’s meaning better than the Gospel writers. Like Francis, Sosa can’t resist the mumbo-jumbo of Modernist biblical scholarship, which always manages to dovetail conveniently with liberal views.
The Council of Trent explicitly condemned the claim that the Gospel writers were just making stuff up when recounting the words of Jesus Christ. But Sosa has no problem trafficking in that heresy.
“Over the last century in the Church there has been a great blossoming of studies that seek to understand exactly what Jesus meant to say,” he said.
The presumption here is extraordinary but typical of a Francis acolyte. The new orthodoxy is heterodoxy, and Sosa is wallowing in it. He is given to little sermonettes on relativism, such as this whopper:
The Church has developed over the centuries, it is not a piece of reinforced concrete. It was born, it has learned, it has changed. This is why the ecumenical councils are held, to try to bring developments of doctrine into focus. Doctrine is a word that I don’t like very much, it brings with it the image of the hardness of stone. Instead the human reality is much more nuanced, it is never black or white, it is in continual development.
Were St. Ignatius of Loyola alive today, the order he founded wouldn’t ordain him, and he would have wondered how a de facto Protestant ended up on the chair of St. Peter. Nor would St. Ignatius have believed the sheer sophistry that now passes for theological “sophistication” in his order.
Fr. Antonio Spadaro, another Jesuit close to Pope Francis, tweeted out earlier this year this profundity: “Theology is not #Mathematics. 2 + 2 in #Theology can make 5. Because it has to do with #God and real #life of #people.”
Gobsmacked by the relentless leftism of Francis and his aides, Al Gore asked in 2015, “Is the pope Catholic?” The question is no longer a joke.