JPII Institute for Marriage and the Family Faculty Purge

5,679 Views | 71 Replies | Last: 4 yr ago by PabloSerna
chimpanzee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
What the heck is going on in Rome?

I don't know if I stumbled in to a rabbit hole of anti-Vatican II press links or what, but among the Amazon Synod, the dead-ending of the Vatican Bank audits, and stuff like this, you really get the feeling that the RCC is up against some really nasty times. And that's not even getting into the priest abuse and seminary issues.

Strange times.
747Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
And from George Weigel... JPII's biographer. Certainly not an anti-VII guy.
americathegreat1492
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I think this sort of thing is inevitable as the church has this seeming desire to "dialogue with the modern world." The dialogue is more of an adoption than a conversation, an adoption of modern ideas. I see catholic social teaching as one of the major pieces of evidence of the infection of modernity in catholicism.
chimpanzee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
747Ag said:

And from George Weigel... JPII's biographer. Certainly not an anti-VII guy.

Not this in particular, but cross links with places going on about VII and the Freemasons, etc. Some of it sounded very tinfoil-hat-ish.
Mark Fairchild
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Have been spending more time in prayer for the Church and all her faithful. These are indeed perilous times deserving much prayer and mortification.
Gig'em, Ole Army Class of '70
chimpanzee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://catholicherald.co.uk/news/2019/07/30/what-is-happening-at-romes-john-paul-ii-institute/

Another take on the issue.

I made it about half way through the article in this link before the deferences to Curial bureaucratic processes and qualified weasel words fogged the whole issue. Seems pretty clear to me that the official strategy is obfuscation.
Ag_of_08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Someone mind summing up the Vatican II controversy without a huge bias to it? Or have an article that lays the basics out in a way that a non catholic with an understanding of their church hierarchy, but not well schooled in specific doctrine l, might understand?

I truthfully have tried to research the topic, but it's a little like looking for articles about british politics that aren't so biased you can tell in five words. OP if it's a problem I'll start a new thread on it as well.
chimpanzee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ag_of_08 said:

Someone mind summing up the Vatican II controversy without a huge bias to it? Or have an article that lays the basics out in a way that a non catholic with an understanding of their church hierarchy, but not well schooled in specific doctrine l, might understand?

I truthfully have tried to research the topic, but it's a little like looking for articles about british politics that aren't so biased you can tell in five words. OP if it's a problem I'll start a new thread on it as well.

I think it's all related/relevant under the question I asked in the OP, so don't start a new thread on my account.

I'm studying a lot of these historical dynamics for the first time myself and it's fascinating. I long ago realized the farce of differing institutions of men claiming mutually exclusive access to mysteries that they all admit to being inexplicable.

I do believe Christ initiated His church to foster the presence of the Holy Spirit here on earth and guide us to bring about His will, but following all of the twists and turns and knowing who to believe at any one point is quite the leap of faith, if you'll pardon the pun.

One description I ran across recently of how the liturgy/policy/dogma/magesterium changes within the RCC sounds a lot like a good way to sugar coat cognitive dissonance. First, you recognize and praise the old practice, then you talk at length how the new practice is really accomplishing the same thing, only better, then you act as though the old practice never occurred at all so you don't have to consider why they don't reconcile.

Vatican II is a very obvious case-in-point and the Amazon synod stuff along with changes around marriage and family suspected by the folks at the head of these decisions sound like they are cut from the same cloth.

It all rather makes the standard Catholic criticism of polyglot Protestant belief rather hollow. While any one officially approved approach may be sanctioned at any one time, you never know what will change at the next council or synod; to say nothing of differences implicitly accepted without sanction or what has been lost in between.
BrazosBendHorn
How long do you want to ignore this user?
chimpanzee said:

Ag_of_08 said:

Someone mind summing up the Vatican II controversy without a huge bias to it? Or have an article that lays the basics out in a way that a non catholic with an understanding of their church hierarchy, but not well schooled in specific doctrine l, might understand?

I truthfully have tried to research the topic, but it's a little like looking for articles about british politics that aren't so biased you can tell in five words. OP if it's a problem I'll start a new thread on it as well.
One description I ran across recently of how the liturgy/policy/dogma/magesterium changes within the RCC sounds a lot like a good way to sugar coat cognitive dissonance. First, you recognize and praise the old practice, then you talk at length how the new practice is really accomplishing the same thing, only better, then you act as though the old practice never occurred at all so you don't have to consider why they don't reconcile.

...

It all rather makes the standard Catholic criticism of polyglot Protestant belief rather hollow. While any one officially approved approach may be sanctioned at any one time, you never know what will change at the next council or synod; to say nothing of differences implicitly accepted without sanction or what has been lost in between.
Reminds me a bit of George Orwell ...

"The past was alterable. The past never had been altered. Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia."
~ 1984
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

I'm studying a lot of these historical dynamics for the first time myself and it's fascinating. I long ago realized the farce of differing institutions of men claiming mutually exclusive access to mysteries that they all admit to being inexplicable.
so since you realized it was a farce long ago, before studying the claims, basically all you're capable of doing is reinforcing your preconceived notion.
chimpanzee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
k2aggie07 said:

Quote:

I'm studying a lot of these historical dynamics for the first time myself and it's fascinating. I long ago realized the farce of differing institutions of men claiming mutually exclusive access to mysteries that they all admit to being inexplicable.
so since you realized it was a farce long ago, before studying the claims, basically all you're capable of doing is reinforcing your preconceived notion.

I'd say, I'm just finally dipping my toes into the reason side of things. I disclaim any certainty or truth in my current or former reasoned conceptions. I pray for clarity.

The specific farcical bit is admitting the existence of the mysteriously unknowable, but knowing for certain that the other guy is wrong about it and you arrived at that conclusion via historical political expediency or private prophecy. Nothing I have found has changed my mind on that, but I remain open to being proven wrong. Reasonably.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

The specific farcical bit is admitting the existence of the mysteriously unknowable, but knowing for certain that the other guy is wrong about it and you arrived at that conclusion via historical political expediency or private prophecy.
neither Rome nor orthodoxy claim this as method. Study more.
chimpanzee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
k2aggie07 said:

Quote:

The specific farcical bit is admitting the existence of the mysteriously unknowable, but knowing for certain that the other guy is wrong about it and you arrived at that conclusion via historical political expediency or private prophecy.
neither Rome nor orthodoxy claim this as method. Study more.

I agree they don't claim it, but plenty others do, just as plenty of others impute political expediency on Rome. I find Rome and orthodoxy's positions more compelling, and I will indeed study more.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I misunderstood you then - thought you were saying Rome claimed those.

The truth is theology development was more complex than most Roman or Orthodox apologists make it out to be...and about ten times more nuanced than everyone else wants it to be.
chimpanzee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
k2aggie07 said:

I misunderstood you then - thought you were saying Rome claimed those.

The truth is theology development was more complex than most Roman or Orthodox apologists make it out to be...and about ten times more nuanced than everyone else wants it to be.

That's the interesting/compelling part to study!
FTACo88-FDT24dad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
And then there's a slightly more preternatural lense through which to
view what's happening to the RCC:

Demons Discuss 1970s Catholicism: Exorcism of (Emily Rose) Anneliese Michel in 1976 [Podcast] from Dr Taylor Marshall Catholic Show in Podcasts. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/dr-taylor-marshall-catholic-show/id689871918?i=1000443201686

The case of the Exorcism of Anneliese Michel (depicted in the American film Exorcism of Emily Rose) alleges that a young girl Anneliese was possessed by 6-10 demons around 1975. The local bishop authorized an exorcist to exorcize the demons and the demons speak to the priest about their joy over Communion in the Hand, the power of the Rosary, the error of Modernism, Hans Kung, Humanae Vitae, and other topics. #TnT discuss this topic and also explain the importance of priests acting like priests as spiritual and superior Fathers to the Faithful. Sadly, Anneliese died of starvation in 1976. Watch for more details.
Redstone
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
OK, I have a lot of opinions about this and will return to the thread.

In brief:

Since the eve of the Great War, the situation of the Church is very grave, including Black Masses (exact inverse of the Latin Rite, with horrifically evil acts)... inside the Vatican and at the highest levels of the Curia.
And, doubters, we know the names.

We are in a major crisis.

At the same time, Christ will win, and there have been quite bad times before, including when St. Peter - an ordained priest from the Last Supper - embraced Luciferianism via explicit denials of Christ.

Demons - and I mean this very literally - are running rampant.

Catholics: pray the Rosary everyday. And speak the truth about the main avenue of priestly apostasy - sodomy.
Redstone
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Some facts

Depending upon how one counts, there have been about 35 anti-popes over 2,000 years.
At present, Benedict resides in the Apostolic Palace, wears white, and gives his Apostolic blessing.
The greatest visionary since the French Revolution, Bl. Anne Catherine Emmerich, has 7 volumes (TAN Books) of detail upon detail, including of future events.
Redstone
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
It is easy to deride those of us with many opinions about Freemasonry ("LOL it's a social club for grandpas") -

Well, guess what

not historically, not in the Orient tradition, not when its literally founded countries (P2, Italian nation-state), not when a conclusively proven influence of Vatican II, and not when a clear thrust of activity has been the abolition of absolute Christian monarchy - of which the papacy is the last one standing
Redstone
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Watch the videos of Fr. Chad Ripperger, especially with regard to demonic influence

Don't believe? Read the books of Fr. Gabriele Amorth, sadly deceased former chief exorcist of the Diocese of Rome, and then watch the documentary of him on Netflix, from the director of The Exorcist.
FTACo88-FDT24dad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Redstone said:

Watch the videos of Fr. Chad Ripperger, especially with regard to demonic influence

Don't believe? Read the books of Fr. Gabriele Amorth, sadly deceased former chief exorcist of the Diocese of Rome, and then watch the documentary of him on Netflix, from the director of The Exorcist.
Have you read Taylor Marshall's "Infiltration"?
Redstone
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm familiar with it, don't think he's wrong, but also think he needs to stop the feuds with more informed people, namely E. Michael Jones (read Jones's book on Medjugorje if you want to be scared out of your mind by the subtlety of demonic oppression).
Redstone
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Also in brief with regard to Vatican II:

How can a Council with "orthodox" document conclusions be, regarding its aftermath in so many ways, such a disaster?

The best way to approach this question is to take the claims of Bella Dodd seriously, to study in detail the 1958 Conclave, and to study in detail the mistreatment of Cardinal Ottaviani. These threads are essential.
Redstone
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Read Archbishop Vigano's letters (I believe we may approach a dozen or so in the next few years).

He is now in hiding for the fear of his life.

Understand the following:

- there are those of influence, including in the Curia, who worship Lucifer. And I am not being dramatic. This exists. It has since the origin of the prayer to St. Michael a century ago.

- there is a Luciferian network that protects its own. Sometimes it is atheistic, sometimes theistic. This is a network of sex (sodomy) and money (envelopes). And worse. This is NOT a crisis of pedophilia, though that evil can exist. It is undue influence of post-pubescent homosexuality. Look at ALL reports of the abuse crisis (ie Jay, Engel, Dallas). In the US, McCarrick was a center. At present, DC remains a center (Rossi).

STAFF
Everything I write here is easily verifiable.
Redstone
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Reader, if you doubt the existence and power of demons, then really think through your relationship to the New Testament.

Fr. Ripperger says that demons, who retain their angelic hierarchy, are led by a "council" of 6, all of them with the descriptor Luciferian, who then charge various underlings with tasks. Some demons are smart, some less so, ect. but all understand the main avenue of sin: SEX. Lust.

You cannot understand the crisis without confronting the word sodomy, and its context of human anthropology (mental, spiritual, physical).
Redstone
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Priests must either be celibate or continent.

There is NO alternative. ZERO.

Why? Because of what the Mass IS. Because of what the Sacraments inherently ARE.
Redstone
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Symbolism is known and exists in the world.

Including the Church.

Quad Dog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
If you are going to believe literal demons exist, why would you believe them to be a trustworthy source for input on your religion?
FTACo88-FDT24dad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quad Dog said:

If you are going to believe literal demons exist, why would you believe them to be a trustworthy source for input on your religion?
I don't believe they are a trustworthy source for input on anything, but I do believe that they can be compelled to speak truthfully by the power of Christ.
Redstone
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Demons, while fundamentally liars, tell the truth all the time. What is needed is a holy priest - let's pray for more
Ag_of_08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I've tried to research some of the topics y'all mention with Vatican II.

If I understand correctly it was an attempt to "modernize " the church by Rome. The biggest points of contention seem to be the changing of parts of the mass( out of Latin, a change with the sacraments, and more participation by laity, and it seems some changed to the symbolism and paraphernalia used.

Am I understanding that correctly in a very simple way?
chimpanzee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I will stipulate that the conspiracy stuff could all be true, but they've managed to keep us all in the dark this long, so I'm not going to burn up anyone's bandwidth trying to crack that particular case. To the extent things are perverted by freemasons and black masses, I trust folks will stay on that trail and find some evidence eventually, in the meantime, there's a real actual debate in the open that can be considered and understood.

There are questions of when, why and how capital "T" Tradition is changed. The world is changing more rapidly than anyone could have foreseen 200 years ago, how the Church should respond is a very real and serious issue to engage.

Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
More than anything I think you could summarize Vatican II as a relaxation of Roman Catholic discipline to try to attract and keep more people. I find this interesting on two levels - one, it explains the immediate dynamic by the hardcore types to reject it, just like you might see in the Corps at A&M. Two, it shows the kind of challenges you get by a centralized, regulated approach to pastoral care and ecclesial administration. Rather than each bishop, each church having the ability to judge and meet the needs of their flock, with the top-down approach everything becomes less about the people and more about the rules. Do bishops have discretion? Of course...but the canons will drive the normal activity of the churches.
FTACo88-FDT24dad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
k2aggie07 said:

More than anything I think you could summarize Vatican II as a relaxation of Roman Catholic discipline to try to attract and keep more people. I find this interesting on two levels - one, it explains the immediate dynamic by the hardcore types to reject it, just like you might see in the Corps at A&M. Two, it shows the kind of challenges you get by a centralized, regulated approach to pastoral care and ecclesial administration. Rather than each bishop, each church having the ability to judge and meet the needs of their flock, with the top-down approach everything becomes less about the people and more about the rules. Do bishops have discretion? Of course...but the canons will drive the normal activity of the churches.


I think this is likely a valid description, but I think it's one of several ways to understand V2.

While V2 certainly didn't result in universal improvements, it did succeed in some areas. Participation by the Laity being a key success IMHO. But let's be clear about 2 things:

1. The rot that is manifesting today did not start with V2. It started long before that, as far back as the late 1800s; and
2. V2 is a valid council of the RCC. Therefore, those RCs who question its validity are heaping coals on their own heads.

Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Sure, the rot started with V1 and the pronouncement of papal infallibility...or further back to 1054.

I think the second point is interesting, because it all depends on the chain of validity. If you reject V1, do you have to accept V2? At the time, there were a lot of people in strong opposition to V1.
Last Page
Page 1 of 3
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.