Latest topics
» Rethink "Feeneyism"?
Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:02 pm by tornpage

» Brother Andre Marie MICM, the Prior at the St. Benedict Center does not correct Frs.Brian Harrison and Cekada,Bishops Sanborn,Pirvanus,Kelly and Fellay
Wed Jun 28, 2017 4:24 pm by MRyan

» Revisiting Diocese/Parish Screening Policy
Wed Jun 28, 2017 4:03 pm by MRyan

» When sedes and trads can accept that Pius XII made a mistake then popes since John XXIII are no more in heresy
Wed Jun 28, 2017 3:08 pm by MRyan

» Doctrinal talks were conducted with Fr.Gleize on 'the other side'
Mon Jun 26, 2017 9:08 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Pope Benedict permitted Fr. Jean Marie Gleize to lead in doctrinal talks since he was a liberal ?
Mon Jun 26, 2017 8:59 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Padre Pio told Fr.Gabriel Amorth," It is Satan who has been introduced into the bosom of the Church and within a very short time will come to rule a false Church" -Bishop Richard Williamson
Sun Jun 25, 2017 9:14 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Mons. Brunero Gherardini misled the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and many traditionalists
Sun Jun 25, 2017 7:18 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Official statement from SSPX awaited : Fr.Gleize and other theologians have got it wrong
Sat Jun 24, 2017 10:10 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Brother Andre Marie MICM too is teaching error : Bishop Sanborn cannot report at the Chancery office
Sat Jun 24, 2017 8:50 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Magsiterial Heresy ?
Sat Sep 26, 2015 8:36 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Magisterium should apologise to the SSPX for the excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre
Sat Sep 26, 2015 8:34 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Brother Francis MICM made a mistake on Vatican Council II
Sat Sep 26, 2015 5:14 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Legion of Christ universities in Rome adapt to leftist laws
Fri May 22, 2015 7:53 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» CM, SSPX, MICM deny the Faith to please superiors
Thu May 21, 2015 4:44 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» SSPX and Church Militant are using the same liberal theology and are unaware of it
Wed May 20, 2015 9:54 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Michael Voris uses liberal theology and yet critcizes Michael Coren
Tue May 19, 2015 10:10 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Fr.John Zuhlsdorf condones Mass for suicide
Tue May 19, 2015 9:18 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Vatican Council II is traditional or liberal depending on how you interpret the Letter of the Holy Office
Mon May 18, 2015 5:57 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Church Militant unable to answer questions on extra ecclesiam nulla salus
Sun May 17, 2015 5:55 am by Lionel L. Andrades


Papal Interpretation of Daniel 9:27

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Papal Interpretation of Daniel 9:27

Post  tornpage on Sun Jul 03, 2011 7:17 pm

Almost every time Paul IV's Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio is discussed it is in regard to its teaching about the possibility, and effect, of a heretic as pope.

I find it fascinating from another perspective: a pope indicating that the meaning of the "abomination of desolation . . . standing in the Holy Place" spoken of by Daniel and Christ (Matthew 24:15) may be tied up with heresy in the papal office:

§1. We considering a matter of this kind to be of so grave and perilous a nature that even the Roman Pontiff, who is the viceregent of God and the Lord Jesus Christ upon earth, having a plenitude of power over nations and kingdoms, judging all and being judged of none in this present world, may nevertheless be reproved if he is found deviating from the faith-and (considering moreover) that where there is greater danger there should be also a fuller and more diligent consultation, lest false prophets or others having secular jurisdiction also, should entangle miserably the souls of the faithful, and should draw down with them into perdition and destruction the innumerable peoples committed to their charge and government in spiritual or temporal matters, and so it might happen that we should see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the Prophet, in the holy place ...

It is the only instance of a pontiff commenting on the prophecy that I am aware of.

avatar
tornpage

Posts : 876
Reputation : 939
Join date : 2010-12-31

Back to top Go down

Re: Papal Interpretation of Daniel 9:27

Post  columba on Sun Jul 03, 2011 9:40 pm

A timely quote tornpage from Paul IV's Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio. It covers what I'm about to say in reply to Mike from the previous thread.

MRyan wrote:
Nice rant; hope you got it off your chest.

Calling it a rant doesn't detract from the truth of the observations I made and getting it off my chest wasn't the prime reason for writing (even though that can be therapeutic).

But the Irish would still have the Faith if they wanted it; or had it to begin with.


There's little doubt that the Irish did have the faith to begin with and there's scarcely nowhere one could stand in Ireland without having at least one commemoration marker within a 3 mile radius to the memory of some priest or bishop who was martyred for the faith while offering Mass outdoors in some secluded area when the penalty for doing so was death. Not to mention the countless number of laity who made the same offering.. So many were they that in the majority of cases there was no one left alive to record their names.
Having taken care of that nonsense I'll proceed.

after all, Catholics, especially Irish Catholics, can only follow the lead of their priests and cannot think or act for themselves. But, where were the faithful Catholics of Ireland that we hear so much about when your Church was being taken over by modernists and queers?

The faithful Catholics of Ireland were doing exactly what you recommend they do.
Like you, they believed that every word that proceeded from recognized and legitimate authority figures within the Church was as if God Himself were speaking, and, like good Catholics they went along with it even despite their grave misgivings. My own parents (may they rest in peace) had grave doubts about the changes that were taking place but trusted unquestionably that the Church knows best, totally unaware that dark forces within that very hierarchical structure were at work to dismantle, little by little, everything they had held sacred.
As for modernists and queers inhabiting the religious houses; at that time it would have been like saying the Pope is not the Pope.

Where was the Faith? Apparently, all of the smells and bells and faux orthodoxy were no match for the zeitgeist. Instead of running the modernist Bishops and priests out of town, they were embraced and the Church would eventually become irrelevant.

The difference this time round was (as Pope Paul IV said) that the threat was not coming from outside the Church, but from within. To reiterate; Believing in those days that this would be possible would be the same as saying today, the Pope is not the Pope.

Ask yourself how the Irish (and the Americans) could have so quickly abandoned tradition and have fallen so quickly into the spirit of the world while rejecting their past with not so much as a fond regret if the Faith had been so firmly implanted before VCII as we like to pretend
.

The spirit of the world wasn't imposed all at once, but rather with very gradual implementations with prior periods of desensitization, beginning in the schools and colleges under the very noses of unsuspecting parents. By the time they found out, the damage was done to the subsequent generation and the media had already well established itself as he new teacher. Blind faith in secular authority (which is more an American trait) was also becoming a trend in Ireland.

The queers and modernists were at work, as Pope St. Pius X knew, and there was something amiss in Ireland long before VCII; and I doubt if the finger of solid orthodoxy and tradition could have plugged the dike, though the complete takeover in Ireland by the modernists is nothing short of diabolical.

In agreement.

If; however, you are saying that the Pope is a modernist, or that the Holy See has been stained with error and the Church has failed in doctrine and practice; then take it to the sede forum.

Here I am at your request even, though I'm not saying what you suggest.
What I am saying is that any evidence supporting such a view hasn't been taken seriously by any high authority. Another possible reason for this is that if it were true it would be like saying to the authority, "physician, heal thyself."

The Church’s mistake, in my opinion, was to think that she could meet the world on its own terms, and to naively believe that man was a reasonable animal who would see the truth if it was presented in the spirit of ecumenical harmony.

I actually agree with you here. There were many innocent (if naive) parties who swung along with this new idea (even despite warnings from well respected and theologically sound cardinals and bishops) but there were also (well documented) cases of infiltrators having a much more sinister involvement and actually achieving the results they hoped for.

While she needed to confront and meet the modern age, she should have done so on her own terms while opening the Church to a true restoration. Believe it or not, that was the intention of VCII.


But was any restoration needed? The Church herself was in pretty good shape doctrinally. To make herself more attractive to the world was indeed the overriding concern and again, was probably undertaken in good faith by many in the council.

But perhaps she also knew what we didn't; that the damn was about to break and she could either batten down the traditional hatches in a siege-like mentality and lose who knows how many souls to schism, or she could take the chosen pastoral path of peace and “dialogue” … and hope for the best ... I know, "so how did that work out?"

One of the many unsavory outcomes; It has produced this sede sub-forum where it can be discussed.

No one is more upset and disgusted by the sins of Churchmen than am I; but, that you would equate malfeasance in government and discipline with malfeasance in doctrine is where we part company, and I am not buying it.

In actual fact my intention in highlighting the sins of Churchmen (and in such an unprecedented scale) was in reference to the good tree not bearing bad fruit. The individual sins of men and bad government don't constitute a false Church. It's the doctrinal deviances that give most cause for concern.

avatar
columba

Posts : 979
Reputation : 1068
Join date : 2010-12-18
Location : Ireland

Back to top Go down

Re: Papal Interpretation of Daniel 9:27

Post  MRyan on Mon Jul 04, 2011 10:07 am

Back to the sede sub-forum - where this will wither on the vine.

I knew my “where is the Faith of the Irish” taunt would get you going, and you did not disappoint in defending the faith of your Fathers. But you seemed to have missed the historical context. I was speaking about that period just prior to VCII when seminaries were thriving and everything seemed just about perfect … but something was amiss and I think it was spiritual. I can only relate to what happened in America, though I am not totally unfamiliar with the state of the Irish Catholic Church just prior to VCII; and it would take a book (already written by others) to analyze those seeds planted long ago that made change inevitable thanks in part to a revolutionary patriotic spirit of accommodation marked in America by an attitude of “see, we’re just like you”.

Thanks to the great wave of Irish priests, the fate of the American Catholic Church was sealed. Very early on the Irish took over the See of ecclesiastical power in Baltimore and the Americanization of the Church would brook no dissent from the Germans or from anyone else who wanted to retain their language, customs and traditions. It was the Irish “American” way or no way and the Catholic Church in America became in many respects the American Patriotic Catholic Church.

The fire bombings of whole civilian populations, such as Dresden and Hamburg, along with the nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, with nary a worrisome blink from the Bishops of America, tells you everything you need to know about the state of affairs in America. Fr. Feeney saw it in the eyes of the returning soldiers looking for refuge and some sanity in Catholic institutions and colleges, when they found only moral relativism and junk food spirituality; and it horrified him. He struggled to find the heart of the spiritual disorientation, and he thought Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus was the anti-dote (hence, his “rigorist” excess). He was only partially correct.

VCII was not the cause of change; it was only the accelerant for what was inevitable. The revolutionary spirit made it inevitable. There was no stopping it. Only a true blue ultramontane would actually believe that the Catholic confessional state could have survived had Catholics only willed it¸ or Rome had stood her ground. They’re dreaming of a by-gone age when pope’s had significant temporal authority and were carried aloft in great ceremonial pomp and circumstance … those days are over; as over as the days of burning heretics at the stake, to the great lament of Jehanne.

By the late 1950’s and early 60’s the Church’s were full and American prosperity could not be stopped … but what kind of Catholics were we? Sunday Catholics, for the most part. I am going to say something that will shock you, but the Mass had become boring, rote and mundane. Lacking the full-fledged faith of our Fathers (retained at a great price), the low Mass alone (the expedient Mass of choice) could not keep “progress” at bay, especially, as you say, when the bandleaders for revolutionary change that seemed to be imposed overnight were the priests and Bishops, at least the few that remained after the priests and nuns left the Church in droves to seek their true calling and to effect real “change”. Fr. Flake married Sister Feminista.

In many respects, the auto-destruction of the American Church was a result of its own resounding success at assimilation … and where there is no persecution there is no fire. How can Catholics live the faith without being constantly under fire? The world hates us and always will hate us because they hated our Lord first. Why do we think we should fare any better? As soon as we become accepted, respected and fully assimilated into mainstream pluralistic society, so long as we know our place, do you think we have the stomach to resist the forces of change?

Sure, blame it on Rome. I blame it on the Irish. Smile

But the faith still lives and the fire of Christ’s love cannot be extinguished. This is a severe test and constant hand-wringing over things you cannot control can only be counterproductive. I don’t know the fate of the Irish ... it’s in your hands ... but it is also a time of great grace.

The future looks brighter in America ... I don’t care what the naysayers say.

Sede land - what a dead end.
avatar
MRyan

Posts : 2276
Reputation : 2448
Join date : 2010-12-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Papal Interpretation of Daniel 9:27

Post  columba on Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:19 pm

I knew my “where is the Faith of the Irish” taunt would get you going, and you did not disappoint in defending the faith of your Fathers. But you seemed to have missed the historical context. I was speaking about that period just prior to VCII when seminaries were thriving and everything seemed just about perfect

I almost took the bait, hook, line and sinker but then I realized, with a surname like that you must have some Celtic blood in your veins. That was qualification enough to temper my over-zealous response. In fact I deleted most of my rant before posting. Smile

I wasn't quite sure of the historical period you were referring to so I stopped short from beginning with St. Patrick.
I accept -without argument- that the period prior to VCII though appearing clean from the outside, was secretly full of dead mens bones. Much of the immorality was already present in holy places and this has lately proved to have been the case.

Thanks to the great wave of Irish priests, the fate of the American Catholic Church was sealed. Very early on the Irish took over the See of ecclesiastical power in Baltimore and the Americanization of the Church would brook no dissent from the Germans or from anyone else who wanted to retain their language, customs and traditions. It was the Irish “American” way or no way and the Catholic Church in America became in many respects the American Patriotic Catholic Church.


As your probably well aware, Catholicism and nationalism have gone hand in hand in Ireland for centuries. A dangerous combination when mixed in the wrong proportions. Catholicism ends up becoming subordinate to nationalism with the result that faith is almost extinguished in this topsy-turvy set up. In the ensuing apostasy, traditionalism (both religious and cultural) becomes the scapegoat and nationalism itself becomes the new Great Sin of the day, so it too has to be replaced with that other monster, "internationalism" where all things are equal, including religious beliefs, personal choice and tolerance of everything except of course religious tradition and culture. The whole sequence I'm sure, is doomed to repeat itself until hopefully the lesson is learnt, that faith, if real, cannot be subordinate to anything.
This of course is my own fallible and over-simplified view of the Irish situation but it seems that when faith isn't given first place it won't hang around for long.

Thanks to the great wave of Irish priests, the fate of the American Catholic Church was sealed. Very early on the Irish took over the See of ecclesiastical power in Baltimore and the Americanization of the Church would brook no dissent from the Germans or from anyone else who wanted to retain their language, customs and traditions. It was the Irish “American” way or no way and the Catholic Church in America became in many respects the American Patriotic Catholic Church.

Well it seems that things have come full circle. Have you ever been to Europe of late?
It's hard to tell one country from another. They all dress the same (jeans and T shirts) with McDonalds. Burger King, KFC, and multinational supermarket chains peppering the towns and cities everywhere. If it weren't for the weather you could imagine you were taking a walk round Dublin. Even the children here who've been raised with the box in the corner as child-minder are beginning to speak with American accents.
I don't refer to it as "Americanization," I call it Universal Culturalism.

Sure, blame it on Rome. I blame it on the Irish. Smile

If it's historic perspective we're after, I blame it on Adam. Smile

But the faith still lives and the fire of Christ’s love cannot be extinguished. This is a severe test and constant hand-wringing over things you cannot control can only be counterproductive.

The hand-wringing is frustration over what can't be changed, i.e, the past.
The narrow road was always there somewhere and still is. I'm tryin to find it.

I don’t know the fate of the Irish ... it’s in your hands ... but it is also a time of great grace.

Am I detecting a case of "Am I my brothers keeper" in that statement? Shocked

The future looks brighter in America ... I don’t care what the naysayers say.

Sede land - what a dead end.

Hope springs eternal and I believe the future's bright for everyone who stays the course, but we still have a good purging to go through. It seems to be a case here in Ireland of wallet-vacante (a term I picked up on another site) and from what I read about the state of the US economy, it's headin that way too. Materialism and faith have never been good room-mates so I'm not surprized at this financial chastizement.

BTW, America is the official head quarters of sedeism. Can't blame that one on the Irish. No doubt you'll post me the family tree of Peter and Michael D. Smile




avatar
columba

Posts : 979
Reputation : 1068
Join date : 2010-12-18
Location : Ireland

Back to top Go down

Re: Papal Interpretation of Daniel 9:27

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum