ANTE DIOS NUNCA SERÁS HÉROE ANÓNIMO
We can only hope and pray.
You only give up nice things for Lent; y'know like chocolate, dry roasted peanuts, absinthe. Any Catholic worthy of the name who happens to be in Rome over the next six weeks will do well to make a beeline for the Wednesday audience and can be reasonably confident that for every minute spent listening to Francis, 10 days will be lopped off any stay in purgatory.
No, we also give up sins for lent, and other things that do not lead to god, eg bergoglio.
We must not only avoid sin, we must avoid occasions of sin. Attendance at this bloke's audiences would be an occasion of sin due to the threat posed to one's faith.
Actually, we don't give up sins for Lent. We must eradicate them entirely from our lives. The phrase "for lent" implies that after Lent they can be resumed. If one is sacrificing, the object being sacrificed must be objectively good.
Can we abstain from him, completely? Karl
In this case Charity would defeat itself!
We can also give up the usual way traditionalists and liberals interpret Vatican Council IIFEBRUARY 15, 2018Reinterpret Vatican Council II with these four linkshttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/02/reinterpret-vatican-council-ii-with_15.html
I pray for the pope every morning. I also pray for Bergoglio's conversion every morning.
It's not open for "reinterpretation" because it contains errors, if the document contains errors you have to throw the entire thing in the garbage.841 The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day."That's a simple falsehood, an error or a lie, voiding the entire document and this is only one example.
There are philosophical errors in Vatican Council II which come from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 but we can still re-interpet Vatican Council II in harmony with the past ecclesiology of the Church, the Syllabus of Errors and the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So lets go ahead and do it and let Rome come back to the Faith and let the German bishops reject Vatican Council II as the SSPX is doing today.We have to make the distinction between Vatican Council II(Feeneyite) and Vatican Council II(Cushingite). Reject Vatican Council II(Cushingite) which is non traditional and irrational and affirm Vatican Council II(Feeneyite) which avoids the New Theology.This is what the SSPX can do immediately and then ask for canonical recognition.-Lionel Andrades
February 16, 2018Cardinal Blaise Cupich is correct : with Vatican Council II interpreted with Cushingism a paradigm shift can be created http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/02/cardinal-blaise-cupich-is-correct-with.html
Jesus was right too, and Paul and Nicaea and...., Vatican II and Amoris Laetitia among others all represent critically important 'paradigm shifts'.
February 18, 2018 Who is going to challenge Cardinal Cupich and say there is no doctrinal change with Vatican Council ? Not Church Militant TV http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/02/who-is-going-to-challenge-cardinal.html
FEBRUARY 18, 2018There will not be mission for Michael Voris based on the traditional teaching of the Church supported by Vatican Council II and the Catechism(1994) since he chooses Cushingism http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2018/02/there-will-not-be-mission-for-michael.html
Paradigm shift is just a euphemism for heresy. What a load of poppycock.
Would like to give up this pope for lent and beyond...forever!!!
How to fill those tell-tale empty spaces? Maybe one of the pope's confidantes can contact the Vatican's new favorite regime in Beijing and ask for a 20-30,000 strong rent-a-crowd to help give the appearance that all is well.
Is there still an official tally of attendees ?
Henry, If you check out the Deus Ex Machina blog, there's an article from February 2nd which has these official Vatican stats for the average attendance at the pope's weekly audience:JPII - 32,000BXVI - 33,000Francis (up to Dec.2014) - 30,000Francis (Jan.2015 to present) - 9,000.
Your citing of para 841 of the CCC is GOLD. It mirrors NA, which is V2. Blasphemy merits no "reinterpretation". It's feces.
When all the protests about the Pope, the venting of frustrations, hostilities and resentments, after the wish lists are exhausted and the crowd numbers are finalized, has it all changed anything or ever likely to?What do you effectively do to change things to your liking.
You make a valid point. However, that just means that you are just as misguided as he is.
How can you concede that I am making a valid point then demonstrate that point exactly. You are still avoiding the obvious, namely, that simply protesting is not going to change anything.Again, what do you believe that you and others of similar mind on this board proposed to do to translate protest into desired effect?
I have to live my own life as minute as it may be. Francis has to live his as well. We will both be judged by the same eternal judge. His responsibility is much greater and he will be judged just that more harshly for throwing Holy Scripture under the bus. I just throw opinions around. The Holy Book is a lot more complex.
841 The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, Lionel:The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 assumed that there was known salvation outside the Church.This was an error. So Nostra Aetate says that the plan of salvation also includes the Muslims.The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 mistook invisible for us baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance as being visible exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.This is Cushingite theology.It is a mistake. Yet this was the theology used by Cardinal Cushing and the others at Vatican Council II.It is used by the two popes today.Now even though this is an error we can re-interpet it.Just be aware that all salvation in personal cases is known only to God. So there is no known Muslim who is saved outside the Church. The reference to salvation here is a reference to a theoretical and hypothetical case, a speculative case.It is based on the wrong reasoning in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949. So we know that the salvation mentioned here cannot be a practical exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.The Magisterium made a mistake.So even though there is an error in Vatican Council II, a philosophical error, which cannot be the work of the Holy Spirit, we can still interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with the old exclusivist ecclesiology and the Syllabus of Errors, by simply avoiding the false Cushingite premise.In this way we affirm Tradition and Vatican Council II and can ask the German bishops to do the same. Ask them to affirm the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus like the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century. It is comptaible with Vatican Council II( Feeneyite).Lionel Andrades
This is quite a different interpretation than the one which affirms that "all dogs go to heaven". My question is just what happens to those who have not been baptised. Muslims are not given the gift of baptism. John the Baptist by his very name baptised Jesus the Christ. Was that only symbolic? It appears that Francis is preaching that everyone goes to heaven.
JBQ:My question is just what happens to those who have not been baptised.Lionel: They go to Hell according to Vatican Council II(AG 7).Those who know about Jesus and the Church and yet do not enter are on the way to Hell(LG 14).Also those who are not baptised in general and do not have Catholic faith are on the way to Hell(AG 7, extra ecclesiam nulla salus Council of Florence 1441 etc,CCC 1257 The Necessity of Baptism)_______________________Muslims are not given the gift of baptismLionel: According to Vatican Council II(AG 7) they are all oriented to Hell.The founders of their religion knew about Jesus and the Church(LG 14) and did not enter.In general they die without faith and baptism(Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II).This is a Feeneyite (according to Lionel Andrades) interpretation of Vatican Council II. So there is no change in the exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church before and after Vatican Council II.The two popes and Cardinal Ladaria interpret Vatican Council II with the theology of Cushingism. So there is a rupture with extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the past ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.-Lionel Andrades Muslims are not given the gift of baptism. John the Baptist by his very name baptised Jesus the Christ. Was that only symbolic? It appears that Francis is preaching that everyone goes to heaven.
The homosexuals in the Vatican really need to give up sodomy for Lent.
They’ve also offered up 60 million Chinese Catholics for Lent