EWTN runs programs of Bishop Sheen taped during the 1950's. Here is a staunch Cathoic defender of the traditional mass,the fight against Communism and other catholic truths.

However with Vatican two he accepted the new mass, kept quiet abou communism and wante to wreckovate the church in Rochester. He was thwarted by the faithful and had to back of. Fortunately he apparently repented before his death. God rest his soul.

We shall hazard an educated guess, on the basis of certain comments in Sheen's published works. He should have known better, but he became an early papolator. He was so attached to the Conciliar Gentlemen's Club headed by Paul VI, whom he knew personally, that instead of performing his sworn episcopal role of correcting that pope's grievous errors, he publicly put him on a pedestal as part of a papal personality cult. Sheen's writings, however, do indicate that by the time of his death in 1979, he repented of much of his weakness. He already saw what an anti-Catholic monster just fifteen years of the New Order had wrought. He spent most of his latter days leading retreats for priests in which he urged them to return to traditional devotion and trying to re-interpret Vatican II in a traditional light, the latter effort being a fool's errand, as we suspect that he himself might have seen, given a few more years.

-- JS (A@A.com), January 25, 2005

Answers

I am not against the bishop. I commend him for his realization that the church was headed in the wrong direction.

-- JS (A@A.com), January 25, 2005.

Your commendation is an empty gesture, since you've shown here that you are an enemy of the Church and her bishops. We all admired Bishop Sheen. I know the whole train of Catholic life and events from well before the 2nd Vatican Council, when we celebrated only the Mass of Trent. Up to our present day, as we celebrate Holy Mass in the vernacular, with the same holy priests, devout worship and Real Presense of Our Lord.

If Bishop Sheen had foreseen the holiness of his people as I see it now,

----And witnessed the diseased things you're saying about him; he would call you the same thing I've called you: a Divider sent here by the devil. And, by the way; the good bishop didn't belong to any Conciliar Gentlemen's Club headed by Paul VI. That is a figment of your malicious imagination caught like a virus from the dishonored Malachi Martin.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), January 25, 2005.

Bishop Sheen's writings from beginning to end showed a tremendous love of God and our blessed Mother, humor, wit, and obedience. I don't think we will find anything in his writings that are critical of Vatican II, Novus Ordo Mass, or Pope Paul VI. I think he was critical of the modernism/liberalism/secularism that had crept into the church but never publicly blamed the Council, the Mass, nor the Pope. Here is an example:

"The rabbis and priests and ministers stopped talking about sin. The jurists picked it up and turned sin into a crime, and finally psychiatrists converted it into a complex. The result is that no one is a sinner.”--National Prayer Breakfast, January 1979

Another quote attributed to him is the following: In the physical universe, energy does not perish but is transformed. In like manner, religious values are lifted into a higher case or degenerate into a lower one. When the nuns gave up their long habits, the girls put on maxicoats; when the rosary as a devotion was dropped, the hippies put beads around their necks; when mysticism evaporated into an irrelevant ideal, youths sought the ecstasy, not through the long haul of asceticism, but the short trip through pharmaceuticals; when seminaries, schools, and convents dropped discipline, which is an inner violence against our vices, the street mobs picked up violence but directed it against neighbor, race, and state. When the pulpits no longer resounded with the Name “above every name,” the young began calling themselves “Jesus people.”

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), January 25, 2005.

LETS see if this works...

-- ZAROFF (ZAROFF3@JUNO.COM), January 25, 2005.

LOL

-- ROTF (toofunny@hotmail.com), January 25, 2005.

Dear John,

You sound depressed and bitter. I will pray for you, that you find healing and see the joy of Christ again.

-- Michael (edwardsronning@prodigy.net), January 27, 2005.

Thank you Michael Edwads, that is a real Christian thing to do. But no.. I am not depressed for myself, but for the many good people that continue in the novu ordo mass. I have close kin that aare also in this situation. On the other hand there aare 3 or 4 kinsfolk, and many friends who would not go near a novus ordo mass. They would rather stay home and watch tapes of the traditional mass.

I do not write this way because of a mean spirit or vengeful scenario. Even though Mr. Chavez thinks that he can psychoanalyze people from a distance.

I have studied the church that was and the church that is now, and they are two different churches. There is not one thing that the conciliar church has kept from the pre V2 church. Mass changed, sacraments changed, code of canon law changed, catechisn changed, rosarychanged, and on and on.

Worst of all is what they have done to non catholics in giving them a false security on salvation. That is criminal.

It is very difficult for Catholics to make it to salvation as probably most will not. However even that slim chance is not given to others outside the faith.

Even Mother Teresa, (God rest her soul), told people to die as a good mosmel or Hindu or whatever.

That was wrong. She was probably one of the sweetest souls that have ever walked the earth, but in that era she was wrong. I will get a tirde of abuse from EC but the truth is the truth. Read her own autobiogaphy. Thanks again and God bless you.

-- JS (AA@A.com), January 27, 2005.

Dear Smith--
You're losing sight of your cause and giving me importance now. It's because we are at north and south poles. You can't feel joy for the moment; your dark star is overhead. I'm only trying to scare you away from the temptation to complete schism. You'll soon fall if somebody doesn't throw you a lifeline. Here you were, cozying up to Michael. But Eugene was on your mind, and conflict. Well, you had better come to your senses.

Either you'll be a faithful Catholic without your present impediment, or a schismatic fallen away from Christ and his holy apostles. Forget about me. I wasn't even in your sorry life a month ago. YOU CAME TO ME. You have need of counsel and correction. You're coming back to your Church, Mr. Smith.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), January 27, 2005.

Hello again John!

I have to be honest; though I believe Mother Theresa was a truly holy soul and a saint, yet, I agree with you, she was wrong about that one point. Perhaps in that sense Dominus Iesus could be a pointer back in the right direction.

May I ask you, John--you can respond to me personally if you'd rather, my e-mail is accurate--how old are you? Did you experience the pre-Vatican II Church? I just wonder, because I've also heard horror stories from older Catholics about priests who went through the motions in cut-down time with the Tridentine Mass, downright mean confessors, people stressing the laws so much (not drinking water after midnight before Mass, etc.) that they forgot the joy, and forgot the Father's love.

Mind you, I agree with you we have our problems now. And maybe one initial (wrongheaded) response to Vatican II was to think, well, we don't have to evangelize anymore, the Catholic Church isn't anything special, let's just fit in and be like everyone else and get along. There has been an initial time of confusion.

But I believe the Church is being purified. I believe you mentioned a young priest friend of yours who says the Novus Ordo with great devotion. I have met young seminarians and priests who seem to me to be deeply committed to Christ and the Catholic Church--and also to a revival of older sacred music, more reverence, etc. The students at Christendom College insist on kneeling when receiving the Blessed Sacrament, even when their bishop has tried to ban it (against the regulations of the Holy See). The Priestly Confraternity of St. Peter is one example of young men committed to the older ways.

John, I think the Holy Spirit is beginning to work a revival in the Catholic Church. Don't give up on it; God is bringing us all around-- people and bishops alike--gradually, step by step.

-- Michael (edwardsronning@prodigy.net), January 28, 2005.

By the way, there was an awful lot that was very good before Vatican II, so don't let my last post let you think I believe otherwise. But my point is--if as you say, Bishop Sheen had a conversion, I see that beginning to happen on a larger scale. God isn't through with His beloved Catholic Church: the best is yet to come.

-- Michael (edwardsronning@prodigy.net), January 28, 2005.

Dear Michael,

I also concede some discouraging problems confronting the Church; they just don't amount to what you & John Smith think. What's more, this which you call a revival implies there was a death of our holy mother Church. But it doesn't fit. The Church has been alive and well despite great challenges. When you say: ''maybe one initial (wrongheaded) response to Vatican II was to think, you impugn our Church, the faithful, clergy and hierarchy; a grave offense. Pardon me for saying so. It plays into the hands of a demagogue like Smith; who can't stand our Holy Church. He doesn't impugn those who have been guilty of lukewarmness, indifference, disrespect and other sins. He attacks the Pope and the prelates. That's terrible; you might just as well preach the death of the Holy Spirit altogether. Just for the record: ''well, we don't have to evangelize anymore, the Catholic Church isn't anything special, let's just fit in and be like everyone else and get along,'' --Is absolutely FALSE. We haven't got that way EVER.

--------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------

I have long experience, having lived up to my late teens during the old Rite of the Catholic faith, and thereafter as a faithful Catholic supporting Vatican II. I loved His Holiness Pius XII; and all the grandeur which was his papacy.

No, there were no 'horror stories'' in my own experience. Things went along much as we see them now. Many fervent Catholics and many lukewarm, pretend Catholics (Think of that awful movie, The Godfather). -- The Latin liturgy was indeed very lovely, and our old hymnals too. Priests had immense prestige, today much less pompous; --You saw the Pope carried around on a THRONE, wearing a triple tiara, for heavens sake! That was over the top; how could anyone deny it? John Smith calls ME a papolater? Come ON!!!! But the main thing then missing, --today we have a huge improvement,

Was our lay participation during the celebration of the Eucharist. The lovely and refined Latin Rite had no more than 30 percent actively involved Catholics in the pews. A lot of kneeling, standing, returning to their seat, standing. More kneeling; etc., --Almost NO responses in the Latin, except by one or two altar boys who learned them by rote (did it myself, so I know) and only a tiny minority who read in Latin from their missals.

Today there's closer to 90% response in the vernacular, good comprehension and LOVE-- real LOVE for the Mass, and for our priests and Jesus Our Lord in our midst. True worship.

Naturally there's lots of room for improvement. But if we improve along Smith's line, the baby is thrown out with the bathwater. --Not me, Baby! I love my Catholic Church and I don't care who knows it!

God bless you and give you Peace, Michael. Ciao.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), January 28, 2005.

Michael;

Thank you for your kind offer, you seem to be a good and caring man.

No, I am not a nostalgic old timer longing for what was. I have what was right now.

The churches that I atend use the missal of St. Pius V. They will not even use the 1962 missal. Yes I have my own missal and I know what I am doing. It took a few weeks to get the hang of it but now I understand every step along the way on the re-presentation of Our Lord on Calvary.

Especially when it comes to the consecration of the chalice, (not cup).

I know that I am hearing the words of Our Lord from the accounts of His apostles and not from a protestant translator.

I know that my priest has been ordained with the power to offer sacrifice and to forgive sins.

I know that the people attending receive communion hearing the words "May Our Lord Jesus Christ forgive your sins and bring you to life everlasting" , Not just Body of Christ,Amen

People with 3,4,5 kids attending. How many novus ordo's do you now see with more than two. Not many.

As for Mr Chavez; He says that I seek him? He is right there on a follow up, no matter which thread I write to.

He thinks that he is the hound of Heaven. Nope, he is more like the hound of the baskervilles.

As for depressed. No I am not depressed. I just used you word. I am saddened (a better word), for the people attending the vacuous N.O. mass.

They had the pearl of great price and traded it in for something far less beautiful, even if it is valid.

Remember Abel offered the best, Cain the lesser. That is what I was doing when I went to the N.O.

Lord Jesus went all out for me, I cannot offer Him less in return.

-- JS (A@A.com), January 28, 2005.

Hello Eugene!

I too have seen warm participation by the people in the Mass in these days. I am not old enough to even have visited a Tridentine Mass, so Novus Ordo is all I know, but I think it is both simple and beautiful.

I've often wondered how many people followed along with their Latin missals in the old days.

BTW, my word "revival" was not literal: I know the Church never died!

Cordially,

-- Michael (edwardsronning@prodigy.net), January 28, 2005.

Thanks for your thoughts, John! I appreciate them and you make me think.

BTW, we have three children! Almost four, but recently had a miscarriage: God bless her soul for Jesus' sake. But I do notice plenty of minivans with three or four kids in my parish.

Peace and joy,

-- Michael (edwardsronning@prodigy.net), January 28, 2005.

Mr. Schismith,
Love this comparison;

''Remember Abel offered the best, Cain the lesser. That is what I was doing when I went to the N.O.''

The analogy seems apropos. You, schismatic dissident, are Cain, clubbing your brother, every faithful Catholic, to death. You want his worship rejected by God; and He infuriates you by accepting our Novus Ordo celebration of Christ's offering.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), January 28, 2005.

Correction; It should read.

"May the Body of Our Lord Jesus Christ preserve thy soul unto life everlasting"

-- JS (A@A.com), January 28, 2005.

Michael;

I am sorry to hear about your loss. I am sure that Our Lord will take care of His little ones. Did He not say something like, "Do not stop the little ones from coming to me".

We have been blessed with five children for which I am grateful.

-- JS (A@A.com), January 28, 2005.

I know that my priest has been ordained with the power to offer sacrifice and to forgive sins.

John,

If you addressed this before forgive me, but I'm curious as to who ordained your priest. Are you a sedevacantist?

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), January 28, 2005.

Aaarchbishop Le Febvre ordained my priests. Some others came from the Thuc line.Their line is not questionable. taheir ordinaations aare in the traditional rite. Their bishops in the traditional rite.

As for sedevacantist, I don't know for sure. One day I think "How can a vicar of Christ go around preaching such anti traditional stuff. But sometimes I think that perhaps it is God's tolerating the 41'st anti-pope. We have had 40 in the past.

-- JS (A@A.com), January 28, 2005.

Be careful, J.S., lest you make a "god" out of your pre-VII traditions. They are just that, and only that, (t)raditions! God is doing great things through VII, and we have a long long time to see the full outcome . . . in fact, it may take centuries to realize the fullness of this Wisdom from on High.

Yes, I know, there have been some rough waters . . . SO WHAT! Can Jesus Christ not navigate through a few storms? I think He can, and I think He will because He said "The gates of hell will not prevail." O ye of little faith! Get back in the boat, hold onto your paddle, and watch the Lord of the Universe sail His boat!!

Gail

-- Gail (rothfarms@socket.net), January 28, 2005.

Gail; Traditions are the soul of our church. Don't brush them off so lightly.

2:5 Remember you not that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? 2:6 And now you know what withholdeth, that he may be revealed in his time. 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity already worketh: only that he who now holdeth do hold, until he be taken out of the way. 2:8 And then that wicked one shall be revealed: whom the Lord Jesus shall kill with the spirit of his mouth and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: him 2:9 Whose coming is according to the working of Satan, in all power and signs and lying wonders: 2:10 And in all seduction of iniquity to them that perish: because they receive not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying: Note God shall send. . .That is God shall suffer them to be deceived by lying wonders, and false miracles, in punishment of their not entertaining the love of truth. 2:11 That all may be judged who have not believed the truth but have consented to iniquity. 2:12 But we ought to give thanks to God always for you, brethren, beloved of God, for that God hath chosen you firstfruits unto salvation, in sanctification of the spirit and faith of the truth: 2:13 Whereunto also he hath called you by our gospel, unto the purchasing of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. 2:14 Therefore, brethren, stand fast: and hold the traditions, which you have learned, whether by word or by our epistle. NOTE: Note Traditions. . .See here that the unwritten traditions are no less to be received than their epistles. 2:15 Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God and our Father, who hath loved us and hath given us everlasting consolation and good hope in grace, 2:16 Exhort your hearts and confirm you in every good work and word.

-- JS (A@A.com), January 28, 2005.

Lying wonders and false miracles? That goes both ways of course. I have a protestant friend who thinks Fatima was a lying wonder and false miracle, since the dancing of the sun should have been seen by the whole world, not just by 70,000 people in Portugal.

-- Michael (edwardsronning@prodigy.net), January 28, 2005.

Anyway, I'm not aware of any false miracles or lying wonders done by either Pope John Paul or by any of the Fathers of Vatican II. But I think St. Paul's warning to retain holy Tradition is a good one.

I guess the question is, does Vatican II retain the Tradition of Faith? I think it does, and it sounds like Gail does too. It sounds like you have your doubts, John. I hope I'm right and you're not!

By the way, weren't most antipopes elected by an opposition faction within the Roman Church? There is no other claimant to the Throne of Peter that I know of besides John Paul II: certainly no one most people would have even heard of. The idea that the Throne of Peter has been vacant since Paul VI is, to me, questionable: has there ever been a 42 year papal vacancy in the Church? I can't think of an example that would come close to that. Even in the Great Western Schism, there were at least four active claimants to the Holy See.

-- Michael (edwardsronning@prodigy.net), January 28, 2005.

There is no other claimant to the Throne of Peter that I know of besides John Paul II: certainly no one most people would have even heard of.

What? You've never heard of brian.crane@cranemills.com), January 28, 2005.

Pope Pius XIII

did it again

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), January 28, 2005.

Thaat pope pius 13 is a bit much but the rest of his stuff is not all bad.

As far as the current popes. Search out the siri thesis.

Siri was elected pope in 1958 and coerced into refusing the tiara. He even had the name of pope Gregory 17 or something. Check it out.

If he was coerced, the following popes were not the choice of the Holy Ghost.

-- JS (A@A.com), January 28, 2005.

Read the following caaarfully and then choose your pope. They are diametrically opposed to each other. One or the other is wrong and therefore a heretic.

John Paul II, Address to Jews in West Germany, Nov. 17. 1980: “The first dimension of this dialogue, that is, the meeting between the people of the Old Covenant, never revoked by God, and that of the New Covenant, is at the same time within our Church…”

This is a denial of the dogma, defined by the Council of Florence, that the Old Covenant has ceased. Do you agree that John Paul II’s teaching that the Old Covenant is still valid is heresy and apostasy?

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Cantate Domino, 1441, ex cathedra: “The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and teaches that the matter pertaining to the law of the Old Testament, of the Mosaic Law, which are divided into ceremonies, sacred rites, sacrifices, and sacraments, because they were established to signify something in the future, although they were suited to divine worship at that time, after our Lord’s coming had been signified by them, ceased, and the sacraments of the New Testament began; and that whoever, even after the passion, placed hope in these matters of the law and submitted himself to them as necessary for salvation, as if faith in Christ could not save without them, sinned mortally. Yet it does not deny that after the passion of Christ up to the promulgation of the Gospel they could have been observed until they were believed to be in no way necessary for salvation; but after the promulgation of the Gospel it asserts that they cannot be observed without the loss of eternal salvation. All, therefore, who after that time (the promulgation of the Gospel) observe circumcision and the Sabbath and the other requirements of the law, it declares alien to the Christian faith and not in the least fit to participate in eternal salvation, unless someday they recover from these errors.”

-- JS (A@A.com), January 28, 2005.

Read the following carefully and then choose your pope. They are diametrically opposed to each other. One or the other is wrong and therefore a heretic.

John Paul II, Address to Jews in West Germany, Nov. 17. 1980: “The first dimension of this dialogue, that is, the meeting between the people of the Old Covenant, never revoked by God, and that of the New Covenant, is at the same time within our Church…”

This is a denial of the dogma, defined by the Council of Florence, that the Old Covenant has ceased. Do you agree that John Paul II’s teaching that the Old Covenant is still valid is heresy and apostasy?

Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Cantate Domino, 1441, ex cathedra: “The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and teaches that the matter pertaining to the law of the Old Testament, of the Mosaic Law, which are divided into ceremonies, sacred rites, sacrifices, and sacraments, because they were established to signify something in the future, although they were suited to divine worship at that time, after our Lord’s coming had been signified by them, ceased, and the sacraments of the New Testament began; and that whoever, even after the passion, placed hope in these matters of the law and submitted himself to them as necessary for salvation, as if faith in Christ could not save without them, sinned mortally. Yet it does not deny that after the passion of Christ up to the promulgation of the Gospel they could have been observed until they were believed to be in no way necessary for salvation; but after the promulgation of the Gospel it asserts that they cannot be observed without the loss of eternal salvation. All, therefore, who after that time (the promulgation of the Gospel) observe circumcision and the Sabbath and the other requirements of the law, it declares alien to the Christian faith and not in the least fit to participate in eternal salvation, unless someday they recover from these errors.”

-- JS (A@A.com), January 28, 2005.

Sorry for double entry.

-- JS (A@A.com), January 28, 2005.

I suppose Karol Woytyla never heard of Pope Eugene IV or any Council of Florence, much less Cantate Domino, 1441 ???

But you-- our House Cardinal, have kept these sacred words in your Catholic Consultant's Broadsheet, ready to overwhelm the whole world ? ? ? SURE. What does a Pope know? We're so fortunate to have you with us, Schismith.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), January 28, 2005.

Thank you for your response, John! Very interesting stuff.

I'll look into the Siri idea more. I heard a Bernard Jantzen tape in which he asked Malachi Martin about that question, and it hadn't occurred to me *why* the question was asked. But as I recall, Fr. Martin gently sidestepped the issue, leaving it that Siri turned down the office of Peter because of concerns "for his family...he had a large family."

(Not that I think Fr. Martin was the final authority on these matters, in fact I'm in some correspondence with a woman who really *does* seem to have had a romantic relationship with him for some years; she indicates he sometimes exaggerated things. However, Fr. Martin was surely active in Vatican happenings during that period, so I imagine he had worthwhile things to say about this.)

But anyway, when did Cardinal Siri die? And did he participate in the election of either John Paul I or II? I'd have questions about your thesis. But it is an interesting one--by the way, *who* would have used force against Siri?

As far as the Jews, I note the careful wording of Pope John Paul's address: that the "Covenant" has not been revoked. That must be true, according to St. Paul's own words in Romans 11:22-29, so John Paul is correct.

Florence is also correct, that the "matter" of keeping Old Testament ceremonies has passed away, and we Christians should not observe them for our salvation.

"Covenant" deals with God's love for the Jewish people, which is eternal and irrevokable. "Matter" deals with observance of Mosaic Law, which has been abrogated by the perfect Sacrifice of Christ on Calvary, offered in an unbloody manner on every Catholic altar of the world. So anyway, on that point, I don't believe John Paul is mistaken.

But again--who wanted to force Siri out of the way?

-- Michael (edwardsronning@prodigy.net), January 29, 2005.

That should be Romans 11:28-29.

-- Michael (edwardsronning@prodigy.net), January 29, 2005.

Okay, even Wickpedia mentions the possibility that Siri *was* elected pope twice. But that being said, (1) various men elected popes through history have either turned the office down or been vetoed by the Holy Roman Emperor or various Cardinals, this is not unheard of by any means; and (2) since Cardinal Siri *did* participate in all the conclaves, it is difficult for me to believe he did not accept their validity. So, even if he *were* the pope, he is by that fact handing over his office, isn't he? I know one Pope Clement resigned, because of the trickery of Cardinal Gaetani (who became Boniface VIII)!

-- Michael (edwardsronning@prodigy.net), January 29, 2005.

Michael;

A well thought out answer and you raise some very interesting points.

Cardinal Siri died in 1989, so he would have been pope for 31 years. He did sign the documents at the council, which of course would have made him a heretic. That is a troubling incident. He did have a name chosen, so it does seem that he would have accepted the papacy.

If he were coerced to the extent that he feared for his family and the clergy of Russia , it was a human weaknes and not the way that a brave man should have behaved.

Nevertheless, if he were coerced out of accepting by outside forces like the Bnai Brith, or the powerfull influences of the Communist infiltrators, (Read AA-1025), it would seem that the choice of the Holy Ghost was thwarted.

In my opinion, and in what I have read, the popes that followed would be the choices of man and not of God. That at least makes them suspect. They most certainly took the chuch into a different direction than that in which it had always gone.

As for the Jews being saved by the old covenent, read Cantate Domino and see what it says about the Jews, and others. From a human perspective I have always had Jewish friends from childhood, however , this is not on a human level, but on a spiritual one.

-- JS (A@A.com), January 29, 2005.

''In my opinion, and in what I have read, the popes that followed would be choices of man, not of God. That at least makes them suspect. They most certainly took the church into a different direction.'' --''In his opinion,'' --there isn't a Holy Spirit at all; Jesus was wrong; there IS no Spirit of truth with the Church.

THEY, meaning the bishops, successors of Christ's holy apostles, ''certainly took the Church in a different direction'' than John Smith's preference. Smith must think He is the Holy Spirit!

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), January 29, 2005.

This is a really dumb question, but what is B'nai B'rith that it could frighten a papal candidate into withdrawing? As for Communist infiltration, I guess that's possible: the KGB certainly did that in the Orthodox Church.

But again, if when you consider it, you wonder if Cardinal Siri was a heretic also, then that would leave the Church in the bizarre situation of not having had a pope on the Throne of Peter in 46 years! I don't ever recall hearing of such a thing. I'm confident Christ our Lord has not forgotten His promise, otherwise the gates of hell have certainly prevailed. (Unless you think the next pope will reverse the last 46 years?! In that case, John Paul's passing should prove interesting!

And thanks, I will try to get around to reading the Decrees of Florence on the Jews, while continuing to trust in Romans 11:28-29. I am also getting a book by Fr. Francis Sullivan mentioned by "Anon" in another thread that should prove interesting; he traces the history of EENS.

BTW, I forgot, one of the reasons I liked the

-- Michael (edwardsronning@prodigy.net), January 29, 2005.

Michael;

I enjoy dialoguing with you. You look aat things in a thoughtful manner. As for the church erring that can never be. Popes have erred but despite that the faith will never err.

It seems to be a horrible thought that we could possibly be without a pope, but there is a first time for everything. Cantate Domino says in no uncertain terms that Jews will not be saved unless they receive baptism and become Catholic. JP@ says differently.

If you wish read the attachmen that I have entered below. Tough reading, but if you find fault with it plase comment.

Heresy of the Week

-- JS (A@A.com), January 29, 2005.

The attachment didn't come through, John.

-- Michael (edwardsronning@prodigy.net), January 29, 2005.

Michael;

Go to googke; type in The masonic agenda to control the world It is the top choice. Sorry for the bad attachment.

-- JS (A@A.com), January 29, 2005.

here is a bit of AA-1025;

INTRODUCTION

This is the story of a man who dedicated his life to the Party. Nothing but the Party mattered for him; his dedication was complete, absolute, uncompromising, unrelenting. But a human being is more than a cog in a machine; a mechanical part has no soul, but man has - even though he may regard himself as no more than a thinking animal. In fact, the higher animals respond to love. For man, love is essential. But love is not to be found in the Party Machine: "If you get caught, we will disavow you", his chief warned him.

Many men find love in marriage, or, if not in marriage, at least in their children. A few, however, are celibate all their life: scientists, composers, men of God. Even then, human warmth is not entirely lacking: Beethoven knew human admiration, and Fr. Damien was loved by his lepers. In the last resort, a man completely bereft of human love can still turn to God. But a man who has no human love at all and no belief in God, and who chooses celibacy to better serve a Party that manufactures hatred will either break down, become insane and perhaps commit suicide, or seek oblivion in drink and gradually destroy himself. Unless, of course, this man gives himself the illusion of a human dialogue by keeping a diary or writing his memoirs.

This is the story of a man who wrote his memoirs, about which he had had dreams for many nights until it had become an obsession. He yielded to the urge to write them though not understanding why. "Anyway, it does not matter", he ruminated, "for no one will ever read this; I shall destroy it in due course."

This man was a Communist agent who became a Catholic priest to better destroy the Church. He was ordained in the early forties, died in the late sixties, and his confessions survived him. He had overlooked one very important fact, however, that no man is master of his own life. He died in hospital as the result of a car accident. His papers were found in his briefcase, and read by the Catholic nurse who looked after him.

We are not relating the story out of sympathy for this Anti- Priest. His ruthlessness, his contempt of man, his demonic hatred of God and His Church, preclude such feelings of sympathy. We sincerely hope, however, that the grace of repentance was given to him before consciousness left him.

The reason we are relating this story is to reveal that, as early as 1938, there were over one thousand Communist agents ordained as Catholic priests or studying for the priesthood. They formed an efficient network of Anti-Priests whose main function was the infiltration, subversion and control of the Catholic press and Publishing Houses with the aid of Soviet money. New ideas were to be spread, a new religion was to be promoted. How well they have succeeded can be seen in a comparison of their avowed aims with the state of the Church since the Council. The reader will be able to judge for himself.

-- JS (A@A.com), January 29, 2005.

John,

I will read through that website, though I believe I remember Robert Sungenis referring to the author (Br. Dimond) as "evil". Just a casual glance troubles my spirit: frankly I don't think it is from God at all. The one priest's (Fr. Trosch) thought that one day vengeance will be taken by the populace against the prelates, with God's blessing, chills me.

The beginning of the article about communists you mention sounds more interesting, at least with a possibility of truth. I'll research it.

I've got to go do some work now, but I wish you joy and peace in Christ.

-- Michael (edwardsronning@prodigy.net), January 29, 2005.

There it is.
John Smith, gone with Malachi Martin, useful idiots for Satan.

Thanks for your last few posts, Sir. They were bound to surface; we've been waiting. Very good medicine for lurkers in our thread to see how atrocious your ideas are. Thanks again, we needed that.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), January 29, 2005.

Michael; I am not a disciple of trosch or dimond. What I take from them is the research that they do on papal pronouncements. When the words of any pre V2 pope appear I carefully read them,. I will make my own decisions on them and not Trosch or Dimond's. Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater just because of what is said about them. Naturally anything against V2 is going to be demonized.

Yours in Christ.

-- JS (A@A.com), January 29, 2005.

Fair enough, John!

Which is one reason I'm excited about reading the Sullivan book mentioned in the other thread. I really need an in-depth discussion of EENS taking into account all the pronouncements, history, theology, etc.

I myself am tempted to "read through the papal encyclicals" in some manner--though there are so very many. But I'm a fast reader.

-- Michael (edwardsronning@prodigy.net), January 29, 2005.

Great, Michael. Go for it!

-- JS (A@A.com), January 29, 2005.