The Pope is Satanic. I told that to my very deep Catholic friend after he got in.. and she didn't believe me. then 8 months later she apologized and agreed. They forced the previous pope out and put him in.
The “US bishops” are merely an advisory body and have no constitutional authority over the Church. Authority exists only in the individual bishops in their own dioceses (but the Pope also has authority). A confederacy of bishops means absolutely nothing. If one of the US bishops opposed this directive, there would be no mechanism for penalizing him (besides not inviting him to the cushy parties) because bishops only have authority in their own territory. The bishop of Chicago has no say in the diocese of Tyler, Texas.
Some of y’all go full NPC when Catholicism is mentioned. None of the prayers or rites of the Church are secret knowledge. If you are curious ask a priest and he will show you the books.
Conservative (trad) Catholics are just about the only Christians that are opposing the vaccine you know. All the conservative evangelicals have no direction on this issue because their theology is vague.
Conservative evangelicals have plenty of direction; just not from a human authority figure.
Though not a Catholic, I have never condemned them, and I have praised (true) Catholicism as the last bastion holding the line on the sanctity of life and marriage (to a lesser degree). This anti-pope has unfortunately put all that to an end.
It is the same crisis we face in our nation: Stay, and be counted as damned, or leave and count yourself a coward. Fight, and die with your convictions.
Conservative evangelicals tend to have sense to them, but they lack deference toward tradition (which is implied in the commandment to honor thy father and thy mother). They would not think it is necessary to bind themselves to the tradition of the Fathers, and though many of them recognize the supreme preeminence of St. Thomas Aquinas as the synthesizer of all theology, they do not think it imperative to adopt his school of thought.
It’s a flaw in the Protestant approach to epistemology. At its root, Protestantism is indeed (and remains) a protest against Catholicism, and not a self contained religious sect. Protestantism cannot define itself besides being “not Catholic.” They occasionally study certain of the Fathers, like Augustine, and even popes like Leo and Gregory, but they draw a careful line around the things that these men said that determine were “Catholic errors.” This is begging the question!
Since Protestantism is founded on the idea that ecclesiastical polities like national Churches, local congregations, and even individual believers ought to determine for themselves the meaning of Scripture, they very easily change their own doctrines. All Protestants (even conservatives) have gone from rejecting all contraception (the Biblical position, even if very difficult to hear), to accepting the pill but rejecting barrier methods and pulling out, to finally accepting all forms of birth control within marriage.
Similarly, though they may have misgivings about these vaccines’ origins, they will probably not come to a real consensus and ultimately will be pulled more and more toward liberalism (moral decay, but also theological decay), which has been the fate of the Protestant experiment from day one.
I appreciate the relatively civil response; however, it's a bit too broad brush for me. I'm not interested in arguing anyone's faith, just really trying to say that I, as a protestant, actually respect Catholics for standing for historic Christian doctrines. It is a sad day when the pope destroys the very basis of them.
May God bless you and keep you in this time of troubles.
Your link says nothing about what I said though. It’s just defending the tradition of interpreting those passages in Isaiah and Ezekiel about the king of Tyre as being about the devil and his fall from heaven. This is the traditional Catholic interpretation or those passages, even though it is not immediately obvious from the text alone.
Lucifer is a Latin word that just means light bearer. Lux + ferre. The guy who carries the cross in a procession is called a crucifer. Christopher means Christ-carrier. It’s just a Latin word. *Illuminamini” appears in the Latin psalms: do you think the Church is secretly the Illuminati? It’s just a word. Nothing in the word lucifer has a negative connotation. It was used in the early Church (which wrote the prayer in question—careful, if you start rejecting traditions further back than this you’ll become a Mormon) to refer, naturally, to Jesus, who is indeed the morning star and light bearer.
Lucifer was originally used univocally of Jesus, and equivocally of Satan. Even though most people think of Satan when they hear it, that’s because people 1. are no longer taught to be literare in Latin, and 2. are more obsessed with demons and cosmology than actually practicing religion.
That is standard cultist rationalization based on old cultists distortions. Learn Bible. Lucifer is Satan but also Jesus, sure, might as well become a Freemason and tell everyone how they are brothers. Ridiculous, and people wonder how could anyone fall for the future Antichrist pope. You are one more testament.
The Pope is Satanic. I told that to my very deep Catholic friend after he got in.. and she didn't believe me. then 8 months later she apologized and agreed. They forced the previous pope out and put him in.
Archbishop Vigano is the true pope
I'm not interested in getting into the weeds on this, but it's morally problematic and morally complicated. Catholic source below. I would be interested in other religion's takes on this, if they are more strident on the issue. I don't want to take these early vaccines anyway. https://www.vaticannews.va/en/church/news/2020-12/us-bishops-covid-clarification-ethical-use-vaccine.html
The “US bishops” are merely an advisory body and have no constitutional authority over the Church. Authority exists only in the individual bishops in their own dioceses (but the Pope also has authority). A confederacy of bishops means absolutely nothing. If one of the US bishops opposed this directive, there would be no mechanism for penalizing him (besides not inviting him to the cushy parties) because bishops only have authority in their own territory. The bishop of Chicago has no say in the diocese of Tyler, Texas.
I know, I was just providing another reference than the one on the post.
What’s this about the Alexandrian bible?
http://www.jesusisprecious.org/bible/nkjv/alexandrian_corrupt_source.htm
Lucifer means lighter bearer. Idiot. It doesn’t mean Satan in that context. It’s talking about Jesus. Here is the full text: http://preces-latinae.org/thesaurus/Hymni/Exsultet.html
Some of y’all go full NPC when Catholicism is mentioned. None of the prayers or rites of the Church are secret knowledge. If you are curious ask a priest and he will show you the books.
Conservative (trad) Catholics are just about the only Christians that are opposing the vaccine you know. All the conservative evangelicals have no direction on this issue because their theology is vague.
And will they still oppose it with this pronouncement?
Yep. Several of our guys (Bishop Schneider and Fr. Ripperger) have denounced it, as they have always denounced the vaccines made this way.
Which is great, but what about the normie laity?
Conservative evangelicals have plenty of direction; just not from a human authority figure.
Though not a Catholic, I have never condemned them, and I have praised (true) Catholicism as the last bastion holding the line on the sanctity of life and marriage (to a lesser degree). This anti-pope has unfortunately put all that to an end.
It is the same crisis we face in our nation: Stay, and be counted as damned, or leave and count yourself a coward. Fight, and die with your convictions.
I know where I want to stand...
Conservative evangelicals tend to have sense to them, but they lack deference toward tradition (which is implied in the commandment to honor thy father and thy mother). They would not think it is necessary to bind themselves to the tradition of the Fathers, and though many of them recognize the supreme preeminence of St. Thomas Aquinas as the synthesizer of all theology, they do not think it imperative to adopt his school of thought.
It’s a flaw in the Protestant approach to epistemology. At its root, Protestantism is indeed (and remains) a protest against Catholicism, and not a self contained religious sect. Protestantism cannot define itself besides being “not Catholic.” They occasionally study certain of the Fathers, like Augustine, and even popes like Leo and Gregory, but they draw a careful line around the things that these men said that determine were “Catholic errors.” This is begging the question!
Since Protestantism is founded on the idea that ecclesiastical polities like national Churches, local congregations, and even individual believers ought to determine for themselves the meaning of Scripture, they very easily change their own doctrines. All Protestants (even conservatives) have gone from rejecting all contraception (the Biblical position, even if very difficult to hear), to accepting the pill but rejecting barrier methods and pulling out, to finally accepting all forms of birth control within marriage.
Similarly, though they may have misgivings about these vaccines’ origins, they will probably not come to a real consensus and ultimately will be pulled more and more toward liberalism (moral decay, but also theological decay), which has been the fate of the Protestant experiment from day one.
I appreciate the relatively civil response; however, it's a bit too broad brush for me. I'm not interested in arguing anyone's faith, just really trying to say that I, as a protestant, actually respect Catholics for standing for historic Christian doctrines. It is a sad day when the pope destroys the very basis of them.
May God bless you and keep you in this time of troubles.
When someone claims Trump is a globalist that's insane, when someone claims Lucifer is Jesus you just eat it up. That is what fanatical cultists do. https://brandplucked.webs.com/luciferormorningstar.htm
The Exsultet for the vigil of Pascha long predates the medieval association of Satan and the Light-bearer.
Learn history and don’t fall for some rando’s crappy blog.
Learn Bible and actually read the entire page and the references
Your link says nothing about what I said though. It’s just defending the tradition of interpreting those passages in Isaiah and Ezekiel about the king of Tyre as being about the devil and his fall from heaven. This is the traditional Catholic interpretation or those passages, even though it is not immediately obvious from the text alone.
Lucifer is a Latin word that just means light bearer. Lux + ferre. The guy who carries the cross in a procession is called a crucifer. Christopher means Christ-carrier. It’s just a Latin word. *Illuminamini” appears in the Latin psalms: do you think the Church is secretly the Illuminati? It’s just a word. Nothing in the word lucifer has a negative connotation. It was used in the early Church (which wrote the prayer in question—careful, if you start rejecting traditions further back than this you’ll become a Mormon) to refer, naturally, to Jesus, who is indeed the morning star and light bearer.
Lucifer was originally used univocally of Jesus, and equivocally of Satan. Even though most people think of Satan when they hear it, that’s because people 1. are no longer taught to be literare in Latin, and 2. are more obsessed with demons and cosmology than actually practicing religion.
That is standard cultist rationalization based on old cultists distortions. Learn Bible. Lucifer is Satan but also Jesus, sure, might as well become a Freemason and tell everyone how they are brothers. Ridiculous, and people wonder how could anyone fall for the future Antichrist pope. You are one more testament.