The Mistaken Revolution - Vatican II

PipeBombNews ^ | May 20 , 2002 | William A. Mayer Jr.

[johnqueuepublic]

A broadside against the rise of liberalism in the Catholic church.

[NYer]

Stated plainly, the root cause of the majority of Catholic priestly sex abuse lies in an increasingly gay Catholic priesthood – it cannot be explained otherwise – celibate heterosexual men do not desire to have sex with men, let alone boys.

This cannot be stated enough!! This message MUST BE BROUGHT to the Bishop's meeting in June. If they don't allow outsiders to attend, then large placards need to be paraded outside and through the convention hall.

[maryz]

Fueled by a long string of poor appointments, primarily by Pope Paul VI [1963-1978], this group unfortunately came to be dominated by the very revisionist forces who now openly war against Catholic orthodoxy –

Anyone know who of the current ringleaders fall into this group? And which don't?

[johnqueuepublic]

Im not a catholic so I dont know anything about a June meeting.

[johnqueuepublic]

Not sure, maybe some catholics here might know, I just poseted it because I think this guy can write.

[ecomcon]

BUMP

[GipperCT]

Catholicism is the oldest of the Christian sects and, until relatively recently, its most conservative voice.

Hello!? Forgetting that the Catholic church began as a split from the Greek Orthodox in 1054 are we? The Greek Orthodox church is the only church that can trace it's roots back to the Apostles. Greek Orthodox have their own issues to deal with, but unmarried "clergy" jumping kids ain't one of them....

[Cicero]

The problem is not Vatican II, which was a Council of the Church like all the rest. The problem is that the liberals kidnapped the Church AFTER Vatican II. If you listen carefully, you will hear the liberals and dissenters talk about the "spirit of Vatican II." They seldom or never actually cite the documents of the council, but instead raise issues like contraception, abortion, women priests, married priests, horrible music, destruction of churches, etc., etc., which were never even mentioned at the council, let alone set down in the official documents.

No, it can only be concluded that, although the Church before Vatican II seemed healthy, there was a good deal of rot hidden away already, or it would not have burst forth so enthusiastically.

Only schismatic groups like the Society of Pius X believe that Vatican II was evil. The real evil was that dissenters and people who in the old days would have been called heretics "seized the levers of power." Nothing in Vatican II authorized any of this mess. The Church was victimized by the whole 60s Counter-Cultural Revolution, which has seized and perverted every other institution and aspect of western culture. It didn't take Vatican II to produce Bill Clinton, to wreck our universities, to eviscerate or destroy many Protestant denominations, and to pervert the media.

"Vatican II" has been a code word for all the dismal things that have happened in the Church, but the council itself was not responsible. Liberal dissenters who misrepresented the council for their own purposes were responsible.

[Arthur McGowan]

This article is not usable as a quotable source, since it is written by a rank, and ignorant, amateur, notwithstanding the validity of some of his points.

Rerum Novarum has no direct connection with Vatican I. It is an encyclical published about a decade later. It was not a response to "Modernism," and "Modernism" is not directly related to Marxism. Modernism was a theological movement, responded to by Pius X in his encyclical Pascendi and other documents and disciplinary measures. is not an encyclical, and was not written by Paul VI. It is a Constitution (i.e., one of the major teaching documents) composed at the Second Vatican Council. Etc.

[Arthur McGowan]

Gaudium et Spes is not an encyclical, and was not written by Paul VI. It is a Constitution (i.e., one of the major teaching documents) composed at the Second Vatican Council. Etc.

[Cicero]

I think you will find similar problems in the Orthodox Church. For instance, most or all of the bishops in Russia belonged to the KGB, and they have always had a problem of being too close to the political authorities. The Church split in 1054, but it's not as clear as you seem to think which is the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church of the creeds, and which is in schism.

[Aquinasfan]

Isaiah 22:22, Matthew 16:19, Revelation 3:7

[ArrogantBustard]

Forgetting that the Catholic church began as a split from the Greek Orthodox in 1054 are we?
That's a matter of perspective. I'd put it the other way around.

The Greek Orthodox church is the only church that can trace it's roots back to the Apostles.
That's just plain false.

AB

[berned]

A question for Catholics. If evolution is true, and the Bible lied, or allegorized, the 6000 year Creation time- frame...

... then how do you know that Jesus really said "Upon this rock I will build my church"? Maybe they misheard Him. Maybe He meant it in some vague allegorical way, and didn't at all mean it the way Roman Catholicism claims He meant it. Maybe the Gospel writer ad-libbed it and it was never said.

Point is, if you don't believe the Genesis account of Creation, then why would you believe anything else that is said in the Bible and that INCLUDES all the other statements like "upon this rock" and "the keys to the kingdom" etc, by which the Roman Catholic Church demands subservience to it.

[johnqueuepublic]

Rerum Novarum was issued by Pope Leo XIII May 15, 1891 read it.

[Jim Noble]

>>yet in one bloodless coup, manifest changes were promulgated which had the effect of subjecting Catholicism to a toxic dose of Protestantism - not that there is anything wrong with Protestantism, as long as you are Protestant<<

Catholics make terrible Protestants.

This Protestant's prayers are with them in what seems to me like a death struggle with Satan.

[johnqueuepublic]

Dont think so.

The schism originated because the Eastern church would not recognize Jesus as part of the Godhead, the filioque clause inserted into the Nicene Creed caused the Eastern church to separate itself because they could not accept the Holy Spirit coming both from God and his Son.

I think the statement is correct, the Roman Catholic sect is the oldest the Eastern sect started in 1054 so it's younger than Islam.

[GipperCT]

Hey, Your Arrogant-ness, educate yourself a little on the Schism:

Here's the G.O. church's Schism story...

[johnqueuepublic]

Because if absolutely everything in the Bible is taken as fact, you end up having to believe that the sun rotates around the earth.

What you are trying to do is set up a faux contradiction.

Science isn't faith and vice versa. There is a huge difference between accepting the 10 commandments as being an authentic way to deal with living a good life and has having come from God through Moses and trying to set up bugaboos that have more to do with the empiracle innocence of that time and the necessity of giving simpler explanations.

[ArrogantBustard]

ROFLMAO!!! That's a really unbiased source. No agenda there. Try reading the Latin side of the story too. You look it up. 'Educate yourself', ideed.

AB