tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post2450219148971566375..comments2024-01-08T10:10:48.074+00:00Comments on That The Bones You Have Crushed May Thrill: So Now That We're All Saying What We're Thinking...The Boneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10271719805983763595noreply@blogger.comBlogger141125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-64123699541150734342019-10-14T09:23:10.275+01:002019-10-14T09:23:10.275+01:00Pope Francis is like a lightening rod. A world of ...Pope Francis is like a lightening rod. A world of sleepy Catholics would hardly notice if the unless ire of the Almighty struck the Vatican to wake them up via an inhumane coil of ally like Pope Francis.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-35318467880726043992019-09-13T14:38:58.202+01:002019-09-13T14:38:58.202+01:00There are many interesting comments being made on ...There are many interesting comments being made on the EWTN programme 'The World Over' following Pope Francis' news conference made on his way back from his recent travels. (Fr Z gives the link) The pope says he is not afraid of schism which Fr Gerald Murray describes as 'very puzzling.'Pelerinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14243859145007696053noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-71901324178382087852019-06-07T01:20:27.526+01:002019-06-07T01:20:27.526+01:00Please watch YouTube:
The Vortex - Abortion and S...Please watch YouTube:<br /><br />The Vortex - Abortion and Sodomy (Church Militant) 3 June 2019 from Michael Voris.<br /><br />Fatima - An Urgent Warning (Renewed Ministries) 3 June 2019.John Haggertyhttp://www.banneroftruth.co.uknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-2558397843211144912019-05-30T19:00:26.690+01:002019-05-30T19:00:26.690+01:00About Dr. K's revised position: https://www.ba...About Dr. K's revised position: https://www.barnhardt.biz/2019/05/30/called-it-wrongthink-will-not-be-tolerated/<br /><br />Just more evidence that crying foul on Benedict's 'renunciation' is not for the faint of heart. Courage is necessary. Thank you, Mr. England, for being courageous yourself. <br /><br />Camnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-25449957381415605572019-05-30T08:52:57.261+01:002019-05-30T08:52:57.261+01:00Please watch Michael Matt on YouTube.
More Cathol...Please watch Michael Matt on YouTube.<br /><br />More Catholic Than Francis: Pope Loses Big in EU Referendum.<br />(Remnant Video. 29 May 2019.)John Haggertyhttp://www.banneroftruth.co.uknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-73058111347805234822019-05-30T01:20:23.940+01:002019-05-30T01:20:23.940+01:00And now Dr. Kwasnieski comes out too: it's bee...And now Dr. Kwasnieski comes out too: it's been "proved in detail that the resignation lacks several conditions for validity."<br /><br />Barnhardt covers it here:<br /><br />https://www.barnhardt.biz/2019/05/29/bombshell-dr-peter-kwasniewski-most-respected-english-speaking-trad-theologian-and-liturgist-vigorously-acknowledges-pope-benedicts-resignation-is-highly-suspect-in-terms-of-validity/<br />Camnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-19778947569688921102019-05-26T11:11:37.938+01:002019-05-26T11:11:37.938+01:00While following this debate with much interest, ma...While following this debate with much interest, may I introduce a diversion?<br /><br />Some critics of Francis attack him because he speaks up for the poor.<br />Others are enraged because he brings up the subject of climate change.<br />To some Francis is a Marxist, to others he worships Gaia.<br /><br />Third World poverty is a fitting subject for the pope to address, and so is the destruction of eco systems.<br />Watch YouTube: Climate Change - Malcolm Roberts vs Brian Cox.<br /><br />As a Christian I am extremely troubled by war, poverty, racism, the ugly mood against asylum seekers, the worst aspects of globalization, and and the scientific reality of climate change.<br /><br /> <br />John Haggertyhttp://www.banneroftruth.co.uknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-54246508394288852912019-05-25T21:45:54.779+01:002019-05-25T21:45:54.779+01:00Ohhhhh, so if Francis were a good Pope then Benedi...Ohhhhh, so if Francis were a good Pope then Benedict's resignation would be magically A-OK as a matter of canon law, but he's not a good Pope therefore Benedict's resignation is absolutely not A-OK as a matter of canon law. Wow, guys! It's like Dr. Who up in here! Barnhardt has some deeply mysterious influence with the time/space continuum that i just can't comprehennnnnnddddkathleenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09760546833628880462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-53911186089100285702019-05-23T21:15:25.199+01:002019-05-23T21:15:25.199+01:00kathleen: “I don't know what Barnhardt's a...kathleen: “I don't know what Barnhardt's argument IS.”<br /><br />She has a video online if you’re interested (transcript too).<br /><br />kathleen: “Citing a random doctoral dissertation that surveys wacko 1970s German theology regarding the papacy in no way suggests that Benedict resigned improperly, let alone proves it.”<br /><br />The dissertation shows Ratzinger to be involved with earlier discussions about whether the papacy could be changed (even abolished). This is very significant, not because it directly proves Barnhardt’s case (she never claimed that it does), but because it substantially supports her case: Barnhardt claims that, in his resignation, Benedict had in mind the erroneous idea of changing the papacy, and the dissertation shows that, in fact, changing the papacy was already in the mind of Benedict for decades leading up to his resignation. So the dissertation actually contributes quite a compelling piece of evidence for Barnhardt’s interpretation.<br /><br />kathleen: “For those who believe Barnhardt's argument is "bulletproof", ask yourself: would Barnhardt make the same case for Benedict's faulty resignation if Francis were a good Pope? Answer: of course she wouldn't.”<br /><br />But if I think her argument is bullet proof, then why should I care about her motivations?Camnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-41595857481277445232019-05-23T18:54:49.309+01:002019-05-23T18:54:49.309+01:00kathleen: Would Barnhardt make the same case for B...kathleen: Would Barnhardt make the same case for Benedict's faulty resignation if Francis were a good Pope? Answer: of course she wouldn't. It wouldn't even occur to her. <br /><br />Would you look for a nail in your tire if there's no indication of a flat tire, no air leakage? Of course not, 'cause there's no problem.<br /><br />The only reason we're looking into all of this so very carefully is because there IS an issue. The thing that has been promised to us by Christ, and the thing that the entirety of the faithful has held to for nearly 2k years is suddenly not the way it is anymore. That's cause for careful, and thorough, examination. <br /><br />We've not only had a flat tire, the tire failure caused an accident on the highway, we're in the ditch, and the engine is now on fire. But somehow a bunch of folks are saying the car is perfectly fine, the ditch is very scenic and pleasant, there's water in it so the fire isn't really a problem, and the car still drives so what's the big deal? And don't even worry about the tire. The nail fills the hole perfectly, so barely any air is leaking out. We just fill it back up again, and it'll be a sunshiny day.<br /><br />As for the rest, your supposed appeal to a hypothetical alternate-history scenario where you also establish motive for an independent entity whom you do not know and can't control, can't forsee, and can't establish a framework for any of your suppositions, and that you use to try to illustrate as proof of a logical failure... Well, I have nothing to say other than, "That's not an argument." It certainly bears no indication of logic or reasoning of any kind. It literally fails from the outset. Game over.<br /><br /><br />Ceterahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05043066262438636003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-79013742184662506722019-05-23T09:01:16.399+01:002019-05-23T09:01:16.399+01:00Kathleen---
Your comment: "would Barnhardt m...Kathleen---<br /><br />Your comment: "would Barnhardt make the same case for Benedict's faulty resignation if Francis were a good Pope? Answer: of course she wouldn't."<br /><br />You are correct. We would never had heard from Ann if Francis was a good Pope. But your point proves nothing as far as I can see. The fact that Francis is a bad Pope elected by a bad conclave is the basis of Ann's argument among other points.<br /><br />My take away from all of this is that Francis current status is UNCERTAIN making whatever he does or says inoperative.Michael Dowdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16650782589323136700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-56805101660004504832019-05-23T01:14:36.272+01:002019-05-23T01:14:36.272+01:00You really believe that’s an honest representation...You really believe that’s an honest representation of her argument? Giving inaccurate and uncharitable depictions of others’ arguments are always self-defeating in the end. So why do it?<br /><br />I presume you're looking for an answer more involved than "because he's a shallow-minded thinker making emotional arguments and doesn't truly understand how ad hominem and strawman attacks don't score the points he thinks they do."<br /><br />You've been more than patient with him. You've laid it out very clearly. There are a lot of reasons why an individual may not be able to follow the very plain logic you have laid out, but none of them are able to be overcome by more logic. It is clear for those who have eyes to see. Those who cannot see shall not see it.Ceterahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05043066262438636003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-1914467301855138362019-05-23T00:40:34.657+01:002019-05-23T00:40:34.657+01:00For those who believe Barnhardt's argument is ...For those who believe Barnhardt's argument is "bulletproof", ask yourself: would Barnhardt make the same case for Benedict's faulty resignation if Francis were a good Pope? Answer: of course she wouldn't. It wouldn't even occur to her. She would rail against anyone who made such a case as a schismatic. Thus your so-called "bulletproof" argument puts the "desired outcome" cart before the "legal reasoning" horse. It fails from the outset. Game over. kathleenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09760546833628880462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-44428095272322855412019-05-22T23:52:20.488+01:002019-05-22T23:52:20.488+01:00Cam: "You really believe that’s an honest rep...Cam: "You really believe that’s an honest representation of her argument?"<br /><br />I don't know what Barnhardt's argument IS, so there is no possible "honest representation" of it. She has about five random points she hammers away at (although she seems to have abandoned parsing Benedict's Latin) and the dissertation is one of them. Citing a random doctoral dissertation that surveys wacko 1970s German theology regarding the papacy in no way suggests that Benedict resigned improperly, let alone proves it. But judging from your continual misreading of my comments, you are not the best judge for determining how and why arguments succeed.kathleenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09760546833628880462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-57977367877600143652019-05-22T17:29:13.956+01:002019-05-22T17:29:13.956+01:00kathleen: “Barnhard is now citing a doctoral disse...kathleen: “Barnhard is now citing a doctoral dissertation written by a PhD candidate in what she seems to believe is a sort of slam dunk maneuver to prove Benedict is still the pope. . . . What can we expect next, textual support from a Sears Catalog?”<br /><br />A “slam dunk maneuver”? "Textual support" akin to a "Sears Catalog"? You really believe that’s an honest representation of her argument? Giving inaccurate and uncharitable depictions of others’ arguments are always self-defeating in the end. So why do it?Camnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-15636601272848339982019-05-22T17:19:24.059+01:002019-05-22T17:19:24.059+01:00Peaceful Universal Acceptance!? Meh.
ABS perhaps...Peaceful Universal Acceptance!? Meh.<br /><br />ABS perhaps you had better go back to med school. Are you a barber?<br /><br />So you are going to follow a 'pope' who wields a Stang at Mass? (Youth Synod October 2018).<br /><br />Who denies the existence of Hell? (Holy Week, 2018). And the immortality of the Soul? (If you're bad: "expungement." Ditto).<br /><br />Who denies the need for Sanctifying Grace in Amoralis Laetitia? (And made it official in the AAS in his spectacularly wrong, bone-headed, heterodox and heretical opinion-letter to the Argentine bishops).<br /> <br />Who says "God made you that way" to Sodomites? <br /><br />Who is the head of the Homosexual Network Strangling the Church? (I invite your attention to the myriad, plethora and in fact superabundance of SodomFag-Clerics that Bergoglio has protected, defended, established and enthroned. Starting with McCarrick, ending with Grassi in Argentina with Don Mercedes Inzoli in between. The fate of the raped boys, half of whom slit their wrists, doesn't seem to concern you o'er much, Brain Surgeon, does it?).<br /><br />But to the point:<br /><br />Of late, more and more priests among others are privately (because they're scared, whatever the merits of that) saying to me two things, that belie your faux claim to UPA:<br /><br />(1) There is no doubt that Francis is a public, formal and intransigent heretic in his teaching.<br /><br />(2) Maybe, therefore, Benedict never abdicated the actual papacy at all.<br /><br />And I'll add one more, (3), Christ's protections to Peter clearly do not apply to Bergoglio--So either Christ lied, or Bergoglio's not Pope.<br /><br />Ofttimes the most ardent defenders of Antipope Bergoglio--who refuse to engage the dataset (see for example the resignation annocnement of the ministry and not the office, including the fifty-year history of Benedict's involvement with grappling with distinguishing ministry from office and the very issue of expanding the papal ministry if not office as well--are themselves partial to the Homosexual Agenda in the Church. (Are you perhaps one of them ABS, because you seem to be in their Camp.)<br /><br />Many thanks to Bones for this fabulous piece, and your witness, Mr. England. You are having an effect on souls, unlike the Antipope, for the Good.<br /><br />In Corde Christi,<br /><br />BrotherBeowulf<br /><br />P. S. "Rejoice, O Virgin Mary, for alone thou hast destroyed all heresies throughout the world!"BrotherBeowulfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08371505680325407418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-7397026095682935692019-05-22T17:16:04.214+01:002019-05-22T17:16:04.214+01:00ABS: “ABS thinks Ms. Barnhardt is insane and that ...ABS: “ABS thinks Ms. Barnhardt is insane and that is a charitable thought as insanity will minimise the culpability she bears for her false witness, advocating mass murder - along with her many other errors too numerous to limn here.”<br /><br />Mischaracterizing people only makes them more sympathetic.<br /><br />ABS: “Dear Bones. Thank you for all of your patience regarding this captious controversy but, owing to Peaceful Universal Acceptance, it is clearly a settled matter for all faithful Catholics.”<br /><br />I’m surprised people find this theory so convincing. It’s really a bad idea, particularly as a counter to BiP Catholics. People can search online for the reasons, but to summarize just a couple here, it’s a bad idea because, <i>even if</i> there has been “peaceful and universal acceptance” (PUA): <br /><br />(A) PUA wouldn’t make valid Benedict’s invalid abdication. Canon 332 §2 says explicitly that for the Roman Pontiff’s resignation to be valid, it matters “<b>not that it is accepted by anyone</b>.” <br /><br />Of course, some will claim that, by virtue of Benedict accepting Francis as pope, he thereby validly resigns even if his previous resignation was invalid. But that could be true only if Benedict accepted Francis as our pope in the <i>relevant</i> sense, i.e., as being our one and only Holy Father. But is that how he sees Francis? Not at all. He sees Francis as representing but one of two parts of a synodal ministry, viz., the ‘active branch’. Consequently, objections from those like Rickert won’t work.<br /><br />(B) PUA is completely irrelevant due to JPII’s apostolic constitution governing conclaves—<i>Universi Dominici Gregis</i> (UDG). Now, certainly, the authority of UDG is more certain than the putative authority of the PUA theory. And what does UDG establish? It establishes that conclaves that oppose the decree are null and void, which is impossible to accept, as we should, if PUA is applicable to the current crisis.Camnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-35443539279250894872019-05-22T13:54:48.162+01:002019-05-22T13:54:48.162+01:00Based on all of the conversation above it appears ...Based on all of the conversation above it appears that not everyone agrees with Ann Barnhardt. Nevertheless, most would agree she has constructed fairly bullet proof cas that Bergoglio is an anti-Pope and Benedict continues as the true Pope. <br /><br />But there is one thing everyone here should agree on. It is that the actual status of Pope (?) Francis is uncertain and that all of his actions are null, void and not binding including all who he has asserted as saints. This status will remain in effect until proven otherwise.Michael Dowdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16650782589323136700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-24790563197361653452019-05-22T05:09:16.993+01:002019-05-22T05:09:16.993+01:00Prior to his election as pope, Jorge Bergoglio con...Prior to his election as pope, Jorge Bergoglio condoned certain same-sex sexual relationships and thus same-sex sexual acts, ipso facto separating himself from Christ, and His One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. A heretic cannot become a validly elected Pope. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-60601450309471956162019-05-21T16:22:37.589+01:002019-05-21T16:22:37.589+01:00The true followers of Jesus Himself were the ones ...<i>The true followers of Jesus Himself were the ones who loved one another, not the ones who were quarelling.</i><br /><br />Yes, quite. There were never any arguments about Christology at the Ecumenical Councils or over the nature of Grace etc<br /><br />When Christian Catholics had arguments over this, that, and the other thing they were told to bring their disputes to the Church and let the Church settle the matter and they were also told to mark out the heretics (and other authocephalic dilettantes) and to avoid them.<br /><br />You do not follow Jesus because you reject the Church He established which included the Hierarchy - with Pope at the top of the Church on earth.<br /><br />You could have had the decency to note the earlier post by ABS which eviscerated your false claim about the Pope as first amongst equals but you didn't and so ....whatever, as the kids say<br /><br />Adios<br />Mick Jagger Gathers No Mosquehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12879499915093940176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-22029456812540322172019-05-21T15:17:26.125+01:002019-05-21T15:17:26.125+01:00Barnhard is now citing a doctoral dissertation wri...Barnhard is now citing a doctoral dissertation written by a PhD candidate in what she seems to believe is a sort of slam dunk maneuver to prove Benedict is still the pope. I guess her foray into local real estate law was not sufficient, she is now given to treating the fulminations of a grad student as if they were the distillations of canon law itself. She doesn't seem to grasp that "examinations" and "investigations" -- as the author himself describes his own dissertation -- are not meant to be dispositive. Barnhardt's intellectual inquiries are certainly wide-ranging, I'll give her that. What can we expect next, textual support from a Sears Catalog?kathleenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09760546833628880462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-20575995585577502762019-05-21T14:51:24.621+01:002019-05-21T14:51:24.621+01:00Dear Bones. Thank you for all of your patience reg...Dear Bones. Thank you for all of your patience regarding this captious controversy but, owing to Peaceful Universal Acceptance, it is clearly a settled matter for all faithful Catholics.<br /><br />https://vermontcrank1.blogspot.com/2019/05/barnhardt-thesis-blowed-up.htmlMick Jagger Gathers No Mosquehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12879499915093940176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-56788719844718636122019-05-21T14:48:08.333+01:002019-05-21T14:48:08.333+01:00Dear Cam. ABS thinks Ms. Barnhardt is insane and t...Dear Cam. ABS thinks Ms. Barnhardt is insane and that is a charitable thought as insanity will minimise the culpability she bears for her false witness, advocating mass murder - along with her many other errors too numerous to limn here.Mick Jagger Gathers No Mosquehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12879499915093940176noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-82982105104758544922019-05-21T00:11:34.948+01:002019-05-21T00:11:34.948+01:00ABS: “Post just one word- one word- from Bishop Em...ABS: “Post just one word- one word- from Bishop Emeritus Ratzinger . . .”<br /><br />Again, why do you call him “Bishop Emeritus Ratzinger”? He still wears the papal ring and wants to be called pope, at least 'Pope Emeritus'. This seems to contradict your name for him, and also your idea that we should take him at his own words.<br /><br />ABS: “Post just one word- one word- from Bishop Emeritus Ratzinger - his own words, not the words of others or his implied beliefs attributed to him by others- and then you and Ms Barnhardt would have the BEGINNING of an argument.”<br /><br />To give an example using his own words, we can turn to Pope Benedict XVI’s final General Audience address (27 Feb. 2013). Those words are important because they show that, for Pope Benedict, the papacy isn’t something from which you can fully resign. He says, for instance, that from the moment he was made pope, he was then “engaged <b>always and forever</b> by the Lord,” and that “anyone who accepts the Petrine ministry . . . belongs <b>always and completely</b> to everyone, to the whole Church.” He says further that “the <b>‘always’</b> is also a <b>‘for ever’</b> – <b>there can no longer be a return</b> to the private sphere.”<br /><br />If he doesn’t think he can wholly cease being pope, then why should we think his putative abdication was intended to remove him, wholly and completely, from the Chair of Peter? <br /><br />Later in his address, Pope Benedict even says explicitly, “My decision to resign the active exercise of the ministry <b>does not revoke this</b>.”<br /><br />Catholics like myself are trying to interpret him as honestly as we can, but these are his own words.<br /><br />ABS: “If the person is wildly wrong about geography, religion, economics, philosophy, and other matters, that person is likely to be wrong in considering hearsay irrefutable evidence of anything.”<br /><br />Aquinas was quite wrong about ensoulment; he’s quite right about a whole lot more. He was also wrong about our Mother’s Immaculate Conception; but, again, he’s quite right about a whole lot more. Persons are one thing; their arguments another.<br /><br />ABS: “Ms Barnhardt is an insane and unstable person who is riven with hatred and suffused with ideas of bloody vengeance but you, and many other geese, follow her because you have ideologically imprinted on her.”<br /><br />Some charity here would be appreciated, ABS. I follow her, as I think all should, because her arguments pan out (I wouldn’t say it’s a fact that Benedict resigned under duress, and I don’t recall Barnhardt saying as much, but I would say it’s beyond reasonable doubt that Benedict resigned on the basis of a substantial error).<br /><br />ABS: “she is a blood thirsty lunatic who has a pink rifle and is itching to use it.”<br /><br />Seems pretty harmless to me (unless you attack her or something, I suppose).<br /><br />ABS: ”The vast majority of Catholics accepted Francis as Pope.”<br /><br />But if even a consensus among the cardinals doesn’t determine the validity of a papal resignation (can. 332 §2), then why does it matter that the majority of Catholics accept Francis as pope?Camnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2389530333077823143.post-22391426559311401542019-05-20T22:38:04.246+01:002019-05-20T22:38:04.246+01:00The true followers of Jesus Himself were the ones ...The true followers of Jesus Himself were the ones who loved one another, not the ones who were quarelling. Physiocrathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13682019625346594568noreply@blogger.com