Skip to main content

Hilarious: Seems Dr. Feser thinks St. Paul flew "off the rail" for rebuking St. Peter & "Does Paul’s rebuke of Peter in the Book of Acts prove that St. Peter could not have been the head of the entire Church? Jimmy Akin sets the record straight"

Post

Conversation

Edward Feser
@FeserEdward
An important pair of articles. As always, De Mattei is a voice of sobriety, whereas Viganò has flown off the rails. The imperative is: respectful and restrained criticism when necessary, schism never, consequent suffering to whatever extent Christ asks it. twitter.com/RorateCaeli/st
You’re unable to view this Post because this account owner limits who can view their Posts. Learn more
9,652
Views

Peter, Paul, and the Circumcision Controversy

Catholic Answers
https://www.catholic.com › video › peter-paul-and-the...
Jun 26, 2019 — Does Paul's rebuke of Peter in the Book of Acts prove that St. Peter could not have been the head of the entire Church?

Comments

Anonymous said…
The canonically elected popes have always had faithful ones advising them, first with the example of St. Paul, and then with cardinals and others who have assisted them in difficult decisions. The Church historically demonstrates that these Catholic saints walked for the good of the Papacy and the Church. But it is interesting to note that both Viganò and De Mattei follow the same opposite path.

What draws the most attention is that Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò justifies that Bergoglio is occupying only the Petrine office materially. The word matter seems to be seen covertly as something evil. All this leads us to believe that the facts demonstrate a dialectic on the part of the two. But turning only now to the archbishop: if the present Church is made up of evil prelates, then the popes are evil too. Logic shows that this is the only way to call them modernists of the same "conciliar sect." It is also the same as saying that God has done harm to the Church today and there is nothing more to be done with it.

But this all turns out to be a historical mistake that the Jews exchanged the Tradition of Moses for the Tradition of the Ancients. That is why Christ condemned the tradition of the Jews (Mark 7:1-9).

Therefore, the archbishop is close to ideological traditionalist radicalism; and the TFP layman is walking in the most moderate ideological traditionalism. Both disregard the canonical evidence of the Universi Dominici Gregis that would show who Bergoglio really is.

My opinion is the left hand and the right hand of the same Mystical Body of the Anti-Christ acting against the Mystical Body of Christ.
3:17 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?

Did Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) say that Francis is a heretic ?   On June 3, 2003 the then Cardinal Ratzinge r (and future Pope Benedict) , head of the Congregation for the Faith, said that the endorsement of  " homosex civil unions" was against Catholic teaching, that is heterodoxy : "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimatization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil... The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to legal recognition of homosexual unions ." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Considerations Regarding Proposals to give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons," June 3, 2003) Gloria.tv reported: " Francis made on October 21 his latest declaration in sup...
6 comments
Read more

Could Francis be an Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?

Is it possible for someone to be an antipope even though the majority of cardinals claim he is pope? The case of Antipope Anacletus II proves that it is possible for a majority of cardinals to claim a man is pope while he, in reality, is an antipope. In 1130, a majority of cardinals voted for Cardinal Peter Pierleone to be pope. He called himself Anacletus II. He was proclaimed pope and ruled Rome for eight years by vote and consent of a absolute majority of the cardinals despite the fact he was a antipope. In 1130, just prior to the election of antipope Anacletus, a small minority of cardinals elected the real pope: Pope Innocent II. How is this possible? St. Bernard said "the 'sanior pars' (the wiser portion)... declared in favor of Innocent II. By this he probably meant a majority of the cardinal-bishops." (St. Bernard of Clairvaux by Leon Christiani, Page 72) Again, how is this possible when the absolute majority of cardinals voted for A...
3 comments
Read more

A Hour which will Live in Infamy: 10:01pm November 3, 2020

10:01pm November 3, 2020, a hour which will live in infamy, the United States of America presidential electoral integrity was suddenly and deliberately attacked by the forces of the Democrat Machine and some corrupt collaborators within the Republican Party. It will be recorded that "under the pretense of COVID, executive branch officials across a number of key battleground states violated election procedures passed by the legislative branches of those states in a number of ways that opened up the process to fraud on a massive scale, never before seen in the history of this country" which makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks before. During the time before and after the attack the Democrat Machine and its corrupt collaborators in the Media have deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.  The attack on United States has caused severe damage to the Ameri...
Post a Comment
Read more