John Lewis
Full Member
Awsome contributor
Reviewing the Knowledge
Posts: 491
|
Post by John Lewis on Sept 20, 2023 22:44:58 GMT -5
I was recently introduced to this youtube channel by a friend who left the sedevacantist position. I have requested that Pacelli take a look at these videos and he has agreed to do so a write a public commentary. The title of each video is written above it. If you click through to the youtube channel and hit the three dots on the right underneath the video, you can generate a transcript so that you can read what is said in the video with time stamps. I'm only posting these three videos, though there are more as I think these convinced my friend more than others. The False Version of La Salette I am convinced that that the video author is correct about La Salette and the new secrets written by Melanie being condemned by the Church and added to the index of forbidden books as I have found an article by Daniel J Castellano discussing this in the past 6 months myself which you can find here. Novusordowatch has also mentioned that Catholics were forbidden to discuss Melanie's writing in one of his articles. The condemnation from the index is quoted below and in the article: Tradition vs tradition: a false opposition The Church has Authority |
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Sept 21, 2023 16:23:47 GMT -5
John Lewis , I finished the first video and the transcript. Thank you by the way for telling me about the transcript feature, I wasn't aware of that before. This is the video: I agree with him, as we must in regards to the later secret as written Melanie in 1879. With that said, I'll make a few points: 1. Even for the sake of argument, that the Church never forbade the use and publication of this text, it's a weak argument to rely on private revelation to defend one's theological position. Those who use such arguments are probably not too well educated in their Faith, and therefore gravitate to simple arguments, and this one certainly would look appealing. 2. With that said, that we are most likely dealing with simple and not well educated Catholics, as they rely on a private revelation in the first place and even worse, a text forbidden to be used by the Church, is most likely because they are ignorant on this matter, so for most, explaining to them the status of the text will cause them to cease, as happened to him, and also happened when the matter was brought to the CMRI priest, who then removed it.
|
|
John Lewis
Full Member
Awsome contributor
Reviewing the Knowledge
Posts: 491
|
Post by John Lewis on Sept 21, 2023 21:15:47 GMT -5
Hi Pacelli, It seems that even well-educated Catholics bring up La Salette in our times. I recall John Lane and Louie Veracchio mentioning it in their discussion and it is cited by some priests also. These are truly confusing times. Do you believe that we are in the times of book of the Apocalypse when Rome will be destroyed and the Church relocated to Jerusalem as discussed by Fr Sylvester Berry in his commentary on St John's Apocalypse? |
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Sept 22, 2023 7:18:41 GMT -5
Hi Pacelli , It seems that even well-educated Catholics bring up La Salette in our times. I recall John Lane and Louie Veracchio mentioning it in their discussion and it is cited by some priests also. These are truly confusing times. Do you believe that we are in the times of book of the Apocalypse when Rome will be destroyed and the Church relocated to Jerusalem as discussed by Fr Sylvester Berry in his commentary on St John's Apocalypse? It seems very likely that we are getting very close to the days of the Antichrist. The great apostasy as prophesied from scripture is to precede his coming, and if what we are witnessing, universal mass defections of Catholics from the Church, heresy and apostasy everywhere, evil practices being openly embraced as good on worldwide scale, denial of even basic understandings of God's creation in regards to the nature of a man and of a woman, of marriage, etc., is not the apostasy prophesied in scripture, then I cannot imagine what it would be. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Sept 22, 2023 12:25:04 GMT -5
Hi Pacelli , It seems that even well-educated Catholics bring up La Salette in our times. I recall John Lane and Louie Veracchio mentioning it in their discussion and it is cited by some priests also. These are truly confusing times. Do you believe that we are in the times of book of the Apocalypse when Rome will be destroyed and the Church relocated to Jerusalem as discussed by Fr Sylvester Berry in his commentary on St John's Apocalypse? Regarding John Lane, even great men make mistakes sometimes. I am sure it's just a mistake on his part, perhaps he wasn't familiar with the prohibition. Regardless, John knows that sedevacantism doesn't rely on private revelation, even though such revelation may add to better understanding it. The man doing the videos seems to be elevating this 1879 text as written by Melanie as though it's a decisive factor as to whether sedevacantism is true or not. |
|
|
|
Post by Didymus on Sept 22, 2023 14:34:03 GMT -5
Hi Pacelli , It seems that even well-educated Catholics bring up La Salette in our times. I recall John Lane and Louie Veracchio mentioning it in their discussion and it is cited by some priests also. These are truly confusing times. Do you believe that we are in the times of book of the Apocalypse when Rome will be destroyed and the Church relocated to Jerusalem as discussed by Fr Sylvester Berry in his commentary on St John's Apocalypse? Regarding John Lane, even great men make mistakes sometimes. I am sure it's just a mistake on his part, perhaps he wasn't familiar with the prohibition. Regardless, John knows that sedevacantism doesn't rely on private revelation, even though such revelation may add to better understanding it. The man doing the videos seems to be elevating this 1879 text as written by Melanie as though it's a decisive factor as not to whether sedevacantism is true or not. Pacelli or John, can I ask you to explain better what is condemned and what is not condemned? I asked this same question before but I don't think anyone answered it. Was that message about "Rome will lose the Faith" made by Melanie or was it attributed to her? What is specifically condemned and what is not? sorry for my ignorance |
|
|
|
Post by Didymus on Sept 22, 2023 14:57:09 GMT -5
I was recently introduced to this youtube channel by a friend who left the sedevacantist position. I have requested that Pacelli take a look at these videos and he has agreed to do so a write a public commentary. The title of each video is written above it. If you click through to the youtube channel and hit the three dots on the right underneath the video, you can generate a transcript so that you can read what is said in the video with time stamps. I'm only posting these three videos, though there are more as I think these convinced my friend more than others. The False Version of La Salette I am convinced that that the video author is correct about La Salette and the new secrets written by Melanie being condemned by the Church and added to the index of forbidden books as I have found an article by Daniel J Castellano discussing this in the past 6 months myself which you can find here. Novusordowatch has also mentioned that Catholics were forbidden to discuss Melanie's writing in one of his articles. The condemnation from the index is quoted below and in the article: Tradition vs tradition: a false opposition The Church has Authority I sincerely believe that what this man says is true, the Church is an authority and has legitimate successors, and I agree that the way in which Sedevacantism is carried out in traditional groups has contributed to very sectarian thinking. And that has led many to believe that these chapels are the Catholic Church, I believe that the conclusions reached are true, but perhaps there may be an error in the diagnosis, I would like to read Pacelli. |
|
|
|
Post by Didymus on Sept 22, 2023 15:35:39 GMT -5
Actually watching the videos of this good man I very much agree but I think that, like many of us, we are tired of the Sedevacantist sectarianism and I think that this man is trying to cleanse himself of that and making good conclusions that leads some, seeing a real problem, to go to the opposite pole.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Sept 22, 2023 16:11:19 GMT -5
Actually watching the videos of this good man I very much agree but I think that, like many of us, we are tired of the Sedevacantist sectarianism and I think that this man is trying to cleanse himself of that and making good conclusions that leads some, seeing a real problem, to go to the opposite pole. I agree, he sounds like a good man that has been scandalized by the false claims of some sedevacantists. I will hopefully get to the other videos later. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Sept 22, 2023 16:14:59 GMT -5
Regarding John Lane, even great men make mistakes sometimes. I am sure it's just a mistake on his part, perhaps he wasn't familiar with the prohibition. Regardless, John knows that sedevacantism doesn't rely on private revelation, even though such revelation may add to better understanding it. The man doing the videos seems to be elevating this 1879 text as written by Melanie as though it's a decisive factor as not to whether sedevacantism is true or not. Pacelli or John, can I ask you to explain better what is condemned and what is not condemned? I asked this same question before but I don't think anyone answered it. Was that message about "Rome will lose the Faith" made by Melanie or was it attributed to her? What is specifically condemned and what is not? sorry for my ignorance Didymus, The article John Lewis posted above is excellent in explaining in detail this matter. I will post it again in case you missed it: www.arcaneknowledge.org/catholic/lasalette.htm |
|
|
|
Post by Didymus on Sept 22, 2023 17:51:24 GMT -5
Pacelli or John, can I ask you to explain better what is condemned and what is not condemned? I asked this same question before but I don't think anyone answered it. Was that message about "Rome will lose the Faith" made by Melanie or was it attributed to her? What is specifically condemned and what is not? sorry for my ignorance Didymus, The article John Lewis posted above is excellent in explaining in detail this matter. I will post it again in case you missed it: www.arcaneknowledge.org/catholic/lasalette.htmThanks as always Pacelli, I remember this fight between the traditional clergy even, a big hug, I will take a look at the article. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Sept 24, 2023 13:57:28 GMT -5
Comments on the next video: T[/u]radition vs tradition: a false opposition I will respond to his points in the order he made them: 1. He responds to the oft used quote attributed to St. Athanasius that the Church will be reduced to a handful, and questions the application of that to the current crisis, adding also the question of whether the hierarchy are part of that handful. Response: I take this one step further and question whether this quote is even real to begin with. I looked this up, using the citation found with it on every website where it is cited. It isn't there. See my post on this from 2017: tradcath.proboards.com/thread/929/athanasius-reduced-handful-quote-referenceBut, to answer the essential part of his argument, yes, no matter how small the Church gets, the successors of the Apostles will be found along with the rest of the remaining Church. 2. He defends Catholic teaching on the four marks, particularly the Apostolic succession, and on that I commend him and agree with him. 3. He distinguishes between men with Holy Orders and the Apostolic succession, and I again commend him and agree with him. The two are completely separate and must be treated as such. 4. He then brings up the Donatists, the Orthodox and the Old Catholics, and again I agree with him and commend him that these are sects, and they certainly broke from the Church. 5. He then brings up the use of the qualifier "Traditional" used before Catholic. Again, I agree with him, as Pope Benedict XV forbade the use of qualifiers before Catholic. 6. His last point is again a defense of the necessity of the hierarchy, and again I agree with him. In conclusion, as far as theology and principles I find no disagreement with this man and myself. |
|
|
|
Post by Didymus on Sept 25, 2023 4:54:41 GMT -5
Exactly, it is the same thing that I think the points he is talking about are totally true, I think he is wrong in the Conclusion, I feel that the danger of realizing this is that one ends up accepting those modernists who are eclipsing the Church as the hierarchy. (perhaps my definition is not very precise) do you agree when he makes a parallel between the way old Catholics spoke with Vatican I and how traditional Catholics speak with Vatican II or would you make a more accurate comment?
Linked to this, I like to ask, what do you think about the idea that Lucia de Fatima was changed? That is usually very much in vogue among the sedvacantists as further proof that the conciliar church is not the Church.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Sept 25, 2023 7:24:32 GMT -5
Exactly, it is the same thing that I think the points he is talking about are totally true, I think he is wrong in the Conclusion, I feel that the danger of realizing this is that one ends up accepting those modernists who are eclipsing the Church as the hierarchy. (perhaps my definition is not very precise) do you agree when he makes a parallel between the way old Catholics spoke with Vatican I and how traditional Catholics speak with Vatican II or would you make a more accurate comment? Linked to this, I like to ask, what do you think about the idea that Lucia de Fatima was changed? That is usually very much in vogue among the sedvacantists as further proof that the conciliar church is not the Church. Yes, he is drawing a conclusion that is not warranted by all of the principles he understands. His conclusion doesn't resolve the doctrinal teachings and law of the Conciliar Popes that directly contradict the Faith. So, clearly the conclusion must be something other than what he thinks or the problem remains. Regarding the Old Catholics, unless I am misunderstanding him, he seems to be saying that the traditionalists with their bishops and priests and organizations without a lawful hierarchy imitate that sect. To a certain extent, he has a point, but, only those groups that actually assert or exercise authority, or claim to be the teachers of the Church. Doctrinally, however, there are clear differences, the "Traditionalists" are keeping their Faith as identical to what existed prior to Vatican II, while the Old Catholics outright denied a Catholic teaching as defined at the Vatican Council, and formed their new sect around that heretical belief. Regarding a fake Sister Lucy, I am not sure. It sounds crazy, but who knows for sure. I haven't looked at the evidence in detail to make any clear judgment on it. I remember in the 1990's there were many who were saying this about Paul VI, that he was being imprisoned in the Vatican, and it was really an imposter that looked like him that did these things to the Church. I've never seen the proof of that either. I think in these double theories, there seems to me one thing missing, in my opinion, and that is for such a thing to be pulled off, then how can the people who know the person well be fooled? In either case, of Paul VI or Sr. Lucy, they had family, wouldn't family spot it right away? I know with Sr. Lucy, she wouldn't have had friends, as she was a nun, but wouldn't the other sisters who lived with her every day in the convent notice if she wasn't the same person? Besides facial features, everyone has a unique voice, and unique habits, accents, and ways of saying and doing things, so a double wouldn't truly be able to imitate all of these perfectly. In convents the nuns do chores together and recreate together, so even though she was cut off from the world, her sisters in the convent, in my opinion, would notice if a fake was put in there. |
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Sept 25, 2023 9:24:32 GMT -5
never underestimate the level of deception and scheming the Evil one can accomplish in matters relating to the Church. Nuns could be under obedience to remain silent |
|
