Thu, Jan 12, 2012 11:35 AM
Shannon, against my better judgment I answer your email in bold. I won’t bother opening another email from you. I’m tired of your goofball replies.
Dear Steven,
Pax Christi!
You suggested that I look up the term “micro-evolution.” Actually, I have looked into the topic for awhile because of the way modern, atheistic science uses it. Remember, they call micro-EVOLUTION, not just variation and adaption. Evolutionists suggest that new organs and biological functions can develop in a certain species which they call MICRO-evolution which, by the way, has never been shown in nature nor in a laboratory despite all their radiation inflicting instruments. From this false claim of micro-evolution, they extrapolate to the even more absurd idea of macro-evolution. But we, modern men that we are, have taken what is simply variations and adaptations within a species, and have labeled it micro-evolution. Yes, we have embraced the language of the ungodly revolution and, by extension, we have embraced the devil’s main battle plan…evolution.
Evolution just means change and when you have variations and adaptations, then you have a change, an evolution. However, we know that bacteria have become resistant to antibiotics over the years. This is a classic example of micro-evolution. The fact that we have different races is proof positive of micro-evolution. That’s if you believe that we all came for the same two parents (dogma).
Would you suggest that there has been a micro-EVOLUTION in Dogma over the years or rather a proper, organic development? Modernist don’t need much room to change the Faith, remember.
Of course you can’t have a change from one thing to another (macroevolution), but isn’t a development a change in a sense?
The thing is, Steven, you and I, and perhaps every person on this unmoving earth, have been infected by this liberal, ungodly, and disordered revolutionary spirit.
We were all affected the moment Adam and Eve sinned. It’s called Original Sin.
We talk its language…we all want to be seen as good progressives.
Progression can be a good thing. Without progression, we wouldn’t be communicating right now, and the Church wouldn’t have all its dogmas. Progression is only a bad thing when it leads you away from Holy Law and Sacred Tradition and ultimately away from Christ.
And Holy Church, in her members mind you, has not be exempt from this sickness.
It’s only a sickness when it concerns sin.
The reason I brought up issues surrounding so-called modern science, is because it is an area where the magisterial figures of the Church have dropped the ball.
You mean your Church. Mine has not.
The Church, in her members, has retreated and backed itself so far into a corner that we now hold onto an outrageous Big Bang Theory in order to save the notion of Creation ex nihilo.
I don’t think you have to make that connection. Many Catholics reject the Big Bang but still hold to a symbolic understanding of the six days. I don’t know why you insist that someone can’t hold to an outrageous scientific theory as long as they hold to the Catholic Faith, which you can do so with a symbolic understanding of Genesis.
How Mighty and Wonderful is our Modern God Who makes the universe like a modern artist paints a canvas with explosive bursts of paint…certainly a god I would find hard to worship.
I feel sorry for you that you’ve put Almighty God in your small box. I don’t know how God did any of it, but I’ll accept whatever is the truth on the matter. I don’t put HIM in a box.
Science is the idol of the modern age that demands acts of faith and latria.
That’s Scientism, not science.
Popes for the past century and a half, as well as many bishops, have failed to meet this challenge because they fear another Galileo case. So what happens? The revolution sinks further into the membership of the Church. And so from this failure in the beginning to meet the challenges to the Holy Faith, we have the modern churchman. Failure to more fully face the evil of evolution and even allowing its study and discussion, has led to theistic evolutionists and the Year of Darwin at the Vatican a few years back.
That’s your NEW Vatican which also removed Crucifixes in rooms so that Jews aren’t offended in the Vatican during the commemoration of the Holocaust and in Assisi. However, the problem is not in allowing the study and discussion of Darwin, anymore than allowing the study and discussion of Protestantism. The problem is allowing it to be given credence of truth. If that’s what you meant, then I agree with you, but that’s your religion, not mine.
From Churchmen embracing Copernicus and Galileo’s revival of a heliocentric model…which was and is considered revolutionary…we now have Copernicus’ body moved to a special crypt at a Polish Cathedral under its main altar and Bl. JP II flying around in a Vatican Jet called the Galileo.
LOL. Again, that’s your religion, not mine.
Of course, the modern duped Catholic responds…well, the Church allows it to be held and believed.
Allows Outrageous scientific beliefs to be held? Is it antifaith and immoral?
How many times have I heard this…altar girls…the Church allows them so accept it. The Fathers of the Church and any true lover of the Most High, would be ripping their clothing and crying out blasphemy.
Now you’re getting into the issues of faith and morals involving the liturgy. THAT’S YOUR RELIGION, NOT MINE! IT’S IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE TRUE CHURCH OF CHRIST TO ALLOW SUCH EVIL!!!!
That our good God would bring about Adam’s body through millions of years of death, mutations, disease, failure, etc.; and then to be raised and nursed at the breast of an ape. How dare would any Catholic hold such a monstrous idea of our Good and Perfect God. Our God, in the order of Creation, made all things perfect and complete. He is a perfect Artist Who arranges all things well and sweetly.
THAT’S MACRO-EVOLUTION WHICH IS CONDEMNED BY THE CHURCH. If your religion is allowing it, then you’re proving to me that you’re not part of the Catholic religion.
The Fathers knew the heliocentric system which goes back to the Ancient Greeks, yet they, unanimously, rejected it.
Now you’re back in the scientific realm where dogma is not necessarily affected. They didn’t all reject it. Even the popes allowed Copernicus to lecture on it and Galileo was permitted to hold it. Only when Galileo made the pope look like fool was he condemned.
The earth would be the place that the Son of God would walk as the Son of Mary. It is the place…the rock earth…where Holy Church would be established. Yet Popes for the past two centuries have quietly given in.
What? Copernicus was giving lectures on it to the Church in the early 1500’s.
From being formally heretical and Galileo’s books being forbidden, to being embraced.
Not at first!
Again, we hear the refrain…the Church allows it. Yes, Christ came to an insignificant, distant “planet” that has no central place in the cosmos.
Christ came to an insignificant cave born around insignificant animals with the smell of manure all around. So what’s your point?
How many condemnations were made of usury during the 20th by popes? It is a forgotten topic…so is it surprising that the Vatican issued a credit card not too long ago?
Your religion perhaps?
Also, the correction of Fr. Feeney back in 1949…note the year…1949. Not only during the Pontificate of Pius XII, but also a full four years before Fr. Feeney’s denial of Baptism of Blood and Baptism of Desire as being sufficient for Beatitude. Fr. Feeney’s defense of Extra Ecclesiam nulla Salus included his rejection of all this talk about implicit desire…a very dangerous notion to say the least, especially since explicit Faith in the Holy Trinity and the Incarnation is required for salvation according to most Fathers and Doctors of the Church.
I wrote a book about it. You should read it. The 1949 letter is unofficial and has no authority whatsoever! Fr. Feeney (though meaning well) was wrong. He said that one could die unbaptized but justified and he wouldn’t go to heaven. Where would a justified unbaptized person go? I don’t know, he said, but not heaven. Feeney didn’t use good sense. We poor Irish (well Irish descent) sometimes have that flaw.
Today…well, we now have Assisi.
If you think JP2 and Ratzinger are popes after these events, then you’re simply as ignorant as an infant, or you’re not Catholic.
Liturgically, Pope Pius XII radically altered Holy Week. You wrongly equate such changes to Pope St. Gregory the Great’s miniscule adjustments. Every major liturgist states that the changes made under Pius XII were totally unheard of before.
You’re wrong. It was totally unheard of to insert words into the canon. The Romans wanted to kill St Gregory for it.
Also during his pontificate, experimentation with Mass facing the people and con-celebration were tried in various monasteries and liturgical workshops.
Masses in the first centuries were facing the people. Were you aware of that? [since making this statement, I was shown to have a faulty source and that other sources say that they always faced the East] I will concede to be wrong if this is indeed the case. If this is so, then when did we stop facing the East?
And then, oh how I rue the day, the butchering of the Holy Psalter with a horrible translation that virtually destroyed the traditional Psalter under Pius XII.
It didn’t virtually destroy anything. It wasn’t even made obligatory.
Today…well, we have the Novus Ordo,
Protestant mass!
extra-ordinary ministers,
Women on altar condemned by the true Church as evil!
and mass con-celebrations, as well as a breviary, for the new rite, that is more a liturgy of the minutes than a liturgy of the hours.
SAD INDEED!
Religious life, too, suffered when Pius XII asked some orders to modify their traditional habits designed by their very founders and some by our Lady herself.
What were they?
Today…well, now we have few if any habits worn by the major religious orders.
They don’t even have the Faith!
The Liberal Revolution has been a plague upon mankind with its perverse notions of individuality and personal autonomy.
THIS IS YOUR RELIGION MAN! GET WITH IT!
Every man is his own king …his own pope…his own god.
It’s called antichrist!
Liberalism loves separation…separating the Holy Faith from reason…separating theology from science and Church from state. The revolution will not hear of Divine Revelation and it will not stomach the notion of authority and tradition. And yes, Steven, I do believe that it is very present in the members of Holy Church on earth including her highest members.
HOW HIGH? RATZINGER PERHAPS? DON’T YOU SEE THAT A POPE CAN’T BELIEVE, TEACH, SAY, ACT, ETC HOWEVER HE WANTS AND REMAIN POPE? IT’S AGAINST THE DIVINE LAW, AND YOU’RE REJECTING IT!!!!!!
As Cardinal Suenens stated enthusiastically: Vatican II was the Church’s French Revolution.
The Church can’t produce a revolution against itself. You’re only proving me right with this reply.
Granted that some of the documents are helpful, especially Perfectae Caritatis for religious like myself, there were revolutionary new orientations taken in other documents that have caused untold confusion where many traditional minded Catholics cannot find continuity. But then again the revolution was in place well before the start of the council and the reign of Bl. John XXIII.
Even Pope Pius XII said so.
Sedevacantists are just another example of the revolution. They are truly novus ordo people. That is, any true revolutionary wants a new order. They want to destroy and start from scratch. In order to have a new beginning, the old order must be cast out.
WRONG. WE’RE THE COUNTER-REVOLUTION. We never left the old order, therefore we don’t want to start from scratch. We want the revolutionaries to be rejected as the anti-catholics they are, and get our churches back.
For the sede, there is no pope and all those who would vote for a pope are imposters.
For those like yourself, there’s a pope regardless if he’s a Catholic and member of the Church. You’ll keep accepting apostates as true popes despite the Divine law.
Thus, it is left to the sedes to form a new order from the rubble of the old…true revolutionaries all of them.
That’s not how it works at all and if you actually studied the Catholic faith, you would know it.
You charge me with not answering any of your personal observations regarding the seat being empty. Answers to your personal pronouncements have been made by various traditional Catholics, including good men like John Salza, as well as a recent contributor to your website who writes under the label of Veritas.
I’ve already debunked Salza several times on my website. He’s a liar and a deceiver! Veritas hasn’t answered anything yet. If you actually read the comment posts, you’d see that. AND NO ONE HAS DEALT WITH THE APPROVED APPARITION THAT SAID THE CHURCH WOULD GO WITHOUT A PRELATE AND FATHER TO WATCH OVER IT DURING THE 20TH CENTURY.
NO ONE HAS GIVEN A GOOD ANSWER TO THE NEW RITE OF ORDERS.
NO ONE HAS ADDRESSED THAT THE UNIVERSAL TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH FATHERS TAUGHT THAT ROME SHALL APOSTATIZE FROM THE FAITH, AND THE CHURCH WILL BE SCATTERED AND SEEM TO HAVE BEEN SWEPT FROM THE FACE OF THE EARTH.
NO ONE HAD ADDRESSED MANY THINGS THAT I’VE BROUGHT UP ON MY BLOG!
With these answers being provided, I seek to simply show that the sedevacantists are not counter-revolutionary, but rather part of the revolution itself.
I’ve thorough debunked all of your goofball assertions!
Like Lucifer they see an empty throne that they would wish to take from Christ and His chosen Vicar. They are truly New Order “Catholics.”
What a fool you make yourself by saying such silly nonsense!
Well, let me remind you, that your new order sede Church will require every element to make it a perfect society.
You don’t know what you’re talking about.
Therefore, you could use a pope.
Of course, we could use a pope. We need a pope! We don’t deny that at all!
There is a “Gregory XVII” in Quebec available and various other claimants.
Antipopes are not the answer, and to suggest it means that you’re being a smart aleck. And you’re doing what people like Karl Keating do, by pointing to extremists as a way of suggesting we’re all a bunch of kooks.
You will also need various tribunals and congregations to watch over all aspects of your perfect society. Who will grant an annulment in an invalid marriage? Who will grant dispensations? Who will grant indulgences? Who will receive religious vows? Who will approve anything in your perfect society? Peter assigned the apostles certain territories…what territories are sede bishops assigned to?
We answer all your questions the same way the Church did it for the many years it’s been without popes before.
Upon further reflection, the sedes are like the rapture theorists among Protestant groups. Sedevacantists have been “raptured” from the so-called “Modernist” Church to live a life of blissful traditionalism in various gardens of Eden on earth. We, the “unenlightened” and uninitiated, are left behind to fight the battle of the counter-revolution.
Wrong! We’re not caught up from the modernist church of yours. You must presuppose that we were the same religion as yours at one time, which is silly. Your religion was created by modernists who usurped Rome. And we aren’t in blissful traditionalism. It’s called the Great Apostasy!
Oh, that’s right, the sede life is not always so Eden like if we look at the disastrous fall out associated with Christ the King Monastery in Simcoe, AL.
Yes, they lost the faith and joined your false religion right?
Our dearest Lord stated that towards the end not only will apostasy rise, but charity will grow very cold.
That Apostasy means falling away, or total desertion of the true doctrine of religion. Therefore, when St. Paul speaks to the Thessalonians about a great apostasy, he could only be speaking about a falling away from the true religion. Your billion strong religion came out of my Catholic religion. You’ve already spelled out your apostasy quite well above.
With little or no charity, unity of love will be dissolved and schisms and spits will increase. It is impossible, humanly speaking, to correct a sedevacantist because they have an imprudent zeal. Their sin is not gross or obvious like lustful actions or theft. Rather, they see themselves as the pure ones…the virtuous ones who hold onto the true Faith. Thus, they are incorrigible. Steven, you have great zeal. You have spent much energy and time fighting a battle. But you zeal is imprudent in the highest degree. Come down from being raptured and help fight the battle here below. The true counter-revolution could use you.
In Jesus and Mary,
Fr. Shannon Collins
Only someone in union with the great apostasy would make such statements. Like I said before, and I repeat myself: You can’t be a counter-revolutionary and be in union with the revolutionaries at the same time. That would be like fighting for the British Loyalists while, at the same time, establishing and being in union with the Independent Patriots during the American Revolution. You have to take a side. You can’t have your church cake with a heretic pope, too.
Your position is illogical and goes against the Divine Law! Please don’t email me again.
Steven
Those were the cleverest (even to a point funny) replies to a letter that I’ve seen. Good Job Mr. Speray. Why can’t anybody see anything. Is it because they get distracted on Facebook or is it just plain retardation. Novus Ordo priests are a joke. They need to quit worrying about being so conservative and act like their “pope” whom they dare criticize and think they can resist. What good is their “pope” if he be resisted all the time especially when dealing with Faith and morals.
Rev Collins….Let me get this right….After VatII the church was to be known as the New Order…Novus Ordo. Right??? Revolutionary …New Order of Mass etc etc. What have I missed here? oh never mind…You’re just like my Evangelical minister buddy who goes on and on swearing he’s catholic too..Like all other Novus Ordo priests I’ve about had my fill with personal interpretations…philosophical BS .and non sensible rubber-lipping on the non-revolutionary modernistic ideals and holiness of NEWCUURCH and her Blessed popes. Paul told us to hold onto Tradition . What have you grabbed onto?.