Reesorville
Reesorville

Chemtrails: Are Planes Spraying Chemicals Into The Sky?

water (H20) naturally dissolves in air at the right temperature and pressure. When air rises, the pressure decreases and the air expands, which causes it to lose temperature as well (like the opposite of what happens in a pressure cooker). When the air drops in temperature, the water that is naturally dissolved in the air may go from a gaseous state (ie. water vapour) to a liquid (ie. water) or …More
water (H20) naturally dissolves in air at the right temperature and pressure. When air rises, the pressure decreases and the air expands, which causes it to lose temperature as well (like the opposite of what happens in a pressure cooker). When the air drops in temperature, the water that is naturally dissolved in the air may go from a gaseous state (ie. water vapour) to a liquid (ie. water) or solid state (ie. ice). That is how clouds form.

Often, however, in places high in the atmosphere, there is enough water vapour to form a cloud, but it doesn't form a cloud because the atmospheric conditions are not right.

When a plane, a rocket or some other big thing with a big hot engine flies through this air, however, it can easily disturb the equilibrium in such a way that the water vapour then condenses to form clouds, which will look like trails of white coming from behind the plane. The white 'chemtrail' is not actually from the plane at all, but it is just water that was already there that is being disturbed by the plane flying through it in such a way that it condenses into a cloud.

And that is what you are seeing.
Reesorville

Cardinal Burke: Consecration of Russia Was Not Carried Out

the consecration occurred on March 25th 1984. Seven years later, December 25th 1991 is the day that Gorbachev resigned and the Russian Federation replaced the USSR. Seven is a biblical number. March 25th is the annunciation, December 25th is the birth of Jesus... is it a coincidence?
Reesorville

Why did Vikings have 'Allah' on clothes?

Vikings plundered expensive things across Europe... couldn't it just be possible that these were just things that they stole from somewhere?

I think there have been things found in the Vatican that had Arabic writing on it. Muslim textiles were some of the best in the world during the middle ages.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 2nd of February 2017

I can't really understand the idea that going to an Anglican church headed by a male priest is somehow more correct than going to an episcopelian church headed by a female priest.

In either case, the presider is not a priest, the sacraments are invalid and the church in question is not the church founded by Christ that is going to bring you to heaven... what is the difference?
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 24th of January 2017

Cannoli:Yes, I am an idealist. Peace be with you!

Bobus: Well, I don't know. I was just reading this article today, for example: www.yahoo.com/news/u-says-prevent-…

And many others like it. I certainly hope and pray that there is success in the economy and no war.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 24th of January 2017

Cannoli: I'm not American, but no, I would not have voted for Hillary, if I was.

When Hitler invaded the Soviet Union, you would have thought that he was a person who was putting an end to communism, but in the end his actions just led to it expanding even further and putting the Soviet Union as the second most powerful state in the world.

I'm well aware that Trump plans to get rid of federal …More
Cannoli: I'm not American, but no, I would not have voted for Hillary, if I was.

When Hitler invaded the Soviet Union, you would have thought that he was a person who was putting an end to communism, but in the end his actions just led to it expanding even further and putting the Soviet Union as the second most powerful state in the world.

I'm well aware that Trump plans to get rid of federal funding for abortions and appoint pro-life judges. I think this is great. But that is not our long-term objective, here.

We are aiming at ending all abortion, and I feel, although perhaps I am wrong, that Trump's qualities have the risk of destroying the image of conservatism within the minds of voters in generations yet to come. If it had been a different republican who won the election, I think you would not have had such a massive women's march being organized now. Trump, one may argue, is actually galvanizing and giving power to anti-life feminism.

Whatever temporary gains he makes in the supreme court or in federal funding are great, I think, but that is not the end game. If they do as they say they plan to do, and get Roe vs. Wade overturned, and then leave it to the individual states to decide... abortion will still be widespread and accessible, it would just be a matter of going from one state to another. It's better, but it is really not good enough.

And furthermore, if Trump's words and actions actually lead to the anti-life movement getting even stronger than it was before, then you realize that not only is it not good enough, but it is actually something that may bring great consequences against the future success of the pro-life movement. Trump can appoint judges and take away funding from abortion providers, and he can also destroy the economy, go to war with China, North Korea, Iran, get into twitter fights and lose his temper with newsmedia, etc. and then just lose everything when elections occur again in a few years, and the evil spirit that was first driven out will just come back even stronger than it was before.

The people need to be converted to God and brought to believe from the heart that abortion needs to be rejected. That is the surest way that our final victory can be achieved.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 24th of January 2017

I certainly hope that Trump will be as effective at getting rid of abortion as these protestors seem to think he will be. Sadly, I have doubts, however.
Reesorville

The great deception in the Catholic Church

In one common translation of the Creed we say 'He was crucified, died and was buried. He descended into hell. On the third day He arose again from the dead'

The catechism states this: '633 Scripture calls the abode of the dead, to which the dead Christ went down, "hell" - Sheol in Hebrew or Hades in Greek - because those who are there are deprived of the vision of God.479 Such is the case for …More
In one common translation of the Creed we say 'He was crucified, died and was buried. He descended into hell. On the third day He arose again from the dead'

The catechism states this: '633 Scripture calls the abode of the dead, to which the dead Christ went down, "hell" - Sheol in Hebrew or Hades in Greek - because those who are there are deprived of the vision of God.479 Such is the case for all the dead, whether evil or righteous, while they await the Redeemer: which does not mean that their lot is identical, as Jesus shows through the parable of the poor man Lazarus who was received into "Abraham's bosom":480 "It is precisely these holy souls, who awaited their Saviour in Abraham's bosom, whom Christ the Lord delivered when he descended into hell."481 Jesus did not descend into hell to deliver the damned, nor to destroy the hell of damnation, but to free the just who had gone before him.482' (www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P1R.HTM)

Which, if you follow through with it, therefore means that Abraham, Moses, Esther, Isaiah, etc. were in hell. But their lots were not the same as those who were condemned to be there forever. Hence your statement that a person in hell must necessarily be there forever is thereby false. Scripture and tradition both call this place 'hell'.

When Christ went to preach to the souls in hell after He was crucified, I don't see any reason why we would have to exclude the possibility that He gave baptism of water to them there, and that they therefore also entered the church through the same means as the living did.

The church says that eternal hellfire is reserved to unrepentant sinners because of their refusal by their own free-choice to let go of their sins. If a person is not a sinner, but they just lacked knowledge, and would have gladly accepted the faith had they known of its existence, then they are obviously not unrepentant sinners. Both will go to hell, as the Council stated, but with 'unequal pains'.

Have you ever read Anne Catherine's Emmerich's supposed visions of the Passion? In the part where where Jesus descends to hell, there is a vivid description given in the text whereby He first meets Adam and Eve in a dark place, then the other people of the old testament, then He visits a cavern filled with pagans who had lived holy lives and demons were in it confessing to the pagans how they had deceived them with idols, and then finally Jesus enters the city of the damned where all the souls in eternal damnation are abiding.

Here is the text: " I next saw our Lord, with his triumphant procession, enter into a species of Purgatory which was filled with those good pagans who, having had a faint glimmering of the truth, had longed for its fulfilment: this Purgatory was very deep, and contained a few demons, as also some of the idols of the pagans. I saw the demons compelled to confess the deception they had practised with regard to these idols, and the souls of the poor pagans cast themselves at the feet of Jesus, and adored him with inexpressible joy: here, likewise, the demons were bound with chains and dragged away. I saw our Saviour perform many other actions; but I suffered so intensely at the same time, that I cannot recount them as I should have wished." (www.jesus-passion.com/THE_PASSION6.htm LIX)

I note that although it does not say specifically that He did not take away any souls out of that place, but I draw your attention to the fact that she claims it is 'a species of Purgatory', implying that a purification is taking place and it is not permanent.

The number of magisterial documents that support the conclusion that all outside the church go to hell is massive. I don't disagree with you. But can you find a document that actually disproves the thesis I just presented here, and specifically states that those who die in orginal sin only are punished eternally?
Reesorville

The great deception in the Catholic Church

But, if a person in hell received faith and baptism while they were there, wouldn't the person then be getting to heaven through Jesus Christ and the church he founded? What is the contradiction between this idea and what the council stated?

If a person can receive baptism by an angel, by being resurrected back to life, by some supernatural person... why not this as well?
Reesorville

The great deception in the Catholic Church

OK, I got it, I understand it now, thank you!

Now, there is something I should note, however. Since the concept of the supposed 'baptism of desire' is, as you must know, the idea that Jesus would not reject someone, simply on account of an innocent lack of awareness of a need to join the church. What you are saying makes sense, however, because the idea that someone without baptism or without …More
OK, I got it, I understand it now, thank you!

Now, there is something I should note, however. Since the concept of the supposed 'baptism of desire' is, as you must know, the idea that Jesus would not reject someone, simply on account of an innocent lack of awareness of a need to join the church. What you are saying makes sense, however, because the idea that someone without baptism or without the church can get to heaven appears to be completely contradicted by what that council stated in the 15th century.

However, consider this now: Abraham, John the baptist, Isaiah, Moses... they all would have died before Christ and hence were without baptism and were never joined to Christ's body before their death, but when Christ went down to hell and preached to the dead, we believe that they must have been saved as well. Could it have been that they were baptized in hell and then entered into heaven? And if so, is it inconceivable that the same could be possibly be true of other people today who died without baptism?

I think this wouldn't pose any necessary contradiction with what you are saying, because all such people would still need baptism and faith to find salvation, but they would just receive it while they were dead. What do you think?
Reesorville

The great deception in the Catholic Church

Thank you for your response!

For the part about the council and those in original sin, here is the actual text: 'But the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains.' (www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/FLORENCE.HTM)

What is the basis for saying that those who die in original sin only …More
Thank you for your response!

For the part about the council and those in original sin, here is the actual text: 'But the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains.' (www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/FLORENCE.HTM)

What is the basis for saying that those who die in original sin only go to limbo, but not hell? The council explicitly uses the word 'hell'

Your position is a little clearer to me now, but I want to reiterate just to make sure I got it right-> You are saying that if a person dies without baptism, but they find salvation in the end, then somehow they still must get baptism before finding salvation, like in the case of a person who returns to life in order to get baptized or who was maybe baptized by an angel or some supernatural person, etc....but without the baptism through some such means, then they cannot find salvation... is that correct?
Reesorville

The great deception in the Catholic Church

I am wondering if I could ask some questions, if that is OK? Because I am not sure I completely understand your position.

The council of Basel-Ferrara-Florence claimed that all people outside the church, whether Jewish, pagan, heretic or schismatic, no matter whether they even die in Christ's name, all go to hell immediately upon death. Do you believe that this is true?

The same council also …More
I am wondering if I could ask some questions, if that is OK? Because I am not sure I completely understand your position.

The council of Basel-Ferrara-Florence claimed that all people outside the church, whether Jewish, pagan, heretic or schismatic, no matter whether they even die in Christ's name, all go to hell immediately upon death. Do you believe that this is true?

The same council also said that all who die in original sin only, but without mortal sin, also go to hell immediately upon death, but with unequal pains. Do you believe that this is true?

If a catechumen dies before he receives baptism, does he go to hell?

If a baby dies before he or she is baptized, does he go to hell?

If a person in another religion or without a religion dies without mortal sin on his conscience and a desire to know the Truth, does he go to hell?

I keep reading what you say about there being no known exception to EENS... but I am confused. I am not sure whether you are asserting these things I write above or not, so I am wondering if you could provide specific answers.

When you say that there are no known exceptions, I am confused by whether you mean that there could be exceptions, and we just don't know them, or whether you actually mean that there are no exceptions at all. Thank you for your time!
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 23rd of December 2016

Donohue - the newsmedia in western countries is private business. They make more money if more people read their news. The larger public is not nearly as interested in a scandal with US gymnastics as it is with scandals in the Catholic Church. It is for the same reason you can find so many articles printed about Brad and Angelina's divorce, instead of something that actually matters like child …More
Donohue - the newsmedia in western countries is private business. They make more money if more people read their news. The larger public is not nearly as interested in a scandal with US gymnastics as it is with scandals in the Catholic Church. It is for the same reason you can find so many articles printed about Brad and Angelina's divorce, instead of something that actually matters like child trafficking or third world famine. There are millions of people suffering horrible things around the world every day, but the newsmedia covers stuff that is of far lesser importance, because the public doesn't have as much interest in learning about those things and by virtue of natural selection, the dominant news outlets are the ones who understand that unfortunate truth.

You can't assume it is always because of an anti-catholic bias. Think of yourself as a news editor for a moment and two stories come on the table, one is that there was a gym teacher somewhere who murdered a student and the other is there was a bishop somewhere who murdered a layperson... if you want the paper to sell, which do you choose?

The catechism under the eighth commandment gives the responsibilities of the newsmedia, but the world often works differently.

2493 Within modern society the communications media play a major role in information, cultural promotion, and formation. This role is increasing, as a result of technological progress, the extent and diversity of the news transmitted, and the influence exercised on public opinion.
2494 The information provided by the media is at the service of the common good.284 Society has a right to information based on truth, freedom, justice, and solidarity:

The proper exercise of this right demands that the content of the communication be true and - within the limits set by justice and charity - complete. Further, it should be communicated honestly and properly. This means that in the gathering and in the publication of news, the moral law and the legitimate rights and dignity of man should be upheld.285
2495 "It is necessary that all members of society meet the demands of justice and charity in this domain. They should help, through the means of social communication, in the formation and diffusion of sound public opinion."286 Solidarity is a consequence of genuine and right communication and the free circulation of ideas that further knowledge and respect for others.
2496 The means of social communication (especially the mass media) can give rise to a certain passivity among users, making them less than vigilant consumers of what is said or shown. Users should practice moderation and discipline in their approach to the mass media. They will want to form enlightened and correct consciences the more easily to resist unwholesome influences.
2497 By the very nature of their profession, journalists have an obligation to serve the truth and not offend against charity in disseminating information. They should strive to respect, with equal care, the nature of the facts and the limits of critical judgment concerning individuals. They should not stoop to defamation.
2498 "Civil authorities have particular responsibilities in this field because of the common good.... It is for the civil authority ... to defend and safeguard a true and just freedom of information."287 By promulgating laws and overseeing their application, public authorities should ensure that "public morality and social progress are not gravely endangered" through misuse of the media.288 Civil authorities should punish any violation of the rights of individuals to their reputation and privacy. They should give timely and reliable reports concerning the general good or respond to the well-founded concerns of the people. Nothing can justify recourse to disinformation for manipulating public opinion through the media. Interventions by public authority should avoid injuring the freedom of individuals or groups.
2499 Moral judgment must condemn the plague of totalitarian states which systematically falsify the truth, exercise political control of opinion through the media, manipulate defendants and witnesses at public trials, and imagine that they secure their tyranny by strangling and repressing everything they consider "thought crimes."
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 19th of December 2016

Cardinal Muller said that there are some cases when a confessor can decide for a penitent when a previous marriage was null.

The Council of Trent said that those who declared that church courts could not judge marriages were excommunicated.

The Council of Trent was speaking of a heresy wherein people were asserting that the church did not have the authority to judge such things, and those who …More
Cardinal Muller said that there are some cases when a confessor can decide for a penitent when a previous marriage was null.

The Council of Trent said that those who declared that church courts could not judge marriages were excommunicated.

The Council of Trent was speaking of a heresy wherein people were asserting that the church did not have the authority to judge such things, and those who held that this was a heresy were excommunicated. Many of the canons of the Council of Trent are of a similar nature, in that they anathematize people who question the validity or effects of the sacrament, or the authority of the church to grant them... primarily because the Council was facing a widespread protestant heresy that denied the sacraments and the church's authority over them.

Perhaps I am wrong, but I question if that specific canon means the same thing as stating that the Council in fact demanded all cases where a previous marriage might have existed must necessarily have been dealt with by a church court. It could be rather interpreted as meaning that the Church had the right and authority to judge such cases, and not that every such case must necessarily be judged by a church court.

To use some practical examples, suppose you had a man in Saudi Arabia who had four wives. And the fourth wife was a Catholic who got married in an Islamic ceremony. Later she realized this marriage was against what the church taught, left him, confessed this and the priest absolved her... why would you need a church court to give her an annulment before you could conclude her marriage never existed and this man was not her husband?

Or if two Catholic males had a homosexual marriage, and they later repented and separated, then went to confession... why would an annulment be necessary?

I think the purpose of the annulment is to make a formal declaration when the case is in doubt, and you need an authoritative opinion... not when it is an absolute and complete certainty. Maybe I am wrong.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 12th of December 2016

intelligence agents are only human. There are things other than humans that guard the church. Remember the story of Heliodorus.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 14th of November 2016

the fifth station of the cross: Simon of Cyrene helps Jesus to carry His cross.

Simon was a pagan, he didn't believe in the true God, nor did he believe that Jesus was God, but he helped Jesus to carry His cross when the Jews around Him were calling for His death.

When Mother Teresa visited China in the early 90s, she visited a state-run orphanage, I think, and told the people who ran it they …More
the fifth station of the cross: Simon of Cyrene helps Jesus to carry His cross.

Simon was a pagan, he didn't believe in the true God, nor did he believe that Jesus was God, but he helped Jesus to carry His cross when the Jews around Him were calling for His death.

When Mother Teresa visited China in the early 90s, she visited a state-run orphanage, I think, and told the people who ran it they they were doing Christ's work, even though they may have been communists.

Communists called for society to serve the poor. This is a thought paralleled in the teachings of Jesus that called on people to serve the suffering or else face eternal damnation. In this respect, what Francis is reported to have said is true. It doesn't change anything else about communism's inherent flaws rooted in its atheism or the tremendous evil that many communists have done in the world. In the millions of people who have had communist party affiliations, I am sure that at least some of them were like Simon of Cyrene or the people that Mother Teresa is reported to have praised.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 18th of October 2016

@Rafał_Ovile If you want to avoid WWIII then you must do what Mary said to do at Fatima and other occasions: to pray and to suffer for sinners. As long as there are ten righteous remaining in the wicked city, the whole place will be saved for their sake. Putting Donald Trump into office is not going to save the world from destruction.

When Hitler invaded the Soviet Union, there were Catholics …More
@Rafał_Ovile If you want to avoid WWIII then you must do what Mary said to do at Fatima and other occasions: to pray and to suffer for sinners. As long as there are ten righteous remaining in the wicked city, the whole place will be saved for their sake. Putting Donald Trump into office is not going to save the world from destruction.

When Hitler invaded the Soviet Union, there were Catholics who supported him because they saw him as putting an end to communism. Volunteers from Spain joined the German army in the battle for Leningrad. But actually, in the end, Hitler's actions only served to spread communism even further. The Catholics who supported him were deceived. The house they built was on sand and not on a rock.

In my fallible opinion, Trump's actions could perhaps be something similar. The republicans should have been able to win this election this year, for many reasons, but it seems that they will not. Why will they not? Because of Trump's own actions. There is no one damaging the cause to put a pro-life candidate into the white house more than he is when he does the things that he does. Perhaps I am wrong.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 18th of October 2016

are there no pro-life options in the race? (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evan_McMullin)

Trump has publicly made comments calling for US forces to target civilians and use torture. He is not a pro-life candidate.
Reesorville

DAILY MAIL COMMENT: Climate change and an inconvenient truth

It is indisputable that the ice caps are melting. This article is misleading, I believe, because it fails to mention all of the decrease that has already occurred. Let me explain with an example:

A farmer owns nine cows. Wolves come to his field one day and eat seven of them. The following year, the two remaining cows give birth to a calf. The farmer then claims he has been very prosperous …More
It is indisputable that the ice caps are melting. This article is misleading, I believe, because it fails to mention all of the decrease that has already occurred. Let me explain with an example:

A farmer owns nine cows. Wolves come to his field one day and eat seven of them. The following year, the two remaining cows give birth to a calf. The farmer then claims he has been very prosperous because he has had 50% growth in his cattle population. Do you think the farmer is being logical?

If you think not, then you see the problem in this article and why it is misleading. Look here (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_sea_ice_decline) to see a graph on arctic sea ice from 1979-2014.

To say that it had a 41% increase in 2013 means it increased since 2012, not that it increased since 1950, 1900, etc. If you look at the graph, you will notice a bump from 2012 to 2013. But the 2013 figures are actually lower than the 2010 figures.

Furthermore, you will also note that in fact not just 2013, but actually there have been occassions when there was jumps in particular years, but the ovverrall decline is still there.

The fact that environmental destruction should come from our civilization makes sense, because if Creation was designed by God, then why would people who rejected God's plans for the world be possessing lifestyles that actually correctly functioned and corresponded with the machine he built? The fact that the enviroment is going like this is the very proof that we are not living in this world according to its own design.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 27th of September 2016

Exodus 22:28 You shall not speak evil of God or speak evil of a ruler of your people

On the other hand, to pass judgment upon or to rebuke the acts of Bishops does not at all belong to private individuals - *that comes within the province only of those higher than they in authority and especially of the Sovereign Pontiff, for to him Christ entrusted the charge of feeding not only His lambs, but …More
Exodus 22:28 You shall not speak evil of God or speak evil of a ruler of your people

On the other hand, to pass judgment upon or to rebuke the acts of Bishops does not at all belong to private individuals - *that comes within the province only of those higher than they in authority and especially of the Sovereign Pontiff, for to him Christ entrusted the charge of feeding not only His lambs, but His sheep throughout the world. At most, it is allowed in matters of grave complaint to refer the whole case to the Roman Pontiff, and this with prudence and moderation as zeal for the common good requires, not clamorously or abusively, for in this way dissensions and hostilities are bred, or certainly increased." - Pius X, Tribus Circiter, 1906

*If you have a complaint against Francis, you must speak to his Superior; you do not have the right as a lay Catholic to be his judge.

I rather think this kind of public attack only makes things worse.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 23rd of September 2016

@Ana Luisa M.R you can report to interpol here: www.interpol.int/Forms/Crimes_against_children I can't do it myself, because of the country I am in
Reesorville

Josef Seifert: The Pope must revoke parts of Amoris Laetitia

hell is permanent because those inside of it sin forever. Sin can only be sin, if it is freely chosen- a person who has no ability to stop sinning, cannot actually sin, because sin implies the person has an ability to reject the temptation. Every person who remains in hell, is there because they voluntarily choose to sin forever- no matter what God offers them, they refuse to repent. In other …More
hell is permanent because those inside of it sin forever. Sin can only be sin, if it is freely chosen- a person who has no ability to stop sinning, cannot actually sin, because sin implies the person has an ability to reject the temptation. Every person who remains in hell, is there because they voluntarily choose to sin forever- no matter what God offers them, they refuse to repent. In other words, it is human beings, not God, who are the ones that make hell permanent.

I don't think that Francis' statement about hell was heretical, because it is possible to interpret it in relation to this. The logic of the gospel is that God came to save the world, not to condemn it. He desires for all to be saved. How could it be then that there is some point that passes at which God says He does not want a person to be saved any longer, or He does not wish a person to repent any longer? Why did He die on the cross if His love for human beings had limits?

God consigns people to hell, the way that a boy in love with a girl lets the girl go away, when she doesn't want him, even though he would do anything for her. Those in hell are there, because they themselves refuse to repent, not because God refuses to allow them to repent. Hence, it is possible to say that He does not send people away forever, but they are away forever. Perhaps I am wrong about this, but I don't believe it has to contradict what Jesus says in the gospel.
Reesorville

Churches are ‘more free’ to speak about US election than they think

Hillary's position is insupportable for someone who wants to protect life. However, Trump is also on record for calling for the intentional killing of civilians by US forces, which is also insupportable for someone who wants to protect life; although he later walked these comments back and said he wouldn't disobey international law (geneva conventions).

Frankly, if I was American, I wouldn't …More
Hillary's position is insupportable for someone who wants to protect life. However, Trump is also on record for calling for the intentional killing of civilians by US forces, which is also insupportable for someone who wants to protect life; although he later walked these comments back and said he wouldn't disobey international law (geneva conventions).

Frankly, if I was American, I wouldn't trust either of them with that power. We need catholic lay people who have the same thinking as Pavone to run for President and other government positions.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 5th of September 2016

it seems to me like there is fundamental contradiction between a homosexual identity and the catholic priesthood.

The priest has to be a man, because he is in the place of the 'bridegroom' to the church as his 'bride'. In the Middle Ages, Popes were sometimes referred to as 'the spouse of the church'; Francis, in the same vein refers to the church as his.

The priest has to be a man because he …More
it seems to me like there is fundamental contradiction between a homosexual identity and the catholic priesthood.

The priest has to be a man, because he is in the place of the 'bridegroom' to the church as his 'bride'. In the Middle Ages, Popes were sometimes referred to as 'the spouse of the church'; Francis, in the same vein refers to the church as his.

The priest has to be a man because he is serving as a husband to the church as his wife. The entire mystery of the priesthood is wrapped up within the mystery of the marriage in heaven between the Bridegroom and His bride. If the priest is not designed for a woman, then it seems to me like it is a contradiction of the fundamental mystery that the priesthood derives its existence from.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 29th of August 2016

in past times Catholic countries sent missionaries all across the world to preach the gospel in places where they were not allowed to go. They illegally entered countries and illegally staid in their borders, carrying out activities that the states in question did not allow them to do. Some of them suffered and even died while doing this, and among them are many saints.

If now, people from all …More
in past times Catholic countries sent missionaries all across the world to preach the gospel in places where they were not allowed to go. They illegally entered countries and illegally staid in their borders, carrying out activities that the states in question did not allow them to do. Some of them suffered and even died while doing this, and among them are many saints.

If now, people from all those nations, leave and come to Catholic nations, should not Catholics be embracing this as a missionary opportunity? Even if the people in question have some among them who cause problems or even commit murder or terrorism, should this not be embraced as a part of the missionary's cross?

If you cannot allow people from non-christian nations to enter Christian countries, then I really see no point in sending missionaries to those non-christian nations anymore. Certainly it is easier to preach the faith to people when they are in your borders, living among you, under your rule, etc. and if you reject this opportunity, then why bother sending missionaries elsewhere? How could you possibly justify missionaries entering and illegally doing mission work in non-christian countries, if you cannot even allow the people in those countries to come to the Christian nations in the first place?

'We are violating your laws and sending these people into your territory because there is such a surpassing need for you peoples to hear this message, but this need is not so great that we think you people should be allowed to enter our nations'

A while back gloria.tv I think published a quote from a bishop or priest in Yemen- I think he said that migration is not the problem, the problem is that the western church is too weak. He is right- they fear muslim migration, because they don't know Christ as they should.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 23rd of August 2016

@Abramo , I am surprised you have never heard of this. Just do a short internet search on the number of terrorist attacks around the world that Hezbollah, Hamas or some other Iranian-linked organization claimed responsibility for. There is an entire wikipedia page on the topic: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_state-…
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 23rd of August 2016

Iran is complaining that there are countries in the world giving help to terrorist groups....

First remove the beam in your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck in your neighbour's eye
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 10th of August 2016

Francis was also devoutly obedient to church authority; he would never dream of publicly attacking bishops or popes, no matter how much his way of life contradicted theirs.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 26th of July 2016

Burke is a wonderful cardinal. Even when he disagrees with things at the Vatican, he still nevertheless treats the Pope with the utmost respect and obedience. He is an example for Catholics to follow.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 8th of July 2016

In the bible, Abraham had relations with his wife's maid, but he was still counted as righteous. Jacob had two wives and God blessed him. David had many more and he was counted among the prophets. Samuel ordered the killing of infants, and he was a holy prophet. Moses instructed the Israelites to pursue genocide and he was God's friend, who spoke to Him face to face.

All these people were violat…More
In the bible, Abraham had relations with his wife's maid, but he was still counted as righteous. Jacob had two wives and God blessed him. David had many more and he was counted among the prophets. Samuel ordered the killing of infants, and he was a holy prophet. Moses instructed the Israelites to pursue genocide and he was God's friend, who spoke to Him face to face.

All these people were violating God's law when they did these things, because His law is the same for all times in all places. However, they were not counted as wicked for doing these things, because they did not realize that these things were contrary to God's will and they were people who would not have done these things had they realized it was something He did not want. It is therefore possible for a person to commit such a grave violation of His law and not actually be in mortal sin.

For that reason, Amoris Laetitia is correct when it says that not every person who does these things is necessarily in a state of mortal sin. However, if a person does these things because they do not realize it is against God's will, then this person, while perhaps not being in a state of sin, nevertheless is not qualified to take communion, because it means that they either do not know or do not believe in what the church teaches. If David lived today, he would be required to put away all of his extra wives if he wanted to get baptism.

Amoris Laetitia, states that we cannot assume that they are necessarily in mortal sin, and I think the document is right in that, but it also does not state in any part of the document that such people can take communion. Nothing has changed with regard to that.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 28th of June 2016

When John Paul II apologized for the burning of Jan Hus, it wasn't because Jan Hus was doing the right thing by leading people away from the church. I think he offered the apology was because even though Hus was doing the wrong thing, the approach the church took at the time in burning and destroying him was not the right way to handle it.

When John Paul II apologized for Catholic sins against …More
When John Paul II apologized for the burning of Jan Hus, it wasn't because Jan Hus was doing the right thing by leading people away from the church. I think he offered the apology was because even though Hus was doing the wrong thing, the approach the church took at the time in burning and destroying him was not the right way to handle it.

When John Paul II apologized for Catholic sins against Jews or against members of any other religion, including pagans, it wasn't because it was right for those people to follow those other religions, it was because even though they were following the wrong thing, the ways that Catholics treated them was not always correct.

John Paul II, when he made his sweeping apologies, in many cases he was apologizing for sins committed against idolaters, against people who practiced witchcraft and demonic things, against heretics, etc. And his apologies were right, not because those things were without guilt, but because the approach the church took in treating them was not always the correct one.

This lifestyle is one that can end in destruction, unless the person gets out of it. But that doesn't mean that all the words and actions Catholics have used in combating it were from the Holy Spirit.

As long as people are still clear about the fact that the church teaches that homosexual acts harm the soul, I don't see why such an apology would have anything wrong with it.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 21st of June 2016

危机 -crisis, 危 is danger, 机 can mean many things, but opportunity is an acceptable interpretation.

Chinese baidu dictionary also takes the opportunity interpretation

(baike.baidu.com/link)

危机:'是有危险又有机会的时刻' - crisis: 'a time with both danger and opportunity'

Given Chinese traditional Taoist thinking (within evil there is good, within good there is evil), it …More
危机 -crisis, 危 is danger, 机 can mean many things, but opportunity is an acceptable interpretation.

Chinese baidu dictionary also takes the opportunity interpretation

(baike.baidu.com/link)

危机:'是有危险又有机会的时刻' - crisis: 'a time with both danger and opportunity'

Given Chinese traditional Taoist thinking (within evil there is good, within good there is evil), it also seems logical to me why people would think it means that.

St Paul, 'Where transgression abounds, grace abounds even more'
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 12th of May 2016

to say that the pope is not an object open for our public criticism or scorn and to say that we have to believe that everything he does or says is coming from God, are two entirely different questions.

Noah's sons walked in backwards to cover their naked father, and they knew that he was naked.

Paul would not have issued his sharp rebuke after being slapped had he known that it was the high …More
to say that the pope is not an object open for our public criticism or scorn and to say that we have to believe that everything he does or says is coming from God, are two entirely different questions.

Noah's sons walked in backwards to cover their naked father, and they knew that he was naked.

Paul would not have issued his sharp rebuke after being slapped had he known that it was the high priest, and yet the high priest at the time actually was trying to destroy the church. Even to him, Paul still applied the law 'you shall not speak evil of a ruler of your people'.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 13th of January 2016

Perhaps I am wrong, but I think none of the German bishops are pro-choice. They have that pill in their hospitals is because they think it is only a contraceptive and does not induce abortion. They could be mistaken, but that doesn't equal to meaning they are in favour of abortion.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 23rd of December 2015

I think there is nothing wrong with having certainty in God's endless mercy. The more important question, however, is whether you are willing to give mercy to others. His mercy is a certainty, but your reception of it is dependent on how you treat others.

Jesus said in the gospel that if you do not forgive your neighbour his debt, then your master will not forgive you your debt. Your master is …More
I think there is nothing wrong with having certainty in God's endless mercy. The more important question, however, is whether you are willing to give mercy to others. His mercy is a certainty, but your reception of it is dependent on how you treat others.

Jesus said in the gospel that if you do not forgive your neighbour his debt, then your master will not forgive you your debt. Your master is always willing to forgive you, but not if you are not willing to forgive your neighbour. As the Lord said, 'Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy'.

The people who have certainty in mercy and who go to hell, are those who think of mercy as meaning God will always forgive you, but you do not have to forgive others.

This year of mercy instead ought to be an opportunity for people to find ways to suffer for others who do not deserve it. This is how we truly honour mercy: by practicing it ourselves.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 14th of December 2015

Mr. Li is the richest man in Asia; he lived in Hong Kong since he was a child, but he was born in the mainland. He owns a huge empire of different investments around the world, with the largest portion in the real estate market. You could probably find things in your own country that are owned by him, if you check.

Interestingly enough, he is also the owner of Husky energy in Canada, an oil …More
Mr. Li is the richest man in Asia; he lived in Hong Kong since he was a child, but he was born in the mainland. He owns a huge empire of different investments around the world, with the largest portion in the real estate market. You could probably find things in your own country that are owned by him, if you check.

Interestingly enough, he is also the owner of Husky energy in Canada, an oil company, which has been criticized for its projects in the Alberta tar sands, because it is a big source of greenhouse gas emissions.

I think the light show at the Vatican was wonderful. The Immaculate Conception is a day when we remember how it was that there was a human being who was completely perfect, without the slightest bit of evil in her from the time she was conceived.

What created was completely perfect in every way. The book of Wisdom says 'God did not make death' and 'there is no destructive poison' in what God made. In just the same way that Mary was created without flaw, so also the original creation was made without flaw. The light show on the environment has this relation to the Immaculate Conception, I think.
Reesorville

The Sin of Sodom

I think the verse from Ezekiel makes it clear that the sin of Sodom was not only the sexual sins, but also the greed, the inhospitality, etc. Most importantly, a just person could not continue living in the place without being forced to engage in these sins by his neighbours.
I say 'most importantly', because if you think back at the exchange between God and Abraham what God said to him that if …More
I think the verse from Ezekiel makes it clear that the sin of Sodom was not only the sexual sins, but also the greed, the inhospitality, etc. Most importantly, a just person could not continue living in the place without being forced to engage in these sins by his neighbours.
I say 'most importantly', because if you think back at the exchange between God and Abraham what God said to him that if there were just a few just persons, then God would spare the entire place for their sake.
Now, if the place did not allow the just person to exist within it, either by killing them or by forcing them to engage in their sins with them... then that promise from God no longer applies, if you think about it.
So, even if homosexuality or other sexual vices spread through the modern society, that alone is not enough to merit destruction like Sodom, according to Genesis. Because as long as people exist within the society who are following the Truth and the society leaves them be, the whole place is spared for their sake.
It is similar to what Mary said in various apparitions, that you must suffer for sinners and pray for them, so that the world can avoid destruction. Hence, you then understand that because of the prayers of the few who are abiding within the Truth, so the many who have immersed themselves in these sins are all spared for their sake.
I think, and perhaps I am wrong... that the sin of Sodom does not need at all to be homosexuality. It can be idolatry, it can be racial hatred, it can be greed for money, it can be any other kind of sexual vice, etc. and when the society reaches the point where a just person cannot exist within it, because all the people in the society require the just few to be like them or else suffer the consequences... then you have the sin of Sodom, because as God told Abraham the place is spared for the sake of the few.
If the two angels went to modern day Amsterdam, Toronto, New York, San Francisco, etc. and went on loudspeakers calling on people to repent of homosexual behaviour, the police may even come to protect them and as long as they kept within the law, they would be left alone. I don't think these places are Sodom. Because as long as they are still there giving witness and being left in peace, the place is spared for their sake.
Perhaps in the future, if the society really does not allow people to have anything but a positive opinion of homosexual acts or else be killed or jailed, then one can say it was Sodom, but at the moment we are not there, I think. There are various ways that people can be persecuted now, but none of the restrictions employed in any of these countries actually prevents a person from bearing witness to the Truth, it just restricts the places, circumstances and times they can do so... it is not really the same, because a just person can still live and bear witness in the society without being forced to sin. And as long as they are there, the promise of God to Abraham concerning Sodom holds true.
If, however, the two angels came to Nazi Germany and they were told that they must hate Jews and other races, or else suffer the consequence, or they went to the Roman Empire where people were collectively required to worship the Emperor as a god or they lived in a place where the only way to earn your daily bread was by lying, and people who told the Truth could not be allowed to eat... or some other situation like this, then I think that that place is Sodom, because the few who protect the many are no longer allowed to exist in the society, you cannot continue within the society without engaging in the sin with them... this is Sodom.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 27th of November

There is a story that when Pius X was Pope, he once encountered a four year-old child coming up for communion and the Pope, who was supposed to bless the child because the age of first communion had not been reached, held up the Eucharist and said 'who is this?' and after the child responded, 'Jesus', the Pope gave the Eucharist to the child.
Thanks be to God for the gift of the Eucharist, and …More
There is a story that when Pius X was Pope, he once encountered a four year-old child coming up for communion and the Pope, who was supposed to bless the child because the age of first communion had not been reached, held up the Eucharist and said 'who is this?' and after the child responded, 'Jesus', the Pope gave the Eucharist to the child.
Thanks be to God for the gift of the Eucharist, and thank you gloria.tv for presenting this story!
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 20th of November 2015

I don't know about Serra, but there were actually saints who approved of torture, especially in relation to the Inquisition. The catechism itself even mentions how in past times the church even condoned torture, although it was wrong to do so. Without checking, I seem to think that maybe Thomas More is on record of having approved of it, and perhaps also Thomas Aquinas argued in favour of it? …More
I don't know about Serra, but there were actually saints who approved of torture, especially in relation to the Inquisition. The catechism itself even mentions how in past times the church even condoned torture, although it was wrong to do so. Without checking, I seem to think that maybe Thomas More is on record of having approved of it, and perhaps also Thomas Aquinas argued in favour of it? Robert Bellarmine was a judge for the Roman inquisition when it burned people to death, which is also a kind of torture.

Even in the bible, the manner that Moses orders the death of people by stoning, is certainly a kind of torture. Regardless of what is said about Serra, I don't think anyone would deny that there is guilt in Catholic history on this point.

The gospel is always the same, but people can misunderstand it from time to time, because like idolaters we prefer to follow the ways of the world because it seems easier, and thus we follow the creature, rather than the Creator. It is just as true now, as it was back then.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 29th of October 2015

Statistics can be misleading. The total number of priests and religious in Africa is still lower than it is in Europe. The number is increasing in Africa and decreasing in Europe, but the sum total is still higher in Europe.

The truth is that the western countries are actually among the areas in the world least affected by a priest shortage. Despite what you may think, Africa still has a much …More
Statistics can be misleading. The total number of priests and religious in Africa is still lower than it is in Europe. The number is increasing in Africa and decreasing in Europe, but the sum total is still higher in Europe.

The truth is that the western countries are actually among the areas in the world least affected by a priest shortage. Despite what you may think, Africa still has a much bigger priest shortage than the west does.

to give some figures, you may consider this. From www.catholic-hierarchy.org

Archdiocese of Berlin 2012, the number of catholics for each priest (average) is 949, in 1950 it was 1375

Archdiocese of Kinshasa (DR Congo) 2013, the number of catholics for each priest (average) is 5000, in 1950 when it was still a Belgian colony it was 1023

Archdioese of Capua (Italy) 2013, the number of catholics for each priest (average) is 2345, in 1950 it was 874

Archdiocese of Beira (Mozambique) 2012, the number of catholics for each priest (average) is 12641, in 1950 when it was a Portuguese colony it was 636

Archdiocese of Liverpool (UK) 2012, the number of catholics for each priest (average) is 1564, in 1950 it was 614

Archdiocese of Abidjan (Cote d'Ivoire) 2012, the number of catholics for each priest (average) is 7402, in 1950 when it was a French colony it was 1675

Diocese of Gent (Belgium) 2013, the number of catholics for each priest (average) is 2170, in 1950 it was 673

Archdiocese of Cape town (South Africa) 2013, the number of catholics for each priest (average) is 1887, in 1950 it was 418 -

Archdiocese of Krakow (Poland) 2013, the number of catholics for each priest (average) is 729, in 1950 it was 1111

Archdiocese of Nairobi (Kenya) 2013, the number of catholics for each priest (average) is 4959, in 1949 when it was still a British colony it was 657

the reason why many of these african countries had such a low ratio when they were european colonies is partly because there were so many missionary priests (most of them European) at that time and the number of baptized catholics was also lower, so the ratio was significantly less at that time. But today, despite what you may think, they have a bigger vocation shortage than the west does, because so many have been baptized and joined the church in Africa, but the rate of increase in vocations hasn't quite matched it.

By contrast, the west has lost a huge amount of its membership and the number of vocations has decreased as well, but the total ratio is still healthier than what it is in most of Africa.
Reesorville

EXCLUSIVE Cardinal Pell: “The final document is much better than what we feared”

so you see... you never needed to attack the bishops and pope... catholic doctrine is upheld and God is in control, no need to worry-

Pius X said that lay people have no right to pass judgment on bishops, but that belongs to those who are above them in authority.

"On the other hand, to pass judgment upon or to rebuke the acts of Bishops does not at all belong to private individuals - that …More
so you see... you never needed to attack the bishops and pope... catholic doctrine is upheld and God is in control, no need to worry-

Pius X said that lay people have no right to pass judgment on bishops, but that belongs to those who are above them in authority.

"On the other hand, to pass judgment upon or to rebuke the acts of Bishops does not at all belong to private individuals - that comes within the province only of those higher than they in authority and especially of the Sovereign Pontiff, for to him Christ entrusted the charge of feeding not only His lambs, but His sheep throughout the world. At most, it is allowed in matters of grave complaint to refer the whole case to the Roman Pontiff, and this with prudence and moderation as zeal for the common good requires, not clamorously or abusively, for in this way dissensions and hostilities are bred, or certainly increased."-Pius X, Tribus Circiter, 1906
Reesorville

Spain's socialist party would ban religion classes – even in private schools

If parents can still do it at home or at church, then all this is doing is removing the power of teaching religion from the schools and into the hands of parents and pastors.

I don't know the situation in Spain, but if the schools were teaching a confusing or corrupted version of the faith to begin with, then perhaps this ought to be seen as a positive development, because the state is …More
If parents can still do it at home or at church, then all this is doing is removing the power of teaching religion from the schools and into the hands of parents and pastors.

I don't know the situation in Spain, but if the schools were teaching a confusing or corrupted version of the faith to begin with, then perhaps this ought to be seen as a positive development, because the state is preventing people from being deceived any longer.

If they were teaching the faith correctly and its banned, then people perhaps can see this as a cross that they must take up to follow Christ.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 20th of October 2015

Austrian priest and friend of Hans Kung, Fr Gotthold Hasenhüttl was suspended of his priestly faculties in 2003 by Trier Bishop Reinhard Marx for inviting protestants at an ecumenical congress in Berlin to receive the Eucharist. Bishop Marx told him to recant, and he didn't do so, so the bishop revoked his license to teach theology in 2006. The following year he was made Archbishop of Munich by …More
Austrian priest and friend of Hans Kung, Fr Gotthold Hasenhüttl was suspended of his priestly faculties in 2003 by Trier Bishop Reinhard Marx for inviting protestants at an ecumenical congress in Berlin to receive the Eucharist. Bishop Marx told him to recant, and he didn't do so, so the bishop revoked his license to teach theology in 2006. The following year he was made Archbishop of Munich by Pope Benedict- the same diocese that Benedict once held. This priest left the Catholic church in 2010; in the same year Pope Benedict made Reinhard Marx into a Cardinal.
Reesorville

Archbishop Cupich: Kasper's proposal 'very rich theologically'

The Kasper proposal is simply the suggestion that it is possible that some people may be divorced and remarried... and yet not be in mortal sin.

In catholic teaching, the conditions necessary for a mortal sin are:

1) the sin itself concerns something grave
2) the person is aware that it concerns something grave
3) the person voluntarily chooses to do it, even though they are aware, and not …More
The Kasper proposal is simply the suggestion that it is possible that some people may be divorced and remarried... and yet not be in mortal sin.

In catholic teaching, the conditions necessary for a mortal sin are:

1) the sin itself concerns something grave
2) the person is aware that it concerns something grave
3) the person voluntarily chooses to do it, even though they are aware, and not because something else has forced them to do it against their will

masturbation, pornography, sex outside of marriage, homosexual acts, and adultery are all considered grave sins. Divorce and remarriage is adultery, because they are having sex and yet not actually within a marriage, since they are still married to the original partner. So number 1 is checked off for sure.

Is it possible that there are people in the world who are unaware that these are grave sins? I am not sure. I have a feeling in the confusion of today, that such people probably do exist- if not in large numbers. If there are, then number 2 is not checked off for those people, and that means that such people are not in a state of mortal sin and thus could receive communion.

However, it seems to me that more logical that the way you would solve that problem would be by teaching them that it is in fact a grave sin rather than giving them communion because they are unaware and thus not in grave sin.

People like this should not have been even allowed to receive confirmation when they were children or to enter the church as adults if they were converts, because they obviously were not catechized properly. If they were, however, catechized properly and they knowingly reject the church's teachings out of their own free will, then they excommunicate themselves and thus still should not receive the sacraments.

Is there anyone being divorced and remarried who is doing so out of coercion and not by their own free will? Maybe somewhere in the world there is, but I doubt this is the group that the Synod fathers are speaking about. There are some people who are addicted to porn, addicted to masturbation and addicted to sex, who want to break it, and are trying to break it, but have so far failed to completely come clean of it, and to them number 3 could apply and they could perhaps receive communion.

I am not sure if that is the case here or not, however. In order for it to be the case, I think it would necessitate that the divorced and remarried persons were actively trying to get out of the relationship and had just failed to come completely clean of it yet.

I think such people would also be capable of receiving communion, if they existed.

No need to worry though about any of these things... Christ will triumph in the end.
Reesorville

Power in the Church? Women Have Always Had It

the priest must be a man because he is in the place of the bridegroom. St Paul said that the man is the head of the wife and God is the head of the man. The priest has authority over the church as a man has authority over his wife, because the church is the bride and he stands in place of the bridegroom.

each priest has authority over something different, depending on their status. Jesus Christ …More
the priest must be a man because he is in the place of the bridegroom. St Paul said that the man is the head of the wife and God is the head of the man. The priest has authority over the church as a man has authority over his wife, because the church is the bride and he stands in place of the bridegroom.

each priest has authority over something different, depending on their status. Jesus Christ has authority over the entire church in heaven, earth and purgatory. The Pope has authority over the whole church on Earth, the bishop has authority over the diocese, the parish priest has authority over his parish, a priest without a parish perhaps just has authority over those he lawfully gives the sacraments to. And so on.

God is the bridegroom and the church is the bride, and the priest is in the place of the bridegroom.

women cannot be priests because a woman is designed for a man, not for a woman, and the church is the bride.

Mary is the possessor of the whole of Jesus Christ. St Faustina is married to His mercy. St Margaret Mary Alacoque is a bride of His Sacred Heart. Teresa of Calcutta is married to Him in the poor. Joan of Arc(in the picture) to Him is married to the One who fights with His people. Mary Magdalene to His resurrection. Anne Catherine Emmerich to His passion. And so on.

Men cannot have this kind of vocation because they are designed for a woman and not for a man, and God is the Bridegroom.

Women and men have always been 100% equal in God's eyes. The gifts that God gives to either sex are of equal value, but they are composed of different currencies.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 9th of October 2015

The pre-Vatican II popes were not autocratic?

Whether Francis is autocratic or not, I don't know, but I'm fairly confident it doesn't surpass what happened in the past 1700 years of history since Constantine.

When Pius IX's soldiers massacred the inhabitants of Perugia in 1859, was it worse than Francis being disrespectful to the bishops under him?

When Paul IV ordered all Jews in Rome to wear…More
The pre-Vatican II popes were not autocratic?

Whether Francis is autocratic or not, I don't know, but I'm fairly confident it doesn't surpass what happened in the past 1700 years of history since Constantine.

When Pius IX's soldiers massacred the inhabitants of Perugia in 1859, was it worse than Francis being disrespectful to the bishops under him?

When Paul IV ordered all Jews in Rome to wear badges to identify themselves and established a ghetto for them in Rome, was Francis' behaviour surpassing this?

When Julius II started a war against Venice for territorial reasons and then placed the entire territory under interdict, was Francis abusing his authority more than this?

Do these people have any idea what sorts of things happened in the pre-Vatican II church, that they claim Francis is the 'radical Pope King'?
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 7th of October 2015

McCain believes that the people the US are training is not Al-Qaeda. The Syrian archbishop thinks all the rebels are Al-Qaeda. Neither are bad people, they just understand the facts differently.

I suspect the archbishop is incorrect and not all the rebels are terrorists- the CIA probably knows better than him about the ideology of the rebels they are training; he has authority over spiritual …More
McCain believes that the people the US are training is not Al-Qaeda. The Syrian archbishop thinks all the rebels are Al-Qaeda. Neither are bad people, they just understand the facts differently.

I suspect the archbishop is incorrect and not all the rebels are terrorists- the CIA probably knows better than him about the ideology of the rebels they are training; he has authority over spiritual matters, not over political facts.

And McCain is also incorrect because even 'moderate rebels' are a sin in God's eyes, since He gave authority to governments to rule people (Romans 13). For the same reason as this, however, one must also reject what has happened in the Ukraine, which means that Putin is still wrong.

The rule of a government over people is just as much a part of the natural law as is the law governing family and sexuality. A society requires a family with a mother and a father in order to continue. It also needs people to respect the laws of the state and not to take up arms and fight against it, otherwise the society also cannot continue.

It is called natural law, because you don't need revelation to know this- by reason you can plainly see it. It is so ridiculous to watch people who condemn homosexuality because they say it threatens society and goes against reason, while at the same time supporting the people who are fighting the lawful government in the Ukraine, turning cities into battlegrounds and driving people from their homes as thousands die in bloodshed... and somehow not coming to reason that civilization can't exist like this either.

The people fighting the government are just like the people who want to marry the same sex- they are both violations of the natural law upon which the whole society is underpinned.

When Catholics in Poland in 1830 rose up in rebellion against Russia, Russia was Orthodox and it was persecuting Catholics, and yet the Pope condemned the rebellion and called on Polish Catholics to obey the Czar because his authority was from God. Even a government that is against the Truth still has to be obeyed, because the natural law is like this.

Only in extreme circumstances where life is threatened and there is no other recourse, or obedience to the law would mean to commit sin, can rebellion ever be morally permissible.
Reesorville

Gloria.TV News on the 6th of October 2015

Kim Davis divorced and remarried 3 times. Of course the Vatican can't support her.

She is exactly the person being referred to when the Lord said, 'first remove the beam from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your neighbour's eye'. She does not accept gay marriage and she is right, but her own marriage is not marriage either.

Why do you treat her as a hero?
Reesorville

Free Kim Davis

If Kim Davis is a hero, then Cardinal Kasper is right.

If you think she is a person who is in God's grace, then you must also believe that it is possible to divorce, re-marry and yet not be in mortal sin.

I personally am not sure Kasper is right, nor do I assume she is a hero.
Reesorville

Kim Davis: Resistance Is Not Futile

If Kim Davis is a hero, then Cardinal Kasper is right.

If you think she is a person who is in God's grace, then you must also believe that it is possible to divorce, re-marry and yet not be in mortal sin.

I personally am not sure Kasper is right, nor do I assume she is a hero.