Wednesday, May 1, 2019

Pope Francis Accused of Heresy by Theologians and Clergy


VATICAN CITY (ChurchMilitant.com) - An international group of clergy and academics is urging the world's bishops to investigate Pope Francis for the canonical crime of heresy in an open letter released Monday.

The group opens their letter — which was dated "Easter Week, 2019" but published on the feast of the St. Catherine of Siena, a saint who influenced several popes with her counsels and admonitions — by stating their two-fold purpose to the bishops. First, they accuse Pope Francis of the canonical delict of heresy; second, they request that the bishops take the steps necessary to deal with the grave situation of a heretical pope.

In a summary of the letter, the clerics and scholars place this open letter to bishops within the context of two previous attempts to correct Pope Francis on matters of faith and morals.

AMDG

17 comments:

Anonymous said...

Accused by a bunch of VC2 opus devil 'easter worshipers' who willfully never mention VC2 or that all the VC2 popes preceding Francis have laid the foundation and engaged in the same 'heresies' as Francis (but somehow when JP2 did it (or put it in the new catechism or new code of canon law), it was WEIGEL great (cause he stainted Escriva!). Also ignores that JP2 and his sidekick Ratz (who's been carrying on a sodomite union w/ganswein lo these many years, but opus devils do their best to ignore and cover up (like the recent pic of ganswein posing w/the sodomite pornographer in the Rome metro excused by Maike Hickson (Ganswein didn't know!) And of course you deleted that post tancred--can't expose sodomite opus devil ganswein) or him escorting married sodomites about the Vatican, or inviting new ways sodomite promoting ministry open sodomites to Vatican audiences) appointed and promoted all these lordships and also ordered all of them to transfer pedophile priests and to retain them in the priesthood.

Like all lies it will go no-where and will only accomplish the ends of the devil who was a liar from the beginning and is the father of lies.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%92ostre

P.S. Have to be a vc2 formed fool to formulate a prayer (!VC2 petition!) to the Holy Trinity like this: "We ask the Holy Trinity (?Ghost?) to enlighten Pope Francis to reject every heresy opposed to sound doctrine and we pray (to Whom) that the Blessed Virgin Mary, mother of the Church, may gain for your Lordships the light (to know) and strength (?grace to do?) to defend the faith of Christ (?taught by? surely His faith ain't in question or in need of defense)...We humbly (!) request your (!the Lordships!) blessing and assure you of our (!non humble!) prayers (to God Almighty) for your (heretical VC2) ministry and for the (apostate VC2) Church (from which all our ble$$ing$ flow)."

Fiat. Fiat. Easter Worshipers, indeed.

Anonymous said...

From 1988 to 2013 Grammick (and every other dissenter) disobeyed Ratz and promoted sodomy, sodomy, sodomy (but it's all Wuerl's fault Ratz didn't excom her!).

"The sisters were on the runway for a flight from Rome to Munich when Ratzinger himself boarded the plane. Gramick introduced herself when the flight attendants finished serving lunch, and he greeted her by saying, “I’ve known you for 20 years.”

"He laughed when her supervisor explained she was afraid he would have her excommunicated, saying, “You can’t get excommunicated for what you think about homosexuality.” But a year later he issued an order forever barring Gramick “from any pastoral work involving homosexual persons.” She refused, and her order faced increasingly strident demands to close her down (like the easter worshipers strident demands for Francis(but not VC2!) to be condemned that never happens but in another 6 months they'll write another letter to show how $tridently they need donations). ...In 1988, the Vatican created a panel – led by the bishop of Green Bay, Adam Maida – with the mandate to get them to affirm Catholic doctrine on homosexuality.

"The panel concluded its work in 1994, faulting Gramick and Nugent for “merely presenting the Church’s teaching [on homosexual acts but offering] no evidence of personal advocacy for it.” The panel was also critical of a book they published in 1992, including a passage that took issue with language in Ratzinger’s “On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons” that said “neither the Church nor society at large should be surprised … [that] irrational and violent reactions increase” toward LGBT people “when homosexual activity is consequently condoned, or when civil legislation is introduced to protect behavior to which no one has any conceivable right.”

"Around the time Gramick encountered Ratzinger on the plane to Munich, his office had given the duo a final chance to “to express their interior assent to the teaching of the Catholic Church on homosexuality.” Neither complied to his satisfaction — Gramick said she told the Vatican she would “not reveal [her] personal beliefs because they are [her] personal beliefs.”

"When the order came from Ratzinger for them to stop their work, Nugent left the ministry and Gramick temporarily suspended her work. But in 2001 Gramick transferred to another order, the Sisters of Loretto, a move that she believed would circumvent the Vatican’s gag order because of technicalities of canon law. Over the next eight years, Gramick said the Sisters of Loretto leader received nine letters threatening to expel her from the order, but her supervisors covered for her and it was never carried out. (Sisters of Loretto President Pearl McGivney did not respond to interview requests from BuzzFeed News.)

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/lesterfeder/meet-the-nun-who-battled-one-pope-over-lgbt-ministry-and-now

Tancred said...

Just curious...is my salvation dependentent upon you somehow?

Anonymous said...

Is it just me, or is this one of the biggest stories since Jorge's election?

Camper

Anonymous said...

What a hoot --conspicuously absent from the opus devil enemies' list is Cardinal Roger Mahony who was just this past January featured at the Religious Education Conference in Los Angeles promoting sodomy and heresy to EVERY religious education teacher in the U.S.

Why indeed aren't these opus devils asking for Gomez to be removed for allowing Martin to instruct U.S. catechists in promoting sodomy? But opus devils don't care about sodomy and heresy corrupting children if it would lead to the downfall of one of their own dear opus devils. Hmmmmm. What can one say about hypocrites who have one standard for their enemies and another for their friends? Are they condemning heresy or are they mocking God by misusing religion to gain earthly power and glory?

http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/la-religious-ed-congress-draws-kudos-criticism

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/catholic-laity-protest-sin-confusion-at-l.a.-archdiocese-religious-ed-conference
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/disgraced-cardinal-heterodox-teaching-to-dominate-la-religious-education-conference

https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/recing-the-faith

Anonymous said...

Where is Benedict XVI on this list--if Cardinal Maradiaga is going to be condemned for heresy for stating that VC2 meant an end to hostilities between the Church and modernism, how can benny get away w/saying that VC2 was a "counter-syllabus of errors?"

"If one is looking for a global diagnosis of the text [of Gaudium et spes], one could say that it (along with the texts on religious liberty and world religions) is a revision of the Syllabus of Pius IX, a kind of counter-Syllabus ....

"In reality, the mentality that preceded the revolution still reigned in the countries with strong Catholic majorities; today almost no one denies that the Spanish and Italian concordats [accords between Church and State] tried to conserve too many things from a conception of the world that for a long time had not corresponded to reality. Likewise, almost no one can deny that this dependence on an obsolete conception of relations between the Church and State was matched by similar anachronisms in the domain of education and the attitude taken toward the modern historical-critical method ....

"Let us content ourselves here with stating that the text [of Gaudium et spes] plays the role of a counter-Syllabus to the measure that it represents an attempt to officially reconcile the Church with the world as it had become after 1789. On one hand, this visualization alone clarifies the ghetto complex that we mentioned before. On the other hand, it permits us to understand the meaning of this new relationship between the Church and the Modern World. "World" is understood here, at depth, as the spirit of modern times. The consciousness of being a detached group that existed in the Church viewed this spirit as something separate from herself and, after the hot as well as cold wars were over, she sought dialogue and cooperation with it."

https://www.traditioninaction.org/ProgressivistDoc/A_031_RatzingerCouterSyllabus.htm

Tancred said...

Benny?

Catholic Mission said...

MAY 2, 2019
Cushingite signatories unaware of Vatican Council II (Cushingite) ploy : repeat same mistake.

Vatican Council II (Cushingite) is a rupture with traditional extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS). It is a break with the old ecclesiology and the Syllabus of Errors. It has made the Athanasius Creed , on outside the Church there is no salvation, obsolete.
So traditional doctrine on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church did not exist any more for Pope Francis, at the Abu Dhabi meeting.He was referring to Vatican Council II (Cushingite) which is the only way the traditionalists, sedevacantists and conservatives interpret the Council. Just like him!!
So his response once again to the group of 19 Catholic priests and academics who have issued a 20- page open letter to the bishops,1 and who are Cushingites,is, Vatican Council II.It will always be Vatican Council II( Cushingite) until they get smart.
Similarly his response to the dubbia cardinals on Amoris Laetitia would again be Vatican Council II( Cushingite) !!!
Vatican Council II Cushingite and not Vatican Council II Feeneyite.
For Cardinals Burke and Brandmuller unknown cases of being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I), the baptism of desire(BOD) and the baptism of blood(BOB) are visible and known exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.This is Cushingism.So EENS has exceptions for the dubbia cardinals.
For them hypothetical cases, known only to God, referred to in LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are objective and known exceptions to EENS.Cushingism again.
So ecclesiology has been changed for the dubbia cardinals.It is new.They accept the New Ecclesiology based upon cases known only to God also being known to human beings.They believe that there are known exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.
So if ecclesiology can be changed said Cardinal Kasper-very directly, in an interview, then so can the Eucharist be given to the divorced and remarried.
So it was the same with Amoris Laetitia.The exception makes the rule. Subjectivity is assumed to be objective.
So Amoris Laetitia suggests that a priest can know in a particular case( which would otherwise be known only to God) when some one in mortal sin is not in mortal sin.
Sounds familiar?!
Someone else defending Amoris Laetitia said that it had the same moral theology of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
On mortal sin, the Catechism refers to those 'who know'. There is no more an objective mortal sin only.Mortal sin is not always a mortal sin anymore but depends upon conditions, which allegedly can be known to us human beings.
Sounds familiar?!
For Pope Benedict every one does not need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation but only those who know.
Why only those who know?
Since for Cardinal Ratzinger, Cardinal Kasper,Fr. Rahner and other liberal theologians at Vatican Council II, there were known exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.The excommunication of Fr. Leonard Feeney was still not lifed by Cardinal Richard Cushing, who was active at Vatican Council II.
So there were also known exceptions for Cardinal Ratzinger, to the traditional moral theology, which was black and white, and which Pope John Paul II tried to salvation with Veritatis Splendor.
So in faith( salvation) and morals( mortal sin) it is assumed that there are exceptions.It was also presumed wrongly that we humans could judge an exception.
This is Cushingism in faith and morals.The ecclesiastics used the same technique to change traditional teachings.
Now this bad reasoning is also used by the 19 signatories to interpret Vatican Council II not knowing that with Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) the Council does not contradict EENS...
-Lionel Andrades

Continued
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/05/cushingite-signatories-unaware-of.html

Anonymous said...

I'm surprised you are publicizing this letter accusing a pope of heresy, Tancred. The popes have been defending Catholicism for 2000 years. If the Habsburgs are above suspicion for defending Catholicism for 1000 years, surely the pope is 2x more above suspicion--or am I being too tuetonic?

Catholic Mission said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...
I'm surprised you are publicizing this letter accusing a pope of heresy, Tancred. The popes have been defending Catholicism for 2000 years. If the Habsburgs are above suspicion for defending Catholicism for 1000 years, surely the pope is 2x more above suspicion--or am I being too tuetonic?

Lionel: The Habsburgs defended the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and did not postulate the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance as exceptions.For Pope Francis and Pope Benedict BOD, BOB and I.I are exceptions. This is heresy.

The Habsburgs did not interpret the Creeds and Catechisms with this irrationality to create a rupture with Tradition. The present two popes have done just this.

The Habsburgs did not change moral theology. The present two popes have done just this.
I could go on..
-Lionel Andrades

gm said...

I found Jimmy Akin's response on the NCR to be nothing but a long winded ad hominem sortie attempting to discredit the scholars. Furthermore, Akin followed up on a Catholic radio program stating that in order for a Catholic to know what hereby actually is, and how the Magisterium works, one must have a PhD in ecclesiology, otherwise, keep your ignorant mouth shut. Really? If a priest were to state that Christ was a reformulation of Apollo, the sun of God, I don't need, even a high school diploma, to see that this statement would be herecy and if the priest really believed that, I dont need a council of cardinals to judge them to be a heretic.

Catholic Mission said...


1.So there is a denial of traditional EENS by Pope Francis which is confirmed in public by Pope Benedict.Pope Pius XII called EENS an 'infallible teaching'(Letter of the Holy Office 1949). So this is heresy.
2.Since both popes interpret BOD, BOB and I.I as referring to known people saved outside the Church, they have rejected the Athanasius Creed which says outside the Church there is no salvation. This is heresy.
3.With seen- in- the- flesh cases of BOD, BOB and I.I(otherwise they cannot be exceptions to EENS) for the present two popes they have changed the meaning of the Nicene Creed to ,'I believe in three or more known baptisms, desire, blood and invincible ignorance... and they exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church'. This is first class heresy.
4.Since BOD, BOB and I.I refer to known people saved outside the Church( otherwise they could not be exceptions to EENS according to the 16th century) the Catechism of Pope Pius X is contradicted when it says that all need to be members of the Catholic Church for salvation.
The Catechisms would also contradict themselves with the use of the pontiff's irrationality.They would be contradicting EENS and the Creeds according to the 16th century. This is heresy.
5.Vatican Council II can be interpreted with hypothetical cases just being hypothetical and not objectively known people saved outside the Church. Then Vatican Council II would not be a rupture with EENS according to the Magisterium of the 16th century.But this is not the interpretation of the two pontiffs. This is heresy. They intentionally interpret Vatican Council II with a hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition( past ecclesiology, ecumenism of return, Syllabus of Errors, Creeds and Catechism).
6.Dominus Iesus and Redemptoris Missio was written assuming that BOD, BOB and I.I referred to known people saved outside the Church.So there was salvation outside the Church. This is irrational but this is the basis of the New Theology.Possibilities and theoretical cases are assumed to be practical exceptions to EENS in the present times(2019). With the New Theology Dominus Iesus and Redemptoris Missio do not affirm exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church and so they are a rupture with Tradition( 16th century EENS, past ecclesiology).A heretical theology creates new doctrines.They are heretical.They are expressed in the new ecumenism( in which Protestants do not need to convert), a new ecclesiology( in which there is salvation outside the church), new mission( in which non Catholics are saved in their religion since there is known salvation outside the Church,possibilities are real people) etc.This is heretical doctrine.
7. With visible- for- the- pontiff cases of BOD, BOB and I.I and so they have re-interpreted St. Thomas Aquinas who was a Feeneyite. Aquinas affirmed the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS and knew that hypothetical cases of being saved in invincible ignorance and the case of the unknown catechumen, were not objective exceptions to EENS.The pontiffs and the CDF also project St. Augustine. St. Francis of Assisi and the other saints who affirmed exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church, as denying it.They deny it with alleged practical exceptions of BOD, BOB and I.I.The saints are interpreted heretically.

So we have heresy in theology and doctrine and it is manifest.


MAY 5, 2019
We have heresy in theology and doctrine and it is manifest
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/05/we-have-heresy-in-theology-and-doctrine.html

Anonymous said...

Lionel: I’d have more confidence that you were telling (or knew) the truth about the Habsburgs, if you weren’t limiting all your comments regarding apostasy to ‘the present two popes.’ Indeed the present B16 is one of the biggest blatherers about ‘interpreting’ VC2 (!something else you don’t mention!) to be in continuity w/tradition all the while blathering about rejecting the ecumenism of a return/conversion.
https://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/catholicchurch/benedict-xvi-rejects-ecumenism-of-the-return/#.XM9jDuhKiCc
https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/articles.cfm?id=296
In addition, B16 indicates that baptism is not necessary for anyone and says JP2 made the “decisive turn” in the new Catholic Catechism: Earlier ages had devised a teaching that seems to me rather unenlightened. They said that baptism endows us, by means of sanctifying grace, with the capacity to gaze upon God. Now, certainly, the state of original sin, from which we are freed by baptism, consists in a lack of sanctifying grace. Children who die in this way are indeed without any personal sin, so they cannot be sent to hell, but, on the other hand, they lack sanctifying grace and thus the potential for beholding God that this bestows. They will simply enjoy a state of natural blessedness, in which they will be happy. This state people called limbo.
In the course of our century, that has gradually come to seem problematic to us. This was one way in which people sought to justify the necessity of baptizing infants as early as possible, but the solution is itself questionable. Finally, the Pope [John Paul II] made a decisive turn in the [1995] encyclical Evangelium Vitae, a change already anticipated by the [1992] Catechism of the Catholic Church, when he expressed the simple hope that God is powerful enough to draw to himself all those who were unable to receive the sacrament.”
(Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, God and the World: A Conversation with Peter Seewald [San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 2002], pp. 401-402)
https://novusordowatch.org/cardinal-ratzinger-denies-infant-baptism/
Regarding the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, all you have to do is look at the pic of JP2’s prayer service at Assisi in 1986 to know that JP2 didn’t believe or defend it. He also held a mass w/nude women, consolidated the sodomite takeover of the seminaries and priesthood, the pedophile raping of children, and sexual corruption of the youth w/theology of the bawdy.
https://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/catholicchurch/anti-pope-john-paul-ii/#.XM9nZOhKiCc
J23 and P6 subscribed to these heresies before JP1 and JP2—we know this because to show that they were ‘in solidarity’ or ‘in continuity’ w/those two and their Vatican Council 2, JP1 & JP2 took their names. The heresies of P6 are well documented—here’s one site:
https://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/catholicchurch/anti-pope-paul-vi/#.XM9Zh-hKiCc
You also don’t mention the changes to the sacraments done by P6:
“If you consider that the word “faith” is no longer mentioned even in the Rite of Baptism, when the parents are questioned about what they ask of the Church of God for their child, the significance of the problem is very clear”, added the Cardinal
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2015/05/cardinal-sarah-new-rite-of-baptism.html
Ordination, Holy Sacrifice of the Mass:
https://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/catholicchurch/new-mass-invalid/#.XM9r4ehKiCc
P6 inverted the ends of marriage in Humanae Vitae which change was incorporated into JP2’s new catechism. Sure Francis can annul all Catholic ‘marriages’—none were valid from the get go, but soon the VC2 church will be ‘blessing’ sodomite ‘marriages’ – no creation possible/completely fruitless.
https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2015/10/17/the-ends-of-marriage-since-vatican-ii/
https://www.newwaysministry.org/2018/04/10/french-priest-says-pope-francis-approved-blessing-gay-couples/
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-catholic-churchs-looming-fight-over-same-sex-blessings-1527009408

Anonymous said...

Lionel, It is not the present two popes, but EVERY POPE from J23 who have professed the Anti-Christ: Jesus Christ is NOT the Son of God and He did NOT die for our sins—neither repentance nor savior are necessary or true basis of reality: “You would now no longer describe it in such a way that God gave his own son, because we humans were so sinful? You would no longer describe it like this?" Archbishop of Freiburg, Robert Zollitsch responded, "No."”
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2009/04/christ-did-not-die-for-sins-of-people.html Everything that was black is now white.
https://www.traditioninaction.org/RevolutionPhotos/A624-Dog.htm
https://www.americamagazine.org/issue/jack-bobby-ted
http://thepinoycatholic.blogspot.com/2014/11/black-is-liturgical-color.html
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/style/le-privilege-du-blanc-pope-francis-has-relaxed-strict-dress/

Anonymous said...

Lionel: How the Habsburgs profess VC2, not Catholicism: “Today I deleted and re-posted a fanboy tweet about St. Pius V. because my mentioning the excommunication of Elisabeth I. in a positive way can considered to be hurtful to Anglicans and led to anger. Thanks to @SieurdePonthieu (and @AlexanderFaludy for feedback.”

https://twitter.com/EduardHabsburg/status/1123103460373745664

“I took to Twitter to show the world that Catholics are not sad, prudish and world-fleeing weirdos, but people who enjoy MODERN culture and can be fun in a discussion. Just because I have strong OPINIONS about the fundamental truths of my faith doesn’t mean I won’t respect your right to have a different opinion. In fact, much too rarely—but sometimes still—I record my podcast “Glaubenssache” with my BRILLIANT ATHEIST FRIEND Alexander Waschkau. We definitely disagree on quite a lot of things, but AGREE ON HUMANIST PRINCIPLES and the RIGHT to EXPRESS OPINIONS.”
https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2018/11/05/habsburg-twitter-account-interview-hungarys-ambassador-vatican

Even the new catholic catechism teaches: "50. By natural reason man can know God with certainty, on the basis of his works." http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s1c2a1.htm

So how can an irrational atheist be brilliant? How can one be a friend of God and also the friend of someone who denies the existence of God? Can a Catholic agree to a “right” to “express the view” that God (I AM) does not exist any more than a Catholic could agree to a “right” to bear false witness against one’s neighbor?

What about accepting the principles of humanism?
“Some core principles are important: respect for life and human dignity; equal rights and social justice; respect for cultural diversity, as well as a sense of shared responsibility and a commitment to international solidarity. These principles are all fundamental aspects of our common humanity. It is an approach that recognizes the diversity of knowledge systems, worldviews, and conceptions of well-being as a source of wealth. “
https://trenducation.wordpress.com/2016/04/25/education-needs-a-humanistic-approach/

Don’t these humanist principles implicitly deny extra ecclesiam and teach as Francis recently did that God (if He existed) wills a diversity of religions (as a source of wealth!)? Don’t they establish equality of religions by giving everyone equal ‘rights’? Humanist principles deny revelation—and thus deny God’s right to express Himself. How can a Catholic accept that or any principles that stem from the following ideas:
“Most humanists would agree with the ideas below:
• There are no supernatural beings.
• The material universe is the only thing that exists.
• Science provides the only reliable source of knowledge about this universe.
• We only live this life-there is no after-life, and no such thing as reincarnation.
• Human beings can live ethical and fulfilling lives without religious beliefs.
• Human beings derive their moral code from the lessons of history, personal experience, and thought.
While atheism is merely the absence of belief, humanism is a positive attitude to the world, centred on human experience, thought, and hopes.” [Read last sentence again: humanism combines denial of God (atheism) w/a positive attitude toward the world (whose ruler (prince) is Satan)—how can a Catholic accept that? And yet your Habsburg, formed by VC2, brags about doing so!]
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/atheism/types/humanism.shtml

Anonymous said...

Is Habsburg a Catholic or a humanist himself—here are his hopes for the future: “That Europe finds its core again and grows ever stronger and larger. That the church steers through the current difficult times and emerges fresher, renewed and centered on its values (not God/Jesus Christ who doesn’t exist!). That modern media contribute to better understanding between people.” [Catholics hope for the return of Jesus Christ, that their sins will be forgiven, and for the salvation of souls and that God would be glorified.]
How do you pray? “My central and most important prayer time is Lauds which, by the grace of God, I manage to have almost every day. I do it before we wake up the kids, with a steaming cup of coffee, which of course reminds me of the old Jesuit and Dominican joke about whether you're allowed to smoke while praying. On the suggestion of the Greek Catholic Metropolitan in Hungary I try to sing my Lauds; I have really found that “he who sings prays twice.” [Like typical VC2 formed Catholic: he drinks a steaming cup of coffee, while offering tepid, lukewarm, disrespectful, joking, self-worship to God and like the Pharisee he don’t even pray once! Difficult times but only prays VC2 Lauds (no sacrifice, fasting, on your knees) And Noe, and Daniel, and Job be in the midst thereof: as I live, saith the Lord God, they shall deliver neither son nor daughter: but they shall only deliver their own souls by their justice.]

https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2018/11/05/habsburg-twitter-account-interview-hungarys-ambassador-vatican

More Habsburg defense of interfaith/ecumenism:
“The ambassador says he can’t look into the hearts of members of the Hungarian government but has the impression many are really religious. It’s very interesting how surprised diplomats and politicians are outside Hungary, when I mention that Viktor Orban is a Protestant, because they were very sure he’s a Catholic”.

"Archduke Joseph was a very progressive personality, he is the founder of the Hungarian branch,”

"The Habsburg Empire was an empire in a time of rising nationalism, which tried to respect nationalities. There were Jewish, Muslim and Christian chaplains in the army (probably why the Army lost the war). Aristocrats have a long tradition and a lot of experience in peacefully keeping Europe together. If you ask what is the most important for the Habsburgs, I say it’s faith – we are Catholics -, family and working for a peaceful Europe,”– he said. Eduard Habsburg added that aristocrats will never be nationalists.

https://thehungaryjournal.com/2017/10/05/eduard-habsburg-the-habsburgs-are-working-for-a-more-peaceful-europe/

Ferdinand von Habsburg-Lothringen (IDHA 9, MIHA) was recently part of a delegation from the South Sudan Council of Churches

https://iiha.blog.fordham.edu/2016/10/30/alumni-update-ferdinand-von-habsburg-lothringen-idha-9-miha-3/
The Holy Father was deeply touched and expressed his concern for the sufferìng people of
South sudan. He appreciated the role of the Church in the journey towards peace in the
country and also the strong spirit of ecumenism since he has now been invited three times
to visii South Sudan (firstly by His Excellency President Salva Kiir Hayardit, secondly by the South Sudan Catholic Bishops' Conference and lastly by our ecumenical church delegation)' he responded, "I will come"
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1fv2eqj87XEbXNTMjBBeWN0Sms/view

Habsburgs heavily involved w/EU—out of self interest for their worldly empire. But the EU is anti-christ, modeled after the tower of babel and the harlot (Europa) riding the beast.

https://mattbell.org/why-is-the-strasbourg-parliament-based-on-tower-of-babel

Catholic Mission said...

Habsburgs heavily involved w/EU—out of self interest for their worldly empire. But the EU is anti-christ, modeled after the tower of babel and the harlot (Europa) riding the beast.

Lionel:
Agreed.
However when the Habsburg Empire existed it was a Catholic Empire. The bishops and priests affirmed EENS without BOD, BOB and I.I referring to personally known people saved outside the Church.
This is the error now.It also needs to be corrected by the Habsburg families today.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...