/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>658214

Would it be sacrilegious to get a rosary tattoo on my wrist? I want to have one with me that I won't break or lose.

>>851500

Thank you anon. I want to dedicate myself to Christ. I am bumbling along in my faith, because I have no sense of direction, I simply wish I had someone I can trust to teach me the faith. But I see the problems in the Church, and my ability to trust any priest is weakened, as I am afraid that I will be deceived. Or that I will become hard hearted. I DESPERATELY need a guide, but am in no real position to get one as I depend on my family to get me from place to place. The nearest ICKSP is a few towns away, and my family is not able to take me as they are always busy. I want to dedicate my life to God, but I am blind as a bat. and I hear different things from different people on V2 for example. Some say it is infallible, some not. Some say that V2 teachings was taken manipulated by modernists, some say it is all wrong. I am not sure what to think. Father Ripperger says somethings that tke me aback. (Not just theological) Example being when he said that Nicotine could treat Tourette syndrome( Which I have along with autism) It may do that, but it is extremely addicting and is a case of where the cure is worse than the disease. I want someone to tell me the truth and not mere opinions. I here all sorts of conspiracies from some traditionalists. Which warries me, Because when I was a fascist, I believed some...wacky and evil stuff which, And am hesitant to trust extraordinary claims (Which is why I also distrust a lot of modern science, as it often makes conjectures about things that cannot really be replicated, as well as many being Marxists) If I come off moderate, I am not. I simply can't make tails of the world. I hear many conflicting view points and it overwhelms me. I would write off V2 if Fulton Sheen had not participated at the Council. He stated they had put in a lot of effort into it, that it was in part vague, as was the Council of Trent was vague in regards to the Eucharist (because there was conflicting views among Jesuits, Dominicans, etc about the theology of the Real Presence)

“What the Council did was establish equilibrium or balance between these extremes—between evangelization and human progress, between soul-winning and society-saving, between divine salvation and human liberation. It made both inseparable. The Council decided that we must beget children of God through evangelization but not without giving witness to fraternal love and a sensitiveness to humanity’s desire for freedom and justice.”

Venerable Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen

I may be wrong...but it seems to me V2 was a case of something that was butchered, drawn, and quartered by the 'spirit of V2' as the modernists put it. What I have HEARD, is that it went south around the time of the proclamation of Humanae Vitae, at which point modernists went ape**** crazy and started working overtime.

I may be wrong, but NO....MIGHT work, if they made it more...reverent

Link related is what a NO mass COULD be....if it were more reverent. It may not have be a TLM...BUT...it can be a baby step in the right direction. I think work needs to be done to reform the NO masses throughout the West, to make it more Catholic and less...Protestant. Would I like TLM all over? YES! But I think we should fix the NO to get to that point. But it is FAR better than the irreverent NO Mass I went to today. No singing, laity handing out the eucharist, rushed service. I think maybe some TLM could also train in NO, so that they can conduct more of link related throughout. I could be a fool, but it is my two cents. ; /

>>851500

I think the true faithful should HIJACK the NO mass, and take it from those that abuse it and pervert it. It might be a step in the right direction, but it might work, unless I am wrong.

>>851500

Step 1. Remove liturgical abuse. No laity handing out communion, no communion in the hand. No altar girls.

Step 2. Revise music- remove much of the vernacular and replace with more Latin

Step 3 More Confession if possible.

Step 4 Better catechesis

>>851482

There is ONE big thing that can help me: By being around those living holy lives, I can be lifted up spiritually by being inspired by living the way they live and pray and learning from them. I think those you spend time with can really affect how you develop spiritually. They can help you grow...or stunt your growth, or even lose it. Same with marriage. A man MUST be virtuous to be worthy of a virtuous women.. On the opposite end, a wicked man is worthy of a wicked woman.

>>851505

I'm not sure a deliberate takeover is necessary. In my experience (American), the divide between the NO and TLM is most noticably generational; I've observed 80% Boomers and 20% Gens. X/Y/Z attending the NO, and 10% Boomers and 90% Gens. X/Y/Z attending the TLM. I find most Boomers range between left-leaning and right-leaning, and Millennials are quite firmly conservative, so there is something of a political divide too.

Now, the reason I mention all of this is because the Baby Boomer generation is quickly passing, and in only a decade or two will no longer be with us in the Church. A vacuum presents itself and we find less of a generational and more of a political divide: the liberal minority who wish to commit liturgical abuse are attending the NO, and the conservative majority finds comfort in the thriving TLM. The Church is shrinking as more lukewarms jump ship, and it must make a crucial decision: the TLM once again becomes the Ordinary Form, and is now being offered at most Catholic parishes across the U.S.. The NO still exists, but exists only to appease the liberal Catholic minority who have a strange obsession with abolishing every tradition of our beloved Church.

A deliberate takeover isn't necessary - we're already headed in that direction.

>>851482

I think it virtually IS the only way. I am being dragged down by the people around me. People I care about.

>oh anon you don't need confession! you are a saint!

>you know more than most priests and Catholics anon

> You don't need to go to confession to take communion anon. You deserve it!

THIS kind of stuff just...disgusts me. Who are THEY to say that? THEY did not even teach ME the faith. They did not even baptize me as a kid. If I had died before I was converted I would likely be in HELL! This

tepidity....ANGERS me to no end...I want to be free of this NONSENSE...this indifference....OTHERWISE I am doomed. I hate being told lies. I hate being misled. I hate being taken advantage of. I want to be around those

that can inspire me to be better...more virtuous. I want to be a saint. But I NEED a guide. BADLY. I NEED structure and support.

>>851549

Don't be disgusted or angry.

This isn't a bad cross at all, but it was the cross chosen for you so you must overcome it.

Most of the time if you reject the cross given you, you just get a more difficult cross.

Think of it as an opportunity to spread the Word of God and the Christian charity of correcting their errors.

Go to confession, confess the sin of not honoring your parents, and then say a rosary for personal peace and the grace to educate your parents in the faith.

>>851535

I guess we need to give to the Saint Thomas Aquinas and Our Lady of Guadalupe seminaries to support the formation of new priests.

The FSSP is helping N.O. priest to learn to say the Latin Mass and teaching them the basics of Catholic belief. For example, the Eucharist is the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ.

Saving souls is what is most important. We need more priest to hear confession and serve Mass more than anything on this earth, and many of our Catholic Charities sometimes stray in who they help.

We also need real Catholic schools from from K-12. Children shouldn't be exposed to the wickedness of this world found in public schools. Good Catholics should grow up with other good Catholics. Sadly, most Catholic schools are N.O.

>>851568

I'm just a dog. My patron Saint of Confirmation, if that ever happens, will be Saint Rocco, Patron Saint of Dogs, epidemics and bad knees.

I prayed to Saint Rocco as a dog, and asked that he pray to our Lady to give me faith, grace and to heal my knee. All was given to me.

>>851579

I with you the best with your spiritual journey

>>851586

*wish

>>851579

I will also say this about what you told me.

I prayed for inner peace on the rosary as you suggested. I must also say that I have a statue of Mother Mary in my room on the shelf. And as I was doing what you said, I was drawn up to look up at here. And things started to fall into place. I could have imagine it…but it was like she was watching me through the statue. A lot of the fog I felt over the years…lifted. I love Mary…she is the best mother one could ask.

What did I do to deserve Him and Her? I was a wicked sinner. He could have cast me away. But…he called me.

I remember back in March, I went to a Cathedral and they had us a sign. I remember being nervous about writing badly. But…as I was about to sign it…I felt my hand being guided by a force by itself. My mom was behind me, and she said my handwriting was so beautiful that she though I had been practicing. I do not think I could have EVER written that neatly ever again. My penmanship is atrocious. Also, my dads camera on his phone was not working several week prior. But then…it started working as we were in the cathedral. It feels like…it was meant to be with Him…and Her.

Blessed are thou O Lord, for you have created me

Blessed are thou, O Lord, because you did not cast me into the exterior darkness, but brought me into your admirable light.

Blessed art thou O Lord, because you made Your Mother, my Mother as well.

Blessed are thou O Lord, because you made me for yourself. You redeemed me of my sins.

Blessed are thou O Lord, because you let me fall all those years…so that I would turn back to you. Otherwise, I may become lukewarm and far from you, my Lord, my God

Blessed are thou O Lord, because you loved me even when I did not reciprocate your love

May I be forever yours. : D

Is Belphegor an official demon in Catholic theology or just Protestant fanfiction?

>>851578

Catholic school taught me to fukcin swear like a sailor. Real Catholics are nothing like the noobs who populate Catholic discords. We're all horny angry people because we go to a church decorated with vaginal symbolism every week to listen to a libtard boomer gaslight us. Public schools are far safer for a child as long as they're White.

>>851606

Are you a schizophrenic woman or something?

>>851579

You're not even confirmed and you make up a third of the fukcing Catholic General? This whole place should be nuked.

>>851620

He also said he's debating leaving his wife over her lack of support for his tradcath ideals

He complains that any poster criticizing roman catholicism is a troll yet angrily inserts his take on the rcc (sede) being the one true church when its completely off topic. You can tell because his posts are extremely distinctive.

He has problems

>>851626

WAIT! is He the sede that I have been arguing with elsewhere? I thought I was talking with someone else?!

I am now confused

>>849518

Apparently, most of the major subreddits are moderated by the same 4 mods or something. I didn't even watch this video fully mind you but I intend to!

>>849518

Apparently, most of the major subreddits are moderated by the same 4 mods or something. I didn't even watch this video fully mind you but I intend to!

>>851631

>>851620

>You're not even confirmed and you make up a third of the fukcing Catholic General?

Yes. I guess I'm the only real Catholic here. None of you others spread the faith.

What's funny is that you're confirmed, and don't even know what that obligates you to do!

Catholic general would be dead without my posts. What kind of "catholic" complains because I bump it?!

> This whole place should be nuked.

Yes. Most posters lead souls to hell, you'd be better off without it.

>>851619

I thought he was a Catholic struggling with Anger issues. Not sure what's going on now.

>>851631

The differences between the SSPV (sedes) SSPX and FSSP are matters of fact; is there a valid Pope or not.

The differences between the trad catholics and the Novus ordo are matters of faith. The N.O. reject many of the Church councils like the Council of Trent.

They're not even really catholic.

You have to decide if you want a "Pope" who drags pagan idols before the alter of God, advocates sodomy, protects child traffickers, is a socialist, worships Gaia, supports the new world order and all that wickedness. Christ said if your eye leads you to hell, pluck it out.

>>851639

I literally got banned for calling out logical fallacies on Reddit because it's "disrespectful."

>>851968

Because it offends them and you're supposed to just go along with them regardless of whether it's a fallacy or not. Redditors are a lost cause in general, they don't even know that they're slaves.

I'll post here since the prot posts are irrelevant to me.

I have been diagnosed with depression a couple of months ago, and I am taking antidepressants along with anxiolytics. Basically I am dealing with a crushing anxiety that leaves me unable to do basic s— most of the time.

I also realized that despair is a grave sin. However, I don't know to what extent I am sinning, since I have a mental illness that is partially causing that despair. I tried to talk about this with a priest during confession but his answers weren't quite clear. Should I keep confessing despair as one of my sins as long as I have depression? It's not something obvious like masturbation, where you know when you did or didn't do it. I don't even know if I am really ever in a state of grace since the depression doesn't just goes away after confessing. I feel very helpless about this, but also feel some kind of guilt still.

If anybody's gone through the same stuff, please share.

God bless.

>>852217

Despair is the loss of hope of God's mercy. Going to confession means you have hope in God's mercy; So, no, your mental despair is not a mortal sin. The kind of despair you have, an emotional state of depression, is different than the kind which is the sin, the loss of hope of God's mercy.

You can't feel if you're in a state of sanctifying grace.

I'm going by 329 in Baltimore Catechism 4.

What do you guys think of Origen's teaching that even demons will be saved? It sounds kind of controversial, especially coming from the guy who defined and fought against heresy. But it also is the logical conclusion of the modern theme of the unchosen replacing the chosen. Maybe that's why the notion of jews once being chosen and good and then magically turning evil always turned me off. They must've always been evil or else there's really no reason for God not to arbitrarily say "winnie the pooh you, humans. You're not chosen anymore. Demons are my new favorite." which isn't a very Logos thing to do. It's usually Satan who inverts things.

>>852233

Sweet, thematically spooky dubdubs.

>>852233

Pretty sure, having just looked at the Examination of Conscience for Adults, that reading this Origen fellow and his false teachings is a mortal sin.

>>852245

The absolute state of modern 'catholics' who don't know Origen or his role as one of the earliest Church Fathers who greatly influenced the Catholic Church on every level, with even Pope Benedict XVI calling on all Catholics to accept his teachings

>>852233

>What do you guys think of Origen's teaching that even demons will be saved?

He didn't. He taught theology from which one could conclude that demons potentially *could* not would be saved. If you really think he taught that they would, so as to affirm the heresy of universalism, cite it.

See the Summa Theologae Prima Pars 64: Sin of the Fallen Angels as for reason why they *won't*. To hint, it's to do with their eternal nature + the intellectual sins of pride and envy.

>>852259

>He taught theology from which one could conclude that demons potentially *could* not would be saved.

Yes, that's why I said demons not ALL demons. Even though we believe we replaced the jews we don't believe every Christian is going to heaven.

>See the Summa Theologae Prima Pars 64: Sin of the Fallen Angels as for reason why they *won't*. To hint, it's to do with their eternal nature + the intellectual sins of pride and envy.

I'm aware of this and side with St. Thomas on the matter. I was thinking of bringing it up but I wanted to see how modern people would respond without the authority of a Saint influencing them. One thing I am genuinely curious about though is how God would save a demonized member of His elect to prove a point, basically the story of Jesus except with a human who's not God. Imagine if one such elect is a devout conservative Christian who's into goth. He would fit in like a wallflower hundreds of years ago but nowadays he would be slandered and demonized by people who self-identify as Christians. Would God do anything to prove he was right or just leave the masses to dig deeper into their errors?

>>852245

People can be wrong about something and still become a Saint as is the case with Origen.

>>852250

Modern Catholics are just Protestants but a few decades behind them. Even going to Catholic school doesn't help because everything's infiltrated now. I knew something was seriously wrong when "Do what thou wilt." started being considered evil and satanic instead of a St. Augustine quote just because some satanist said it centuries later.

>>852250

Church teachings is the dogma of the faith as found in the ecumenical councils approved by the Popes under their papal infallibility.

The Lateran Council IV is clear on this: demons are not saved, but man can be saved because the first sin of man was at the suggestion of the devil. Demons are damned and will not be saved.

>>852263

Well, my bad. I didn't know Origen was a saint. I still don't know that he was a saint.

https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11306b.htm

He's not on the list.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_saints

But even Saint Augustine was in error when he contradicted a papal bull. e.g. an error condemned by Pope Alexander VIII so sainthood is a moot point.

As to what I think about it, I think it's in error because I fully accept the teachings of the Catholic church.

>>852264

I checked and he's definitely not a doctor of the church at least. Amusingly, Crysostom is though, meaning antisemitism is officially sound doctrine. Thomas is a doctor though, meaning his general theology is officially sound by church decree, so he has more ethos than Origen and I don't doubt his logos is more sound as well. The nice thing about Thomism is how fleshed out it is, leaving little room for error. No doubt, that's why the enemies of the church prefer weaponized ambiguity and never teach the amphiboly fallacy.

I will say what's interesting is Tolkien's character Sauron commits the exact same sin Satan does, specifically the desire for absolute control without God. Persuasion without Logos, which is exactly what the one ring did. Of course Tolkien refused to make direct allegories, which is why Sauron is a servant of Melkor, not the supreme ruler of evil like Satan is.

If you've ever met a narcissist you will know quite well they are extremely concerned about image and persuasion but will refuse to use non-fallacious logic in their persuasion. They don't want to be honest with you but they still want people to like them and do what they want. Exorcists describe demonic behavior very similarly to how narcissistic personality disorder is described. If you haven't met a narcissist you can just read about the pharisees in the Gospels to get a good idea.

>>852225

Thanks a lot anon, that's the answer I was looking for.

>You can't feel if you're in a state of sanctifying grace.

Interesting, I never really thought of that, though it's obviously true.

how can you beieve you are tard if pope posts he is 4 homosex?

Apparently, according to this post:

>>>/hydrus/15124

all of the BOs on this website have been sent a warning that the .onion version of this website may soon be the only available version of the website. Just thought I'd let fellow Catholics know of this.

Just in case you're unaware, you can access this site's Tor address on its homepage. Just Ctrl+F "tor address" on the homepage if you don't immediately see it. Of course, this requires the Tor browser.

>>852233

IIRC, Origen also believed in reincarnation. Just because a man's a Saint, doesn't mean everything he said was right.

>>847198

>Modern Catholics are bad that means Catholicism is bad

>>852391

Both of those are present tense and say the same thing so logically yes.

I feel like the internet's trying to turn me into a demon, especially cuckchan and reddit.

>>851567

btw why are Catholics in the US so progressive? In Brazil the Catholic church has always been pretty reactionary.

Here is Paulo Ricardo, he is one of the priests with the biggest internet following and he has 1million + viwers with an entire series about cultural marxism, each video has like 200k+ views or something

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJi7CugwzVw

>>852397

>I feel like the internet's trying to turn me into a demon, especially cuckchan and reddit.

On the other hand, it was on cuckchan /pol/ in a /cg/ thread that I learned that the Latin Mass and traditional Catholicism per the pre-Vatican II faith still existed.

Until then I thought the Gates of Hell prevailed, and the Church was over. That was wrong.

>>852403

when was this? I used to do those thread around 2019. Seems longer maybe. I stopped doing it because I felt that I was preaching to literal children. But if If it was one of my threads, good on you boy. How old are you?

Maybe I should preach there again. It is often painful, but it MIGHT do some good.

>>852412

oh sorry, my bad.

>>852412

I have no idea if it was your thread.

I am 65. I was baptized Catholic in the Latin Rite at birth.

>>852403

Cuckchan is the most obviously demonic place I've ever been to. They're triggered by logic and only obey anger. Both those reactions are pretty clear signs of demonic influence. I don't think a pearl turns a junkyard into a jewelry shop.

>>852544

Neither chan was as bad as they are now. They got the attention of the jews about the time that Trump started his campaign for president in 2015.

Who owns the Catholic Churches?

Pretty sure that the SSPV who the Novus Ordo hates very much as "sedes", own their own Churches. That's because there are so few SSPV churches.

The FSSP moves into failing novus ordo churches (or even failed Lutheran Churches) but it seems the N.O. diocese owns the property.

Put what about the SSPX? They're irregular with the church with limited jurisdiction.

The reason why I'm asking is because I expect Pope Frances to soon trash the Council of Trent and the Ecclesia Dei of Pope John Paul II and the Summorum Pontificum of Pope Benedict XVI as soon as Pope Benedict XVI dies and then outlaw the Latin Mass.

Then the SSPV would be unaffected, the FSSP will be without a church (disaster) but what of the SSPX?

Not looking for an argument, just the objective fact of who controls the property of the SSPX.

>>852233

It's heretical and such belief has been condemned in a Council.

>>852383

Origen is not a saint because of weird/heretical teachings of his. I don't want to assume he was damned but he may never be canonized.

>>852567

If he is the true Pope he just can't go and trash Trent and forbid the TLM. I guess the SSPX controls its own parishes but they could be pressed on this. The SSPX wants to have good relations with Rome.

>>852571

>If he is the true Pope he just can't go and trash Trent and forbid the TLM.

Trent says that we are to treat those who don't say the mass in Latin, or let the un-ordained touch the Eucharist as anathema

a•nath•e•ma ə-năth′ə-mə

n. A formal ecclesiastical ban, curse, or excommunication.

n. A vehement denunciation; a curse.

n. One that is cursed or damned.

and yet, we have the new mass with women handing out the Eucharist as if they were pretzels at a party and the archbishop of the dioceses thought this was a good selling point for the yearly Catholic Appeal. .

Pope Francis did a survey on the Latin Mass. I think a crisis is coming when Pope Benedict dies. why? Because Pope Benedict might call him a heretic if Pope Francis forbids the Latin mass of Trent. .

>>852554

Yeah, but I don't think you can even compare us to cuckchan. Logos still seems to hold power here.

>>852571

This is interesting. I used to heavily dislike Origen and now I find out both Christian Identity and Catholicism do too, the two western Christian religions the jews actually do explicitly hate. Did Origen have any suspicious ties to the Pharisees? Did he believe anything not just spiritually but physically cucked?

We Need Priests More than anything!

Real priest for real Catholics. More than food, more than feeding the poor (Man does not live by bread alone).

I am blessed that it is only a 40 minute drive to my FSSP parish in our Latin Mass church. Most people don't live close enough to make it to a real mass.

Even then, with the godless government limiting how many can attend mass and Cannon Law limiting how many masses a priest may say in a day, there isn't room for all of us in the Church on Holy Days of Obligation.

We need more Priest more than anything. Most folks aren't even as blessed as I am with a parish just 40 minutes away with two excellent priests! There isn't a valid mass in all of the state of Oregon and many other states.

Please donate to the Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary for the formation of new priests.

http://www.fsspolgs.org/

They talk scripture, but their affinity is for sin above God.

They believe that religion should fit their beliefs and desire for abortion, contraception and wickedness, and not the narrow path given by God.

It's sad to see them damn themselves to hell and try to drag real Catholics down with them.

>>852587

I think he just got into a deep Neo-Platonic rabbithole and believed in its gnostic mythos of reincarnation, preexistence and disdain towards matter. His weirdest belief I know is that, as spheres are perfect bodies, our resurrection will be done into spherical bodies including the body of Our Lord. This was condemned in the Synod of Constantinople.

>>852607

>I think he just got into a deep Neo-Platonic rabbithole

>The problem is logic/Logos/Jesus

We need another flood. ULTRON!!!

Since we can talk about Rome in this thread, do you guys think the wolf that nursed Romulus and Remus might be symbolic of Mary eventually becoming the adoptive mother of Rome?

>>852639

No. Absolutely not.

>>852640

That reply was a bit too fast and frantic for me to trust you. It smells like "SHUT IT DOWN!!!"

>>852641

Go discuss you paganism and irreverence to the Blessed Virgin on /pagan/. This is a Catholic thread on a christian board

>>852649

Irreverence? I suppose Lewis making Jesus a lion is irreverent too?

>>852651

Saying that because Lewis "made Jesus a lion" entitles you to say that the blessed Virgin is the beast who sucked Romulus and Remus in some pagan myth is not just disgusting and vile, it's heretical.

>>852656

A strong sense of disgust is a sign of low IQ. I don't see a problem with it. If anything to me it glorifies her because that wolf adopted and unconditionally loved two lost children and was honored by Rome for many centuries. In Rome the wolf was revered as a symbol of civilization not just a mere beast.

>In RCIA but praying the rosary daily

>Yesterday morning I feel the call to give up my pornography addiction again

>First day goes well, feeling blessed

>Second day is a little rough, so I pray another rosary for the extra fortitude

>Not 5 minutes after, temptation is gnawing at me again

Man, wonder if being able to receive the eucharist would make this any less miserable. My confirmation cannot come soon enough.

>>852664

>If you're disgusted by my heresy in comparing the Blessed Virgin to a Literal bitch, and Jesus to a mythological pagan, you're low IQ.

You're just trolling now.

>>852688

How dare you call the Blessed Virgin a bitch. I'll have you know wolves are among the noblest of creatures. They are instinctively monogamous and the alpha of the pack is always without exception the father. The concept of the alpha status being gained through posturing or violence is a projection by that vile disgusting ape-like human species which commits endless violence against its own kind, creates millions of single mothers, and soils its own mind with chemicals. Calling the Blessed Virgin a human is being insulting and I will not stand for it. It wasn't until Rome united under the wolf that the foul apish species finally gained some semblance of civilization. And to this day they still desire to revert to the ways of the jungle. Do not dare call Mary a human, you filthy heretic. She is far greater than that and does not deserve to be compared to such a repulsive sinful species. I'm just satirizing you btw, but I think you get my point. However, most of what I said is factually true.

Give me a rundown on grace/losing grace and salvation

t.has had an evangelical talk my ear off about how anything outside of just believing Jesus is "made up s—" (including going to church and following the commandments)

>>852697

Mortal sin offends God and keeps you from heaven.

"Go and sin no more" is what Jesus said to the harlot who was forgiven.

Some Protestant denominations take the forgiveness and then believe they are saved no matter what they do. The idea is wicked satanic nonsense that leads souls to hell!

Accepting Jesus as Lord means you obey your Lord and try not to offend him. It doesn't mean he gives you license to do wickedness and then enter heaven.

Humm…

Are you Catholic? Strange question for a Catholic to ask.

>>852699

Yea I'm a Catholic (a bit of brainlet one at that), I just wanted to know what he and a lot of other evangelical types have ranting and raving about to me.

I even brought up that believing in Jesus would entail following his laws and he replied by saying "so you believe in being saved by works?!"

I have no Idea what to tell him to be honest

Catholicism is not a denomination of Christianity. You pray to mortal men and women who came and passed, you read from books that are deuterocanonical and apocryphal, and you teach that the sheer grace of God through Jesus is not the only way of salvation.

Catholicism is a religion of hypocrisy, self -righteousness, and idolatry.

>>852710

Sounds like this person wants to twist your words as your example is that he took obediance to God to mean you believe salvation by works.

Don't even play the Protestant's game.

>>852711

Christianity didn't pop up from King Henry's lust to be a serial polygamist and to loot the Church or from Luther's lust to boink a nun.

The only path to salvation is through the Catholic Church.

Whatever excuses protestants make for continuing to sin and fooling themselves that they are "once saved, always saved" is dangerously wrong.

>>852716

Coming from the faggot who got pissy over a real Catholic calling Mary a symbol of civilization and unconditional motherly love?

>>852719

You are not Catholic, but are trolling.

If I'm wrong, I'll pray you repent of your heresy and paganism and false witness.

>>852721

False witness is what you're doing right now. Are your other two accusations projection as well?

>>852723

>no, you!

And yet you post this wickeness

>>852719

You are truly lost.

>>852725

>no, you!

Well duh of course I'm going to point out it's you committing false witness in your post and projecting your own sin because that's exactly what you did. Strawmanning it doesn't decrease the severity of your error nor does it change the fact it compromises your ethos and makes you suspect for also projecting your other libelous accusations.

>And yet you post this wickeness

Absolutely ironic you dare bear the Catholic flag and then call Mary's virtues of civilization and unconditional love wickedness. Let go of your pride and repent of your sins instead of distracting your mind from your errors by slandering those who love the Holy Mother.

>>848781

>Does anyone have any traditional catholic/conservative catholic podcast they enjoy?

Padre Peregrino, Pints with Aquinas, First Things, and Sensus Fidelium are all good even if somewhat normie.

>>852740

>>850896

Why are you still here?

>>852814

>I am, at best, a protestant troll leading souls to hell.

I'm here to lead those souls back.

… then Francis' is repudiating the Catholic faith in his Amoris Laetitia.

List of the heresies start at about 5:20

What are you giving up for lent?

I'm thinking I'll give up playing "The Sims", and maybe /pol/.

Of course, the flesh of warm blooded animals on Fridays and for 2 meals a day.

I'm exempt from fasting because I'm old.

>>853117

I am considering giving up Soda and Coffee and fast food.

>>853120

Sounds tough, as caffeine is physically addictive! Excellent mortification potential!

>>853117

>>853120

Coffee and falling asleep with music/video. It's a very bad habit since I can't fall asleep in complete silence anymore.

(I started doing it because I have trouble controlling my thoughts when trying to fall asleep, one lead to the next and I keep thinking about mundane stuff. I can't help it, so focusing on listening while trying to sleep was quite effective, too much so I'd say.)

i should repeat a small prayer until I doze off instead.

But I only recently decided to convert, it will be my first lent.

I've been trying to pray the rosary daily but it's hard, I have so many bad/sinful habit I need to get rid off, it seems too much to stop everything at once. However you can't compromise with sin, I have to change now.

I hope my eventual baptism, confessions, taking the Eucharist and partaking in the life of my parish will help me go through this ordeal in a more consistent manners. As things are now I'm pretty ashamed of what kind of person I am.

On the topic of Lent, are you guys going to observe the Ember Days this Lent? Here's some videos about them. They help with vocations.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsDJBfgOdDM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ea7wRDUOSZ0

>>853145

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GqJTnZTzqc

I dread confession (our new parish priest told me to get out of the confessional once) and I fear that I'm unintentionally committing sacrilege if I take communion. For communion I'd almost rather just sit in the pew and let people trip over me.

Covid has been a blessing because the Archbishop has limited our Church to 25% capacity and said we don't have to go to mass. Lots of people can't even get into mass.

I decided to go anyway and scored a spot this Sunday. Covid doesn't bother me. What's the worst Covid could do? I could die in agony; that's no big deal. That's a lot better than committing sacrilege, suffering is good for the soul.

My biggest problem are (wet) dreams from repressing impure thoughts during the day. Yeah, Saint Aquinas says most dreams are not a sin, but when I wake up sometimes I think about my dreams. One dream was quite disgusting. I don't even want that kind of thing in my head.

And I'm not looking forward to it. Our parish has two priests. The parish priest is kinda hard core; ex-military and I think you know the type; you want to have a beer with him but … At least we only have one confessional so there was little chance for anyone to hear him chastise me. Gotta admit, I gave up that sin pretty quickly because of it.

The other priest once accused me of making a bad confession. Now I think of confession and communion as land mines that could result in hell and I should just avoid them as much as I can. I guess I did that using the Archbishop's lame Covid shutdown as an excuse. Well, now comes the reckoning.

The parish has a policy that we have to give our age, sex and marital status. I'm kinda unique and have a speech impediment so they know who I am. Every catechism I have says they're not supposed to make you identify yourself. They claim context is important. I agree, but we're not supposed to change church teachings because in our personal judgment we disagree with Church teaching.

I've been reading up on sins so I know what I'm doing wrong. According to the ecumenical councils I didn't do a mortal sin and the Doctrina Christiana of Saint Robert Bellarmine confirms this by noting that actual sin has to involve either an offense against God (Love God) or an offense against another person (Love thy neighbor) per Jesus Christ himself!

Saint Aquinas says that it's possible to commit a mortal sin against yourself, e.g. masturbation, which the Church calls out as the "sin of Onan" and is condemned by papal infallibility. I read the sin of Onan to be fruitless sex for lust and/or greed's sake and that is a mortal sin, same as having sex while using a condom or birth control. Masturbation alone, otoh, the old testament calls it a venial sin (makes you unclean and doesn't merit stoning) but the Church bounds the sin of masturbation on Earth thus it is a mortal sin regardless of what they call it. St. Aquinas is a church doctor and is right per papal infallibility unless his contradicted by papal decree made by infallibility. But the Popes don't confirm his thesis about sinning against yourself, but right unless contradicted, so St. Aquinas is right. That kinda doesn't matter except that the exception to the rule makes a new rule! I wish the Church was clear about sin; they use so many euphemisms especially about sex that it's hard to figure out what in literal hell they're talking about.

tl:dr That's okay, I'm rather glad you didn't read this and I wrote it knowing you'd blow it off. I'm just gonna confess, close my eyes, and listen to if he tells me not to take communion. Anything else like a dozen rosaries would be good. I say a rosary a day anyway.

>inb4 a baptist says become Protestant

Just don't, okay.

As usual, I can't sleep the night before going to mass. I got maybe 4 hours sleep. I woke up because I had a nightmare that they wouldn't let me in because the ushers wanted someone more worthy than me and gave my place away to someone else who was their friend. That could happen. The last time I tried "sign up" mass they gave me a bad time. Father says don't give them a bad time so if I feel like saying something, I just go home. That's what I did when they said I wasn't on the list. I could see my name right there. My name is hard to pronounce, maybe they didn't match the written to the verbal because of my accent.

It's really icy out there. Family says I'm nuts to go to church, but they're anti-religious. The Church is about 30 miles away. The worst that could happen is that I die in a car accident on the way there.

Some coffee would be good right now, but gotta fast since midnight. I have the pot ready to switch on as soon as I get home.

>>853303

If you're having nightmares, might I recommend sleeping with a blessed rosary under your pillow?

If you're willing to do this, might I recommend further that you position your rosary so that the cross points East?

>>853304

I could give it a try the night before I go to confession.

I guess I need to get my other rosaries blessed. I have two that are identical but one is blessed and the other isn't.

It went well today, Father asked me questions about my confession of prior sins. I'm pretty sure I did my confession by the book and he seemed confused when I got to the part where I expressed remorse for the more serious sins I have already confessed. That rattled me as the sin was particularly wicked.

That tells me that folks don't often confess prior sins and father was unsure of the form. There was just two of us in line for confession today. I wonder how people live such good lives. I feel a need to go every other week, at least.

Oremus et pro perfidies Judaeis.

Had been part of the Roman Missal since 1570. Pope Pius XII said it should be translated as "unbelieving" and then Pope John XXIII had it stricken from the 1962 Missal because the Jewish Rothschilds, who run the "Vatican Bank" were offended. You know, those fellows in the temple Our Lord Whipped and drove out.

Matthew 27:24-25

'''24 When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.

25 Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.'''

I set my phone to remind me that today is mass sign up day for the First Sunday of Lent.

The process is simple, at 5 PM, click like a mad man on the parish web page until you see the sign up. When it comes up already half the spots will be gone! Grab a spot and sign up. I go for the really early mass because fewer folks want that one. I feel bad about bumping someone, but I missed about half a YEAR of mass. I think I need a turn. In 3 minutes, all the spots are taken. Maybe Father will add a 6th mass.

We're limited to 25% church capacity. I wish we could snag the bigger church down the street and fix it up, but it will cost about $1 million.

I really thought the Covid lockdown would be over by now. Guess not. It's a lot easier not to sin if you know that confession is just a few days away!

I have a question: can the demons act on our dreams? I sometimes have horrible dreams involving relatives and sexual thoughts. Last night I had a dream about a girl I'm trying to get over, and remember feeling an anxiety so strong it woke me up. I feel responsible for the thoughts I have during the day, but not for the dreams. What do you think?

>>853387

Saint Thomas says we're not responsible for our dreams except if we willfully did something to direct those dreams

Catholic teaching is that dreams are not things to be regarded in almost every case.

>>853387

btw, I had a filthy wicked evil dream.

I woke up and wanted the memory of it out of my head!

So, of course it stuck.

What a nightmare.

>>853632

>>mortal sin to have any physical attraction to a girl whatsoever

Not. You are to deliberate over your thoughts, hold them captive and obedient to Christ as Paul says.

So if you have a lustful temptation you stop thinking about it rather than entertain the thought. Demons can put thoughts into our head, so the simple fact of having the thought is never sinful, only then actively feeding the fantasy is.

>>853633

>So if you have a lustful temptation you stop thinking about it rather than entertain the thought

Virtually all romantic relationships are sparked from physical attraction, even ones that aren't necessarily sexual and reserve that for marriage. Isn't that a form of giving into lust?

>>853635

physical attraction is one thing, basking in erotic fantasies is another.

Well, I've decided to become Catholic. Baptized as an infant in a Baptist church, but raised as a heathen. I've read the rebaptism is a sacrilege and that I have to confess every sin I've ever committed. Is this true? If so, any tips on preparing a good first confession? Not currently in RCIA because of circumstances but I figure I may as well start preparing for this step.

>>853641

Confess all mortal sins you can remember since you reached the age of reason. This is called a "general confession".

Those mortal sins you forget are forgiven, but if you remember more, you have to confess those too as you remember them.

If I had a "do over", I'd keep a "confession diary and lock it up.

>>853632

>mortal sin to receive Eucharist while a mortal sin is on your soul

True

>mortal sin to have any physical attraction to a girl whatsoever

Only if you're thinking about sex with her.

>mortal sin for ANY kind of intimacy between a husband and wife if the end result isn't conception immediately afterward

read the Saint Aquinas catechism, page 225

Sex to make a baby: Virtue

To give comfort: An act of justice

For the excitement of lust: Venial sin

With a third party: Mortal sin.

>>853632

>need money and affluence to start and raise a family, but its a mortal sin to be concerned with worldly things

Only if you're planning on robbing a banking. Planning to have a good job for good intentions is a not at all a sin.

>church only has 30 minute time period for confessions and only for once a week

In my parish, 30 minutes before almost every mass, and there's a mass every day and 5 times on sunday because of Covid.

>but its ok bro, Jesus saves and we'll all be in heaven :)

Most of us won't be saved, according to some saints.

Key is to confess all mortal sins. Good to confess venial sins too.

After that, make sure you take communion to remove venial sins.

After that, various indulgences to shorten or eliminate time in purgatory. See the Raccolta

>>853632

>Is the sacrament of marriage a giant meme?

No.

> Everything I read seems to indicate that the only way to Heaven is to be a staunch monk with as little connection to the outside world as possible.

Would help. Saint Bellarmine said that there are two kinds of actual sins: Those against God (1st three commandments) and those against another person (last 7 commandments).

Saint Aquinas says that you can also sin against yourself e.g. masturbation. Church dogma confirms this. Impure thoughts are usually about someone else, so that's a sin against another person.

> I feel total fear and anxiety anytime I pray or attend Mass because I feel as though I'm not even worthy to be near God's grace.

We're not worthy. God loves us and died to make us worthy if we accept him as Lord and does as he says.

>>853648

>read the Saint Aquinas catechism, page 225

Doesn't that also suggest that "vitiation of the act" and masturbation are worse than rape and adultery? How would you define sex "to give comfort" as different from excitement anyway?

>>853649

>Only if you're planning on robbing a banking. Planning to have a good job for good intentions is a not at all a sin.

You'd be surprised at how hard money is to come by. I effectively have to work over a decade in software development just to make enough so that I don't have to rely on my would-be wife to work a full-time job while managing kids.

>In my parish, 30 minutes before almost every mass, and there's a mass every day and 5 times on sunday because of Covid.

You're very lucky. Mine is only for 30 minutes now and only on Saturdays. I missed the last one because I overslept during a nap, and by the time I got up there were only 5 minutes left and I would've been shooed away. Farther away churches in my area are similar.

>Most of us won't be saved, according to some saints.

See, this is terrifying to me. Everyone likes to dress our afterlife up as sunshine and rainbows, and maybe they'll at most acknowledge most people won't enter the kingdom. But, at least from what I can tell, that "most" translates to roughly 99.9% of the world population, and no one likes to address that. I can't express the existential dread I feel from this.

>>853650

>God loves us and died to make us worthy if we accept him as Lord and does as he says.

I've been Catholic for my entire life, and this isn't my first test of faith, but I'm embarrassed to even admit my fears and anxieties in all this. How do people not go mad?

When your daughter asks for tasty bacon Friday morning, that's when you realize that payback for the sin of not raising her Catholic is that you have to suffer such temptations.

To be fair, I wasn't raised Catholic myself, and she was 12 when I went back to the Church.

>>853831

I shall pray.

I also have a vivid imagination, yet i havent done any self gratification in years so its possible to remain in purity with God's grace. So growing in grace with prayer and the sacraments will help.

You cant entertain the sinful thoughts. You must deliberate over the thoughts and purge the sinful and useless ones.

"take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ."

It's part of the spiritual warfare.

>>853835

I reject Trent as a heretical council so I couldn't care less, but I'll just point out for your sake that what you posted doesn't say mass must be said in Latin, just that it doesn't need to be in a vulgar language.

>>853835

Why would I reject the Catechism informed by the council that specifically addressed the most common heresy of today?

>>853849

Is there such a position within Catholicism, or are you a protestant?

>>853855

Protestant

>>853849

>I reject Trent as a heretical council so I couldn't care less,

I wouldn't expect a Protestant to accept Church councils, but I do wonder at what point do the protestants think they were valid? When did they "split"? Does your belief say that the Church sprang up with Martin Luther or King Henry, and didn't exist until then? Or are you a Baptist that will tell me that the founding of your religion with John Smyth really began before Christ?

>but I'll just point out for your sake that what you posted doesn't say mass must be said in Latin, just that it doesn't need to be in a vulgar language.

The Roman mass has to be said in Latin. The Eastern rite masses are said in whatever language they were said in 300 years before Trent. That's why it says it can't be in the vulgar local language. There are problems with the local languages, e.g. the mass can be mistranslated and local languages tend to change over time. Latin and ancient Greek, not so much.

Cannon IX comes from this (Council of Trent, 22nd Session:

CHAPTER VIII

On not celebrating the Mass every where in the vulgar tongue; the mysteries of the Mass to be explained to the people.

Although the mass contains great instruction for the faithful people, nevertheless, it has not seemed expedient to the Fathers, that it should be every where celebrated in the vulgar tongue. Wherefore, the ancient usage of each church, and the rite approved of by the holy Roman Church, the mother and mistress of all churches, being in each place retained; [Page 158] and, that the sheep of Christ may not suffer hunger, nor the little ones ask for bread, and there be none to break it unto them, the holy Synod charges pastors, and all who have the cure of souls, that they frequently, during the celebration of mass, expound either by themselves, or others, some portion of those things which are read at mass, and that, amongst the rest, they explain some mystery of this most holy sacrifice, especially on the Lord’s days and festivals.

.

>>853870

>Does your belief say that the Church sprang up with Martin Luther or King Henry, and didn't exist until then? Or are you a Baptist that will tell me that the founding of your religion with John Smyth really began before Christ?

Adorable. Do you do parties?

>>853884

Serious question. At what point does your particular protestant religion, out of the thousands of different protestant religions, think that the gates of hell prevailed against the church and that Martin Luther, John Smyth, King Henry, or some other guy had to pick it up and save the church?

If you believe in continuity, it has to be when the founder of your religion was excommunicated from the Catholic Church.

If your religion sprang off from another protestant religion, e.g. as the Baptist did from the Anglican, did the Anglican church fall?

>>853833

I forgot to thank you.

Thank you.

>>853913

John Smyth, the most protestant founder of the baptist religion, was first an Anglican Priest and then split from the Anglicans and founded the Baptist religion in 1609.

I understand you have a core belief that says your religion dates back to John the Baptists, so the premise, the facts of the matter are thus in dispute.

And I've seen the charts that the Baptist make that claim continuity since before Christ.

All well and good, but then Matthew 16:18 where Christ our Lord establishes his church on Saint Peter, the first Bishop of Roma and Antioch is then misinterpreted.

Well played, but I disagree with your factual basis.

>>853917

>the most protestant founder

Should be "most prominent founder" but as the Baptist started from the Protestant Anglicans, also true.

Probably an odd or silly question, but does anyone have advice on meeting like-minded Catholics in the local area? I have next to no religious friends irl, and I dont know anyone at my local parish (let alone people that arent ten/twenty years older than me). Ive heard of people having success with Catholic dating sites for both romantic and platonic relationships, but Im anxious about using online services like that. Its difficult to fight online addictions and sinful habits when you have no one to socialize with.

>>853943

Join the men's club or the pro-life group.

Not that I do that myself. I don't go to Mass to meet people. I go to assist in the sacrifice of the mass.

I wish killing myself wasn't a mortal sin.

“You must not make for yourself an idol of any kind or an image of anything in the heavens or on the earth or in the sea. You must not bow down to them or worship them, for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God who will not tolerate your affection for any other gods. I lay the sins of the parents upon their children; the entire family is affected—even children in the third and fourth generations of those who reject me. But I lavish unfailing love for a thousand generations on those who love me and obey my commands.

Exodus 20:4‭-‬6

And don’t address anyone here on earth as ‘Father,’ for only God in heaven is your Father.

Matthew 23:9

>>853917

Nobody believed the theory of John Smyth until the year 1881, when the anti-baptist polemicist Henry Martyn Dexter wrote a book about him. Since then, everyone who teaches that has referred back to Dexter's book.

Before 1881, everyone who was against baptists claimed that they originated in the Munster Rebellion. Before the Munster Rebellion, they were called other things and had other false origins ascribed to them by state churches. But the reality is that the church they are accusing is the true church and predates all state churches, including the ones falsely accusing them. Just a warning from someone who is looking out for you, to please "Search the scriptures" as the Lord Jesus commanded in John 5:39. There, you will find what you need to know, in order to be saved. God bless, anon.

>>854075

Pray humbly for forgiveness and grace, and go see a psychiatrist for some paxil.

>>854076

>>854078

That's how dead CG is.

More trolling than post about God's church.

>>854088

Would God's church call lying pedos 'Father', bow to statues or only give what is free at a 10% fee/tithe?

>>854091

There are very few paths for protestants to reach heaven for the deny the Church of our Lord God.

Keep in mind, the Church itself as long predicted the Great Apostasy in the Vatican.

>>854092

Pagans. The Vatican is a satanic evil temple.

There is only one way and it ain't through no sinner. John 3:16, John14:6

>>854093

Yes, Francis, Pope of the Novus Ordo religion (and it is a different religion), dragged a pagan idol to which pagans sacrificed llamas, guinea pigs and children to. That is obviously pagan and heresy against the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Of course, before 1962, while pagans did infest the Vatican, they hadn't yet run amok.

>>854135

I'm interested in talking to you but I don't want to clog up the catholic thread

Can you respond to >>853895

>>854135

Should be:

>One of the requirements for a Marion apparition to be worthy of belief is that it does not contradict Church dogma!

I'm a very blind editor.

Thursday's Food for Thought

<Code 2314

<§ 1. All Apostates to the Christian faith and each and every heretic or schismatic:

<1. Incured by that fact excommunication.

<2. Unless they respect warnings, they are deprivned of benefice, dignity, pension, office, or other duty that they have in the Church, they are declared infamous, and clerics, with the warning being repeated, are deposed;

Why is this important and not the 1983 code of Canon law.

1. Because the belief that the Church is just one of many that Christ established is heresy and those who made the 1983 cannon law were all, by definition, heretics. Thus had no power to change the code of canon law.

2. They were warned by Archbishop Lefebre, Saint Padre Pio and later again by Archbishop Vigano.

- warned that the mass must be said in Latin. Those who say otherwise are an anathema.

- warned that the laity must not take the Holy Eucharist in the hand. Those who say otherwise are an anathema.

- The SSPX and others warned that dragging a pagan idol before the alter of God is the most vile blasphemy and heresy. The old temple was defiled and destroyed for this grave sin and the people punished.

<Matthew 18:9 And if thy eye scandalize thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee. It is better for thee having one eye to enter into life, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire.

Hi I'm inquiring into Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholicism and I'd like to ask a question. I hear many catholics say that the papacy existed in a seed form but Vatican 1 clearly contradicts this when it says Peter was given full authority and jurisdiction right then and there. However historically it seems to me that the popes weren't recognised as having this jurisdiction until it developed starting from Leo onwards. How do Catholics reconcile the idea of the papacy developing with Vatican 1 then?

If I only have Novus Ordus Churches around me, would it be a sin to go to mass? I understand a lot of what's happened to the church after the Vatican II but I don't feel good about missing church. Please give me advice as I am very lost and confused on what I should do.

>>854170

Ordo*

>>854170

Ask Fr. Albert: What if Traditional Priests are too far away?

https://youtu.be/KZ302nrf_B4

Here he says try to avoid them.

Going to a Reverent New Rite Daily Mass?

https://youtu.be/GpGqNcaPOmg

Here he says flat out no.

Council of Trent says no as well. Mass must be in Latin and the Holy Eucharist must never touch the hands of a layman.

I guess learning that rhinos were not pagan unicorns made our Baptist bros snap. Cognitive dissonance.

It's funny but sad too.

I think the high point was a Baptist trying to smear me as a "sede", as if Baptist weren't.

I came here hoping to learn more about the Catholic faith.

What I've learned is that Protestants shamelessly and with no regret tell lies about the Holy Mother church. They point to a sinner who's Catholic and claim it is the whole church, ignoring the sins within their own religions. They tell falsehoods about the Catholic faith, and when you point out it's false, they keep repeating it. It's been a real eye opener! Thank God for the Grace of God and being born in the true faith. I can't imagine a religion that would require me to lie, slander and hate other people and thinking it is from our Lord Jesus Christ.

I guess that's why there are so few Catholics here. Why?

>>854173

Thanks for your response, where should I be going for the sacraments? Mainly reconciliation and communion? Are SSPX churches ok to go to? I’ve seen arguments against it and saying I should instead be a sedevacantist.

>>854201

The Society of Saint Pius V SSPV isn't even sede, they let people decide if Pope Francis is a true Pope, a really bad Pope or not a Pope at all.

The Society of Saint Pius X SSPX says Pope Francis is a heretical Pope, which is an oxymoron since a heretic is automatic excommunication even for a Pope and the 6th month warning period is over. I guess they're basing their logic on the 1983 code of cannon law which was written by, you guessed it, heretics and says the Vatican has to prove you're a heretic.

The Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter FSSP is in full communion with the Vatican. While the Archbishop did try to stop communion on the tongue, the priest was pointed out that was forbidden and he can't do that, so he had to back off.

There's others. I heard about the Institute of Christ the King. I also found today One Bishop split off from the SSPV and has a seminary in California and is training new priests. He's full sede. I doubt that you'll find a full sede parish.

I think even the FSSP is finding Pope Francis a bitter pill to swallow. They were created under Pope Benedict XVI.

Mind you, all of these have the same faith. Almost. SSPV split because the SSPX used the 1962 Latin mass which had changes to it, they use the 1958 Latin mass. (IMHO, the older the better!) They all differ on the status of the Vatican in the Church. They all agree on Fatima and the Great Apostasy. FSSP goes with the principle of Obedience. SSPV says if the Pope is a heretic, chop him off. Better to arrive in heaven with no pope than to arrive in hell with a heretic, I guess.

Father Jenkins of the SSPV says that an SSPX or SSPV parish will do, but he says it with a big sigh. His take is that he questions if the Bishop who gives Holy Orders to the Priest may not be a valid Bishop.

The Precepts of the Church say we must confess once a year and receive the Holy Eucharist at least once during Lent to Easter.

Thus, technically, one could travel to a Latin mass once a year, confess and receive the body and blood of Christ in one species that same mass.

The rest of the year you could watch something like LiveMass. I say "like" because LiveMass is FSSP, and I think they will expect you to attend a Novus Ordo mass if you can get to a Latin Mass. SSPX and SSPV say Latin mass only. Father Albert is a traditional Dominican who was affiliated the SSPX for awhile, he's now in the Latin Mass only camp.

The problem with this plan is that while the SSPX and SSPV may allow it, what happens if one of these Protestants piss you off so bad you have a really bad thought and commit mortal sin of a wicked thought? You'd either go the rest of the year with mortal sin on your soul, and that's very dangerous! (Tip: being angry at protestants behaving badly and their slandering the Holy Mother Church isn't a mortal sin so nevermind).

The other thing is Extreme Unction. If you're dying because a protestant has been blaspheming against the Church and you stroke out, but you're too far away for your priest. My worst nightmare is to be dying and some lady "Eucharistic Minister" visits my death bed handing out communion wafers as if they were Doritos.

I kinda really want to move to a good Latin Mass church, but don't tell the protestants; they'll twist that dream into some wicked lie about me. Again.

>>854149

help bros :(

>>854216

Help you do what? Look for false reasons not to be part of the Body of Christ?

You don't even explain why you should be confused.

>>854220

I thought I was clear in my post about struggling with the issue with the papacy otherwise I would become Catholic in a heartbeat (Orthodox churches here are incredibly insular)

>>854223

Christ can read minds. I can't. At least, not very often. Happened to me once, as a sign from God. You were not clear at all.

>How do Catholics reconcile the idea of the papacy developing with Vatican 1 then?

This is based on a false assumption. The Papacy was established by Jesus Christ who became the Bishop of Rome and thus the first Pope of Rome. See Matthew 16:18. Saint Peter was the first Pope. You'll not find a catechism or Catholic book with the imprimatur of a Bishop that denies this.

>However historically it seems to me that the popes weren't recognised as having this jurisdiction until it developed starting from Leo onwards.

How can you get an answer on what "seems" to you? I have no idea what 'seems to you', or to which (Pope?) Leo you mean.

Your question lacks the grace of God given to the faithful. Someone called to the church would go to a priest and say "teach me". You should ask a good priest! Not here! It's your soul and eternal life, after all. You come here making vague references like a protestant and question the very faith.

You Chose the Church of Jesus Christ, this is not a 'supermarket' where you go about picking a church that fits your own beliefs. That is what protestants do, and why there are 2000 of them. I accept every Catholic belief, stated under papal infallibility and consistent with prior instruction from the Paraclete, without question.

Frankly, if this is a "make or break" the faith with you, then the Catholic Church is not for you or in you as you will, sooner or later, find something else you don't understand and reject the Holy Mother Church. That would be very bad!

If you want grace and faith, pray for them, humbly. Ask for Saint Rocco to pray for you as a dog at the table.

>>854224

>Your question lacks the grace of God given to the faithful. Someone called to the church would go to a priest and say "teach me"

You are right on that point but i cannot go to church currently due to family problems (they are muslims). Fortunately this year I'll be going to university so I can actually go to a church and practise

>You Chose the Church of Jesus Christ, this is not a 'supermarket' where you go about picking a church that fits your own beliefs.

Yes which is why I'm trying to find which church is the one established by Christ by reading books, discussing etc

>>854230

Also by the development of the papacy the best example of what I mean can be summed up by Cardinal John Henry Newman

"For instance, it is true, St. Ignatius is silent in his Epistles on the subject of the Pope's authority; but if in fact that authority could not be in active operation then, such silence is not so difficult to account for as the silence of Seneca or Plutarch about Christianity itself, or of Lucian about the Roman people. St. Ignatius directed his doctrine according to the need. While Apostles were on earth, there was the display neither of Bishop nor Pope; their power had no prominence, as being exercised by Apostles. In course of time, first the power of the Bishop displayed itself, and then the power of the Pope."

It would be a lie to say that Catholic apologists and bishops don't argue for the development of papal jurisdiction as well as other prerogatives. What I'm asking is wouldn't this contradict Vatican 1?

The True Bishop of Rome always has been guided by the Holy Ghost.

Archbishop Leo of Ohrid questioned this, and on the pretext of the west using unleavened bread (because that what would have been used at the last supper, leavened bread being considered corrupted and the Body of Christ is NEVER corrupted) he shut down the Latin Rite parishes under his control. It was a pretext for moving the Chair of Peter from Rome to Constantinople. I believe an additional issue was that the Orthodox felt that the Seat of Peter should be where the temporal power is, and that was in the east.

That's when Pope Leo iX said he was wrong and explained that comes from the Chair of Peter, Bishop of Rome.

That certainly does not mean that the Papacy began in 1054, but that Pope Leo IX was explaining the Catholic Faith to Archbishop Leo and Cerularius, Patriarch of Constantinople.

The East rejected that teaching, causing a schism.

The Papacy has always been with the Seat of Saint Peter, be that Rome or Antioch.

I still don't see the problem. Some orthodox are in communion with Rome and some are not. (I don't think that has to do with Vatican II, however)

Vatican I simply put down as infallible what was common church teaching up to then about Papal infallibility of the heir of Saint Peter. It did not create the concept, just created it as undeniable Church dogma.

Thus, Papal infallibility when speaking ex cathedra on issues of faith and morals are and always was Church dogma. Times when heretics denied this article of faith caused it to be facts in church history as in the schism of 1054 and later almost as the Councils of Florence which was defiant of Pope Eugenius IV. Church dogma was always true, always will be true and no subsequent Pope can change it or contradict it.

hello frens, each day i am becoming more and more ready to convert from protestantism

looking for a cathecism series on youtube, are there any good structured playlist with good audio?

Baby Catholic here, wondering if this will constitute me going to my first confession: I willingly looked at lewd photos, all the private areas censored. I didn't masturbate. I looked up in the catechism what pornography was and it is as follows

>Pornography consists in removing real or simulated sexual acts from the intimacy of the partners, in order to display them deliberately to third parties. It offends against chastity because it perverts the conjugal act, the intimate giving of spouses to each other. It does grave injury to the dignity of its participants (actors, vendors, the public), since each one becomes an object of base pleasure and illicit profit for others. It immerses all who are involved in the illusion of a fantasy world. It is a grave offense. Civil authorities should prevent the production and distribution of pornographic materials.

This is a rather liberal definition of pornography because it sounds like unless there is a sexual act being portrayed it doesn't count. The woman did lower herself to an "object of base pleasure […] for others" though.

>>854809

If you willingly viewed the image lustfully then you sinned mortally.

You could confess like this: "I looked at unchaste imagery X amount of times"

Any type of voluntary lust outside of the relationship between two spouses is generally a mortal sin and must be confessed.

>>854802

I am glad to hear that.

My gf's priest has several catechism playlists on the YT channel of his church: https://m.youtube.com/channel/UC9YlPkoxPrcjbqH6fL-sJ7g/playlists

I highly recommend them!

>>854823

Alright thank you.

>>854875

You are welcome. I highly recommend finding a good spiritual guide / confessor which you regularly talk to about your spiritual progress (or regress, depending on the situation).

Whether your first confession is still ahead of you or not, perhaps the Philothea by St. Francis de Sales will be useful to you: https://www.philothea.de/devout-english.html

The first part (chapters 1-24) deals with meditations and preparations for choosing a devout life and for making your first (or a general) confession.

And if you want to learn about moral theology, there is Jone: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwj-8Y75tvTvAhWBg_0HHWVsCa8QFnoECAYQAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fisidore.co%2Fcalibre%2Flegacy%2Fget%2FPDF%2F7255%2FCalibreLibrary%2FMoral%2520Theology%2520-%2520Jone%252C%2520Heribert%252C%2520O.F.M.%2520Cap.%252C%2520J_7255.pdf&usg=AOvVaw127h_qV8e7QkNWwRbjBhSv

It is quite long though and perhaps not the best for a beginner, especially since it not really gives advice on how to avoid sin or grow in virtue.

Sorry for possibly the off topic. But can someone recommend me a video in the net with expressive Gregorian chant where the singer is not a choir but one man. Perhaps there can be a choir from time to time but the main singer should be one man.

>>854823

He should definitely talk to his priest about it, just to be sure.

But IF he didn't know that willingly looking at this specific type of lewd imagery (whatever it was) constitutes a grave matter, then it's technically not a mortal sin.

>>854809

Did you look up what the catechism says on this topic after you looked at the images or before? Did you know that it was a grave matter before or only after checking up what the catechism says?

>>849405

lmaoooooo the Latin Vulgate that not even Catholics read nowadays because it was so terribly bad its an embarrassment to your entire church.

>>854149

Are you questioning the authority of the Papacy or are you questioning the recognition of the authority of the Papacy? In the first case, a reasonable answer has been given >>854233. In the second case, you would be falling in with heretics and schismatics.

>>855032

both

it seems to me from reading that the early church didn't recognise papal authority and only later did the West recognise his authority

>>855055

Matthew 16:18-19

>And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

It must be made clear that the Bible contains overwhelming proof that Jesus made St. Peter the first Pope. In the Gospel of Matthew we read how Jesus gives Simon the new name of Peter, which means rock, says how he will build His Church upon him, and that He will give Peter the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, whereby whatsoever he binds on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever he looses upon earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Luke 22:29

>And I dispose to you, as my Father hath disposed to me, a kingdom.

Here Jesus speaks to His Apostles about His Kingdom, the Church of God on earth. In the context of discussing that Kingdom – how it will be structured and who will be greatest within it – Jesus singles out St. Peter from the rest of His Apostles. As the Gospel of Luke makes clear:

Luke 22:31-32

>And the Lord said: Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren.

It is essential to note here that when Christ speaks of Satan’s desire, He uses ὑμᾶς (hymas) the accusative form of the second person plural personal pronoun ὑμεῖς (humeis; you all). That is, Satan desired to have all of the Apostles but Jesus prayed for the unfailing faith of Simon-Peter alone. According to Jesus then, St. Peter, the one who will receive the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, will also have an unfailing faith, separating him from the other Apostles. The promise of the unfailing faith of St. Peter is connected to the Infallibility of the Office of St. Peter.

John 21:15-17

>When therefore they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter: Simon son of John, lovest thou me more than these? He saith to him: Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him: Feed my lambs. He saith to him again: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? He saith to him: Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him: Tend my sheep. He said to him the third time: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved, because he had said to him the third time: Lovest thou me? And he said to him: Lord, thou knowest all things: thou knowest that I love thee. He said to him: Feed my sheep.

John 10:11

>I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd giveth his life for his sheep.

The Gospel of St. John records that after His Resurrection, Jesus appeared to a number of His Apostles, singled out St. Peter and entrusted His entire flock to him. Jesus tells him to “Feed my lambs” for the lambs are the members of His Church as John 10:11, among many verses, makes clear. Jesus then, is commanding to St. Peter to feed and to govern His flock. To wit, when Jesus tells St. Peter to “Tend my sheep”, He uses the word Ποίμαινε (poimaine), the present imperative active second person singular of the verb ποιμαίνω (poimaino; to shepherd, to tend; hence: to rule, to govern). This root verb is used repeatedly through the Book of Apocalypse to express the authority of Jesus to rule, e.g., Apocalypse 2:27, Apocalypse 12:5. Jesus used this same verb in the Gospel of St. John when commanding St. Peter to rule the flock because St. Peter would be the first Pope; St. Peter received unique authority from Christ to rule and feed the Christian people.

>>855062

The authority that Jesus promised to St. Peter (Matthew 16:18-19) was not conferred upon him until after the Resurrection of Christ and His appearance before His Apostles (John 21:15-17). It was only at this moment that he became Pope. The unique authority conferred on St. Peter by Jesus Christ is also proven by the singularity and the prominence given to St. Peter in the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles. It is St. Peter who leads the Church in replacing Judas (Acts 1); it is St. Peter who speaks for the Church at Pentecost (Acts 2); it is St. Peter who performs the first miraculous healing in post-Ascension Church history (Acts 3); it is St. Peter who answers for the Church before the council of high priests (Acts 4); it is St. Peter who metes out discipline to Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5); and, it is St. Peter whom Cornelius, the first Gentile convert, is told to find (Acts 10). There is also the manner in which Scripture refers to St. Peter in the context of the Twelve Apostles. For every list of the Twelve in the New Testament begins with St. Peter, ends with Judas, and varies between them (Matthew 10:2-4; Mark 3:14-19; Luke 6: 14-16). Moreover, in the Gospel of St. Matthew we read:

Matthew 10:2

>And the names of the twelve apostles are these: The first, Simon who is called Peter…

The Greek word used here, πρῶτος (protos) means first, chief or principal. Since no other numbers are given, and since Andrew was the first whom followed Jesus, this term is not meant to assign a number but to recognise the authority of St. Peter over the Twelve. In addition, when St. Peter is mentioned by name, the other Apostles are frequently described as “those who were with him” (Acts 2:37; Acts 5:29; Mark 1:36; Mark 16:7; Luke 9:32). Scripture repeatedly singles out St. Peter and sets him apart from the other Apostles because he was the leader, the first Pope.

Now, according to the New Testament Jesus will sit upon the Throne of David and inherit his Kingdom. God made a covenant with David so as to establish a Kingdom. The Davidic Monarchy, the Kingdom of God on earth in the Old Testament, was a prototype of the Kingdom of God which Jesus Christ would establish. It is for this reason that Jesus is called the Son of David in the Gospels, and that kingdoms are a primary theme of the Gospel of St. Matthew. It is also why St. Peter himself says that Jesus sits upon the Throne of David:

Acts 2:30-32

>Whereas therefore he [David] was a prophet, and knew that God hath sworn to him with an oath, that of the fruit of his loins one should sit upon his throne. Foreseeing this, he spoke of the resurrection of Christ. For neither was he left in hell, neither did his flesh see corruption. This Jesus hath God raised again, whereof all we are witnesses.

And why the angel Gabriel told Mary:

Luke 1:32

>He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the most High; and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of David his father; and he shall reign in the house of Jacob for ever.

Jesus sits upon the Throne of David, but the Kingdom of Jesus is spiritual. His Kingdom is His Church. His Kingdom not only fulfils but surpasses its prototype, David’s Kingdom. The essential point here is that the Kingdom of Christ is patterned after that of David and Old Testament Israel. For example, the ministers who formed the royal cabinet in the Davidic Monarchy, as well as the Twelve Tribes of Israel, prefigured the Twelve Apostles of Jesus.

In Acts 15, we read about the Council of Jerusalem. This was a monumental meeting of the Ecclesia, the Church, concerning circumcision and the handling of Gentile conversions to the Gospel. The Council of Jerusalem thus dealt with how the New Covenant and Kingdom of God, His Church, would operate and how it would be built and expanded into the future.

Acts 15:6

>And the apostles and ancients assembled to consider of this matter.

>>855063

The chief men of the Church were therefore present for this crucial meeting. Now, we read of another council in Jerusalem in the Old Testament during the reign of King David where all of the chief men were present and met to discuss the building of the Temple, or House, of God.

1 Chronicles 28:1

>And David assembled all the chief men of Israel…at Jerusalem.

1 Chronicles 28:1

>And David gave to Solomon his son a description of the porch, and of the temple, and of the treasures, and of the upper floor, and of the inner chambers, and of the house for the mercy seat, as also of all the courts, which he had in his thought, and of the chambers round about, for the treasures of the house of the Lord, and for the treasures of the consecrated things.

The Temple, or House, of God in the Old Testament was a type of the New Testament Church of God. As St. Paul and St. Peter makes clear:

2 Corinthians 6:16

>And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God…

Hebrews 3:6

>But Christ as the Son in his own house: which house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and glory of hope unto the end.

1 Peter 2:5

>Be you also as living stones built up, a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

Since the Davidic council of Jerusalem met to discuss how the Old Testament Temple of God would be built, the council itself was a type of the future Council of Jerusalem, which likewise met to discuss how the New Testament Church would be built, recorded in the Acts of the Apostles. In point of fact, the New Testament Council of Jerusalem connects to a prophecy of Amos concerning the tabernacle of David.

Acts 15:16

>After these things I will return, and will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and the ruins thereof I will rebuild, and I will set it up.

Amos 9:11

>In that day I will raise up the tabernacle of David, that is fallen: and I will close up the breaches of the walls thereof, and repair what was fallen: and I will rebuild it as in the days of old.

The tabernacle of David was the tent in which the Ark of the Covenant was housed prior to the construction of the Temple of God. It was thus a precursor to, and represented, the House of God. With the incorporation of the Gentiles into the Church – the specific matter of the Council of Jerusalem – the prophecy of rebuilding that tabernacle of David, the House of God, was thus being fulfilled. The parallels between the two councils continue however:

1 Chronicles 28:2

>And the king [David] rising up, and standing said: Hear me, my brethren and my people:

Acts 15:7

>And when there had been much disputing, Peter, rising up, said to them…

Scripture identifies that the one standing up in the midst of the assembly is the king. The one who stands up in the midst of the others to address them is the one with supreme authority over Israel. So, just as Scripture describes King David rising up and addressing the Council, it likewise describes St. Peter. For St. Peter, as the leader of the Church and the first Pope, had supreme authority over Israel, the Church. That the connection may be inarguable, Scripture continues:

1 Chronicles 28:4

>But the Lord God of Israel chose me of all the house of my father, to be king over Israel forever…

Acts 15:7

>…Men, brethren, you know, that in former days God made choice among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.

>>855064

King David stood up at the Council in Jerusalem – the Council that concerned how to build the Temple of God – and said that from “all the house of my father” the “Lord God of Israel chose me”. At the New Testament Council in Jerusalem – the Council that concerned how to build the Church of God – St. Peter stood up and said to the multitude that “God made choice among us” that “by my mouth” the Gentiles should hear the Word.

The words of the Septuagint, the Greek translation of Old Testament that is most frequently cited by the inspired writers of the New Testament, further confirm that the authority of King David is a type of the authority of St. Peter. For in 1 Chronicles 28:4 when King David says that the “Lord God of Israel chose me” the word for “chose” in the Septuagint is ἐξελέξατο (exelexato), the aorist indicative middle first-person singular form of ἐκλέγω (eklego; I pick, I choose, I elect). And, the same word, ἐξελέξατο, is used in Acts 15:7 when St. Peter describes how “God made choice among us” and he was chosen.

The parallel is stunning and clear. The inspired Word of God describes St. Peter at the Council of Jerusalem in the same manner by which it describes King David at the Council of Jerusalem. St. Peter says and does what King David says and does precisely because St. Peter had supreme authority over the New Israel just as King David had supreme authority over the Old Testament Israel. So too then, just as the Office of King David had successors does the Office of St. Peter as well. King David speaks on this point as he proceeds in 1 Chronicles 28 to describe how the Temple of God will be built during the reign of his successor King Solomon. In the proceeding chapter King David described his successor as the one “whom alone God hath chosen” (1 Chronicles 29:1). All this indicates that God chooses only one man to be King, and that the King has successors in his unique Office. In the same way, God chose St. Peter to be the Rock and Foundation of the Church, the one with the Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven, but his successors, the future Popes, would complete the expansion or growth of God’s Temple, the Church, as new converts continued to enter the Body of Christ throughout history.

Acts 15:9-11

>And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Now therefore, why tempt you God to put a yoke upon the necks of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? But by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, we believe to be saved, in like manner as they also.

The authority of St. Peter at the Council of Jerusalem is clear from the fact that prior to his speaking there had been “must disputing” (Acts 15:7) and that as soon as St. Peter ended his speech “all the multitude held their peace” (Acts 15:12). Scripture thus teaches that the dispute was ongoing prior to the speech of St. Peter, but that it ended as soon St. Peter articulated his position. It was only after this articulation that Barnabas, St. Paul and St. James addressed the Church – after St. Peter had already defined the core doctrinal truth and principle that would endure throughout the ages. That is, that Gentile converts to Christ need not be burdened with the yoke of circumcision and all of the requirements of the Old Law.

>>855065

Acts 15:28-29

>For it hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us, to lay no further burden upon you than these necessary things: That you abstain from things sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication; from which things keeping yourselves, you shall do well. Fare ye well.

While St. Peter was the leader of the Universal Church, ancient Church historian Eusebius tells us that it was St. James who was left to be the Bishop of Jerusalem. It should also be noted that with the exception of the prohibition of sexual immorality or fornication – which is obviously of Divine Law and repeated throughout the New Testament – the proposal made by St. James at the Council of Jerusalem and consequently adopted, was a recommendation involving Church discipline not dogma. It was a disciplinary measure adopted by the Church for that particular Apostolic period in which a single Church of Christ was forming from those Judeans who had observed the Old Law and those Gentiles who had not. Cantate Domino, the Dogmatic Bull of the Council of Florence dogmatically declares as such:

Council of Florence, Cantate Domino, AD 1441

>The Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that ‘every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be rejected that is received with thanksgiving’ (1 Tim. 4:4), since, according to the Word of the Lord (Matthew 15:11), ‘not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man’; and it asserts that the indifference of clean and unclean foods of the Mosaic law pertains to the ceremonials which, with the rise of the Gospel passed out of existence and ceased to be efficacious.

>And it says also that the prohibition of the apostles “from things sacrificed to idols, and from blood and from things strangled (Acts 15:29) befitted that time in which one Church arose from the Jews and the Gentiles, who before lived according to different ceremonies and customs, so that even the Gentiles observed some things in common with the Jews, and occasion was furnished for coming together into one worship of God and one faith, and ground for dissension was removed; since to the Jews, by reason of an ancient custom, blood and things strangled seemed abominable, and they could think that the Gentiles would return to idolatry because of the eating of things sacrificed.

>But when the Christian religion is so propagated that no carnal Jew appears in it, but all passing over to the Church, join in the same rites and ceremonies of the Gospel, believing “all things clean to the clean” (Titus 1:15), with the ending of the cause for this apostolic prohibition, the effect also ended. Thus it declares that the nature of no food, which society admits, is to be condemned, and no distinction is to be made by anyone at all, whether man or woman, between animals, and by whatever kind of death they meet their end; although for the health of body, for the exercise of virtue, for regular and ecclesiastical discipline many things not denied should be given up, since, according to the Apostle, “all things are lawful, but all things are not expedient” (1 Corinthians 6:12; 10:22).

>>855066

What St. James discussed and recommended at the Council of Jerusalem was hence a disciplinary measure. However, what St. Peter declared was the dogmatic truth. That being that Gentile converts to the Church of Christ need not observe circumcision and all of the requirements of the Old Law. That dogmatic principle would define all future generations of Christians and determine how the Church would be built and expanded throughout the ages. It is for this reason that it was proclaimed by St. Peter.

Acts 10:10-16

>And being hungry, he was desirous to taste somewhat. And as they were preparing, there came upon him an ecstasy of mind. And he saw the heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending, as it were a great linen sheet let down by the four corners from heaven to the earth: Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts, and creeping things of the earth, and fowls of the air. And there came a voice to him: Arise, Peter; kill and eat. But Peter said: Far be it from me; for I never did eat any thing that is common and unclean. And the voice spoke to him again the second time: That which God hath cleansed, do not thou call common. And this was done thrice; and presently the vessel was taken up into heaven.

The authority of St. Peter over the Church is also precisely why the first Gentile convert, Cornelius, was specifically told to find St. Peter, the leader of the Church (Acts 10:3-6). It is also why profound vision, signifying that the restrictions of the Old Law against unclean foods had ended, the vision that would shape all future Church history, was given to St. Peter alone. God communicated the dogmatic rule that he wanted His Church to follow to the Head of the Church, St. Peter, so that, once he made the truth known, the Church would accept it. It is also noteworthy that when St. James begins to speak, he references what St. Peter has already spoken (Acts 15:14), yet St. Peter makes no reference to another man but to how God chose him.

The significance of these facts, which prove the Papacy, are made still more evident when we recall that Jesus Christ sits upon the Throne of David (Luke 1:32). Jesus is the King, He is true God and true Man, He is the Founder of the Church and the ultimate successor to David’s Throne, but He gives His authority, the Keys to the Kingdom, and the commission to govern his flock to St. Peter. Hence, the Office of St. Peter is that of Jesus’ prime minister, or vicar, when we consider that Jesus is the King. Yet when Jesus leaves the world and ascends into Heaven, He gives authority over the Church to St. Peter, who consequently holds the place of the King. It is for this reason that the position of St. Peter in Scripture parallels both the position of prime minister under Old Testament kings and the position of King David himself.

>>855067

Isaiah 22:20-22

>And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will call my servant Eliacim the son of Helcias, and I will clothe him with thy [Shebna’s] robe, and will strengthen him with thy girdle, and will give thy power into his hand: and he shall be as a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Juda. And I will lay the key of the house of David upon his shoulder: and he shall open, and none shall shut: and he shall shut, and none shall open.

In the Davidic monarchy the king had a royal cabinet. Jesus’ royal cabinet, which parallels the twelve tribes of Israel and the royal cabinet of the Davidic monarchy, is the Twelve Apostles. However, of all the Davidic king’s ministers there was one who stood up above the others and had authority over them – the prime minister. We read in Isaiah that the prime minister had the key of the House of David. This passage informs us that the prime minister of the king had the key of the house and that the prime minister had authority over the king’s house. The prime minister also had successors.

The prime minister had the power to open so that no one shuts, and to shut so that no one opens. The parallel to the Gospel of Matthew, where Jesus says that St. Peter will receive the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, and whatever he binds upon earth shall be bound in Heaven, and whatever he looses upon earth shall be loosed in Heaven, is unmistakeable.

Jesus established St. Peter and his successors to be His prime ministers, and when Jesus left the world, after having entrusted the flock to St. Peter, he stood as Jesus’ representative and in His place as leader and governor of the Church. That is why St. Peter’s position throughout the Acts of the Apostles is that of the leader of the Church, and why his role at the Council of Jerusalem parallels King David’s position.

As these facts demonstrate to anyone of good will, Protestants and other non-Catholics who reject the Papacy are wrong. Their position is false, and they lack the true Christian faith. When they deny the Papacy, they deny the office and position established by Jesus Christ Himself. When they attack the Papacy, they attack what God Himself instituted. Unless they humble themselves, accept the truth and convert to the true Catholic faith, outside of which there is no salvation, they will certainly be lost.

>>855062

Augustine, Origen, Chrysostom and Cyprian all read that the rock is not Peter.

>>855069

St. Augustine, St. John Chrysostom, St. Cypiran and Origen all accepted the authority of the Papacy. I will not go into giving examples of this acceptance besides that of St. John Chrysostom:

St. John Chrysostom

>It is a prerogative of the dignity of our city [Antioch] that, from the beginning, it received as master the prince of the apostles. In fact, it was a just thing that this city – which was glorified by the name of “Christians” before the rest of the earth – should receive as shepherd the prince of the apostles. When we received him as master, however, we did not keep him forever but rather yielded him to the royal city of Rome. Therefore, we do not hold the body of Peter, but we hold the faith of Peter as we would Peter himself. As a matter of fact, as long as we hold the faith of Peter, we have Peter himself.

More could be written on the use of the phrase ἐπὶ ταύτῃ τῇ πέτρᾳ (epi taute te petra) by Christ, especially His use of the demonstrative Pronoun ταύτῃ, but I feel this would quickly collapse into an argument of grammar and translation.

>>855070

Do you have some reason to think "the faith of Peter" in this context means accepting the papacy? Because ostensibly it does not support your point

>>855072

Repent

>>855073

Your question regarding St. John Chrysostom is irrelevant to one's acceptance of the papacy. For he was a man, and could err on matters of faith and morals.

Regardless, I will answer your question.

Yes, because St. John Chrysostom also calls St. Peter "the prince of the Apostles", and by calling the true Faith "the faith of Peter" he is recognising the unfailing faith and primacy of St. Peter.

>>855075

Your pope is not Peter and the faith you place in him will lead you to hell

>>855075

That just does not follow

I bring up these fathers because we're on the topic. Of course the doctrine is true or isn't independent of their opinions.

>>855076

Make reference to Scripture or reasoned argument, or fall silent and depart first-born of Satan.

>>855077

If you are unsatisfied with that explanation then read his fifty-fourth homily on St. Matthew:

>When Christ has asked: 'Whom say ye that I am?] What, then, does the mouth of the apostles, Peter, everywhere fervent, the Coryphaeus of the choir of the apostles? All are asked, and he replies. When Christ asked what were the opinions of the people, all answered; but when He asked for their own, Peter leaps forward, and is the first to speak: 'Thou art the Christ.' And what does Christ answer? 'Blessed art thou,' etc….Why, then, said Christ: 'Thou art Simon, son of Jona, thou shalt be called Cephas' [John 1:42] ? Because thou hast proclaimed My Father, I name thy father, as though I said: 'As thou art son of Jona, so am I son of My Father….And I say to thee: Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, that is upon the faith of this confession.

>Hence He shows that many will believe, and raises his thoughts higher, and makes him Shepherd. 'And the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.' If they prevail not against it, much less against Me: so be not terrified when thou shalt hear 'I shall be betrayed and crucified.' And then he speaks of another honor: 'And I will give thee the keys of the king of heaven.' What is this: 'And I will give thee' ? 'As the Father hath given thee to know Me, so will I give thee'….Give what? The keys of heaven, in order that whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth may be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth may be loosed in heaven.' Now, then, is it not His to give to sit upon His right hand and on his left, since He says: 'I will give thee' ? Do you see how He Himself leads Peter to a high consideration of Himself, and reveals Himself and shows Himself to be the Son of God by these two promises? For what is proper to God alone, that is, to forgive sins, and to make the Church in so great an onset of waves, and to cause a fisherman to be stronger than any rock, when the whole world wars against him, this He Himself promises to give; as the Father said, speaking to Jeremias, that He would set him as a column of brass and as a wall; but Jeremias to a single nation, Peter to the whole world.

>I would willing ask those who wish to lessen the dignity of the Son: Which are the greater gifts, those which the Father gave to Peter, or those which the Son gave him? The Father gave to Peter the revelation of the Son, but the Son gave to him to spread that of the Father and of Himself throughout the world, and to a mortal man He entrusted the power over all that is in heaven, in giving the keys to him who extended the Church throughout the world, and showed it stronger than the world.

This passage alone makes it clear that St. John Chrysostom recognises that St. Peter is the Rock. He has no idea of the two notions, "Peter is the Rock" and "his faith is the Rock" being mutually exclusive, as, in fact, they are not. It is equally clear that the promise is understood as granting him an ecumenical jurisdiction in a way which is not given to the other Apostles.

>>855076

So will the trinity doctrine. The most disgusting, blasphemous, and pernicious lie of a doctrine on the face of the earth. “god the son” and “god the holy ghost” are false babylonian gods that God Almighty will destroy in hell. The trinity is blasphemous to the Lord Jesus Christ, blessed be his Holy Name.

The Son of God =/= “god the son”

There is verily a difference.

>>855079

Where does this quotation assert that peter is the rock?

>>855078

And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities. Reward her even as she rewarded you, and double unto her double according to her works: in the cup which she hath filled fill to her double. How much she hath glorified herself, and lived deliciously, so much torment and sorrow give her: for she saith in her heart, I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see no sorrow. Therefore shall her plagues come in one day, death, and mourning, and famine; and she shall be utterly burned with fire: for strong is the Lord God who judgeth her.

>>855085

Amen

>>855082

>>855090

Why are you speaking to me, heathen?

>>855093

Repent. You will destroy your soul in hell if you believe in the trinity.

>>855085

Ignoring your insults, what relevance do you believe that the end times counter-Church has to the Papacy and the authority of a true Pope?

>>855095

In every spiritual nature there are two immanent operations that is, two operations that remain within the operator. They are the operations of intellect and will. God is a spirit (John 4:24) and therefore has the power of intellect and will. Now, from all eternity God is understanding Himself, knowing Himself, intellectualising Himself. Since the power of intellect that God possesses is infinite and absolutely perfect (Psalm 147:5), in understanding Himself God generates an infinite concept of Himself, a Word - Logos (John 1:1). This Word, eternally generated by God, is the absolutely perfect and infinite image of God who generates It. Hence concerning the Son, "He is the image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15).

If the Word generated by God in understanding Himself were not as infinite and perfect as God then God's power of understanding Himself would be deficient which is impossible. Thus, concerning the eternal generation of the Son by the Father, the Nicene Creed declares that the Son of God is:

>Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father…

As His perfect image, the Word eternally generated by the Father possesses the exact same substance as the one who generates Him; He is equal to the Father who generates Him. Thus, the Son is the radiance of the glory of God and the stamp of His substance, upholding all things by the Word of his power (Hebrews 1:3).

>>855099

If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

The Word is not the Son. The Bible does not say that. The Bible says that the Word was God. The Word is not a person. It is God's Word. His Word is with him and it is him. Just like your word. It is with you and it is you. When you speak, you are speaking your words. It's not a second co-equal person to you who exists with you. This is why John 1:2 says in the Word of God "The same was in the beginning with God." If you have a bible that says "He was in the beginning with God.", then your bible is not the Word of God but a perversion. The Word is not a person, and thus the personal pronoun "He" cannot be used. God's Word is His own Word which he uses to speak. Let us stop perverting the Word of God with the witchcraft of theology. and read it instead as it is written.

And this is why the Word was made flesh. Because men could not tolerate God's Word because of his voice from the mount, so he put his Word in the mouth of a Man. The Lord Jesus Christ, his Only Begotten Son. John 1:14 is the fullfilment of Deut 18:18

"I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will putmy wordsin hismouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him."

…The Word was made flesh…

It's simple….

Theology will only lead you astray… Lay aside the garbage of the nicene creed (respectfully). Seek God in his Holy Word, KJV. And He will be found of you.

>>855100

John 1:1

>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

It appears that you believe that the Word is a creation. This is against Scripture, and is blasphemy.

For a procession is the origin of one thing from another; and, a procession can be either external or internal. A procession is called internal when the terminus, or the end, of the procession remains within the principle from which it proceeds. The processions of intellect and will, are immanent and eternal, and hence remain within God. A procession is called external when the terminus of the procession goes outside the principle from which it proceeds. Now, everything that is not God is a creation; and everything that is outside of God is a creation. Hence, all creation externally proceeds from God - it comes to be from nothing, through creation by God, and it has a beginning. Per Saint Athanasius:

On The Council of Nicea, De Decretis, #13, c. 351

>Who is there of right mind who will not see at once that the things which are created and made are external to the Maker, whereas our discourse has shown already that the Son exists not externally but from the Father who begets Him?

Now, in every procession there is a distinction between the one who proceeds and the one from whom it proceeds. Therefore though the Word is the perfect image of the Father and exactly the same in substance as the Father, the Word is a distinct person from the Father. He is the distinct from the Father by an opposition of relation. The Father is from no one, He is the one who eternally generates the Son; the Son is eternally generated by the Father. Per Saint Athanasius:

>As we said above, so now we repeat, that the divine generation must not be compared to the nature of men, nor the Son considered to be part of God, nor the generation to imply any passion whatever…with God this cannot be; for He is not composed of parts, but being impassible and simple, He is impassibly and indivisibly Father of the Son. This again is strongly evidenced and proved by divine Scripture. For the Word of God is His Son, and the Son is the Father's Word and Wisdom; and the Word and Wisdom is neither creature nor part of Him whose Word He is, nor an offspring passibly begotten.

Although the Father and the Son have the same divine substance, and therefore both are fully God, the Father and the Son are distinct persons by virtue of their relation of opposition - the Father begets the Son, and the Son is begotten by the Father.

However, there is no dependence of the Son on the Father, or of the Father on the Son. In understanding Himself, the Father is not able to not generate the Word. The Father cannot be without the Son yet he does not depend upon the Son. Likewise the Son cannot be without the Father yet he does not depend on the Father. Neither lacks, nor ever could lack, anything that He possesses. Hence, there is no dependence.

>>855102

I never said that.

Verily, as the Lord said, the Word of God is not revealed unto the wise and the prudent, but unto babes.

He that hath an ear to hear, let him hear. Blessed be the Name of the Lord.

>>855103

Then your position is self-contradictory.

If the Word is God then it must be equal to Him, for the Word would otherwise not be God, or the intellect and understanding of God would not be infinite and absolutely perfect.

And, if the Word is generated by the Father, and the Father generates the Word, and both the Word and the Father are God then the Word and the Father must be distinct persons by an opposition of relation.

You must become a traditional Catholic. It is the one true faith, and absolutely necessary for salvation.

>>855105

>You must become a traditional Catholic. It is the one true faith, and absolutely necessary for salvation.

Not the position of the roman catholic church

>>855106

Why do you lie?

Pope Gregory XVI, quoting Pope St. Gregory the Great, Summo Iugiter Studio

>The Holy Universal Church teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her and asserts that all who are outside of her will not be saved. Official acts of the Church proclaim the same dogma.

Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam

>Urged by faith, we are obliged to believe and to maintain that the Church is one, holy, catholic, and also apostolic. We believe in her firmly and we confess with simplicity that outside of her there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins, as the Spouse in the Canticles [Sgs 6:8] proclaims: ‘One is my dove, my perfect one. She is the only one, the chosen of her who bore her,‘ and she represents one sole mystical body whose Head is Christ and the head of Christ is God [1 Cor 11:3]. In her then is one Lord, one faith, one baptism [Eph 4:5]. There had been at the time of the deluge only one ark of Noah, prefiguring the one Church, which ark, having been finished to a single cubit, had only one pilot and guide, i.e., Noah, and we read that, outside of this ark, all that subsisted on the earth was destroyed.

Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis Christi

>Actually only those are to be included as members of the Church who have received the laver of regeneration and profess the true faith…

>>855107

For one, non traditional roman catholics are not in peril according to your church, hence the majority practice of new order mass.

For another, your church has compromised on trent and the unam sanctum of boniface and argued that protestants or others can have an imperfect relationship with the RCC that still attains salvation. They've also issued the "joint declaration on the doctrine of justification" along with ecumenical/liberal lutherans.

https://www.catholic.com/qa/does-no-salvation-outside-the-church-include-non-catholic-christians

>Why do you lie?

Why do you larp?

>>855108

So your argument is that the Church has compromised on infallible dogma?

This is obviously self-contradictory.

The Vatican II claimants to the papacy are not true Popes but antipopes, any attempts that each have made to bind Vatican II and other false teachings do not impact or invalidate Catholic teaching on papal infallibility nor on the promises of Christ to His Church. Once more for emphasis, the actions and teachings of the invalid usurpers of the Papacy carry neither weight nor merit for Catholics. For the Chair of St. Peter bears no appropriation.

>>855109

Yes if you're a sede this obviously doesn't apply to you. Next time say that.

If someone says "the roman catholic church" they're obviously not referring to sedes unless clarified.

>>855110

LARPapists only care about superficialities, they think what you call something is all that matters. So if you don't use the words he wants used to refer to the things he wants them used for, he'll interpret that as a malicious lie, even if he is wrong. He will probably reply to you and/or me in a way that proves my point

>>855114

>I used the wrong words incorrectly because I don't understand language, definitions, and I don't know what I'm talking about. Therefore I'm right and you're wrong.

>>855062

Thank you for answers lad

Gives me more to think about

>>855116

Yawn

prot about to become catholic here, which prayer book i should get? which one do you guys use daily? it has to be available in ebook since shipping cost will cost me several times the book itself

>>855392

http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2014/04/pdf-download-fulton-j-sheen-sunday.html#.YJO04bUza00

I think this is fine, it's for the latin mass but you will find all the traditional prayers in it. I would really advise to buy one though, it's worth the investment.

>>855394

thanks for the link

i do plan to buy one though, just not the physical version

what do you think about this one?

https://www.ignatius.com/St-Gregorys-Prayer-Book-P3390.aspx

>>855412

This is sadly the same deity that was worshipped during the days of Jeremiah. The "queen of heaven". She and other demigods saints are worshipped by catholics today… sadly. They make cakes for her which is food sacrificed unto idols. Something that a christian ought not to eat. Catholics have fornicated with all manner of idols.

Come out of her, ye who have an ear to hear. Obey the Gospel and be saved. Today is the day of salvation.

"Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call." - Acts 2:38-39

>>855413

>This is sadly the same deity that was worshipped during the days of Jeremiah.

>They make cakes for her which is food sacrificed unto idols. Something that a christian ought not to eat. Catholics have fornicated with all manner of idols.

This is plainly false. Collyridianism (the worship of Mary as a semitic pagan deity) remains condemned by the Catholic Church. If any self-professed Catholic is worshiping Mary as a pagan does, they stand condemned by the Catholic Church.

Besides, pious veneration of the Virgin has nothing to do with the heathen worship St. Jeremiah describes in Jer. 7:18. When Catholics refer to the Virgin as "Queen of Heaven", this is done in reference to the fact that she is the mother of the King of Kings. On the other hand, the pagans worshiped a being who they believed reigned over heaven as a monarch, or was the wife of their 'king' idols.

If we should cease referring to the Virgin as "Queen of Heaven" because pagans used that word for their false idols, then we should also stop using "Lord", "God", "King of Kings", "Saviour", and "Christ" for Jesus, because pagans used those words for their idols at one point in history.

>>855415

See here's the thing though. Nowhere in the Bible is that title ever used to refer to anything except the pagan idol.

Do you think that was intentional or did God make a mistake by never including this supposedly important anywhere in his word except in reference to pagan practices? If you use a term that you (or one of your leaders) introduced later, expect people to go back to the inspired Scripture to find out what that term was legitimately used to signify.

- The man's objection is legitimate.

>>855415

>We don’t worship Mary, we venerate her!!!

I don’t drive a vehicle, I drive a car.

It does not matter how many times papism tries to justify her fornications with wood and stone. Her whoredoms are still great, that is why she has many demigods saints to choose from to worship venerate. She, the orthodox/catholic religion even taught some of her protestant daughters the manner of her fornications. Imagine that! Like mother like daughter.

The queen of heaven is still worshiped venerated today as it once was by the children of Israel.

>Such is the way of an adulterous woman; she eateth, and wipeth her mouth, and saith, I have done no wickedness.

Your religion is not fooling men, especially not God. Papism puts hinduism to shame. But nooo… catholics use idols statues to remind themselves of the devil spirit they are praying to. They ’’’clearly’’’aren’t praying to the physical statue. Oh, wait, what’s that? Hindus do the same? Oh well…

>>855415

>We don’t worship Mary, we venerate her!!!

I don’t drive a vehicle, I drive a car.

It does not matter how many times papism tries to justify her fornications with wood and stone. Her whoredoms are still great, that is why she has many demigods saints to choose from to worship venerate. She, the orthodox/catholic religion even taught some of her protestant daughters the manner of her fornications. Imagine that! Like mother like daughter.

The queen of heaven is still worshiped venerated today as it once was by the children of Israel.

>Such is the way of an adulterous woman; she eateth, and wipeth her mouth, and saith, I have done no wickedness.

Your religion is not fooling men, especially not God. Papism puts hinduism to shame. But nooo… catholics use idols statues to remind themselves of the devil spirit they are praying to. They ’’’clearly’’’aren’t praying to the physical statue. Oh, wait, what’s that? Hindus do the same? Oh well…

>>855415

please stop arguing and just answer my question. you're not going to resolve this 500 year old conflict on an exiled Polynesian basket weaving forum.

are the examples I give acceptable or not by Catholic teachings?

>>855397

It's a good start, but it isn't a missal. I would rather recommend a missal because it will allow you to follow what's going on at the mass. Maybe you didn't start going to the mass on sundays but you definitely should, and you should talk to a priest too. I'm really grateful that you're on your way to become catholic, I wish you the best bro.

>>855419

No they are not, what were you expecting lmao

>>855418

>>855416

Imagine going in the catholic general just to cope and seethe all day. Don't you guys have a general where you can discuss your faith? Do you think you're going to convert anyone here?

>>658214

Who is the catholic equivalent of Jay Dyer?

What are the modesty guidelines for men?

Is exercising shirtless a sin against modesty?

What if it's on the beach?

What if it's in a residential neighborhood?

Does it matter if it's an attention-grabbing activity like rollerblading or unicycling?

>>855557

If you mean a traditionalist Catholic who does film, cultural, philosophical, and political analysis, then the closest I've seen so far is Tyler Hamilton.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIceFsDESMYRF0rPQ_rd8HQ/videos

I only recently discovered him myself.

>>855491

Why are you bringing your sect to the christian board though? You really don't belong here. If you would do like the gnostics, mormons, SDA do and move to your own board, that would address this. If not expect Christians to ask what you are doing here spreading this junk on the Christian board.

>>855708

Bible-only doctrine is nowhere in The Bible therefore you're a pagan.

>>852685

>In RCIA but praying the rosary daily

I'm in the same position as you my friend, some advice would be to always remember to say your intentions out loud, and take a bible with you. Announce the myster out loud, Read about the mystery you are doing in the bible out loud, if it's a catholic bible also read the commentary out loud. If your parish has a blessed sacrament chapel sit in there and pray the rosary. I also struggle with porn addiction, but things are getting better due to the rosary. God bless you my friend.

I'm in a long distance relationship with a girl and I have a hard time trusting her. It isn't anything she's doing, it's all me. I definitely am an anxious-preoccupied person according to attachment theory. She really is the most wonderful girl in the world but that makes me all the more afraid of if I lose her. I don't think I'm going to lose her, she says she wants to marry me, but I've messed up relationships with my paranoia before. We're both serious Catholics and I would be very appreciative of Catholic resources on this matter. I am not really finding anything when I Google "Catholic insecure about relationships".

How did you deal with sexual frustration? I cannot even be in the same room as my fiancee without thinking of having sex with her. It is pretty distracting at this point

>>856195

Imagine what it will be like to see the flesh of Christ, like his hand or his holy face. Also pray to Our Blessed Mother for purity, and trust in God's grace. Also remember that to fornicate is to backstab Jesus and hurt blessed Mary. I will be praying for you.

Bros, I need help on this one. I've agreed to take my best friend of three years on a date this week. We've both had feelings for each other since we met, but I'm a little uneasy. I could see her being a great mother to my children one day, but I worry as she has many biases against Christ and his church. We met in high school ( she's still in high school) and at the time I was very far from Christ. Interactions with her indirectly played a large part in changing how I see the world and finding Christ. I am about to begin RCIA, but she is nowhere near that point. She grew up in a fundamentalist protestant household around a grandmother that told her that God only loves you if you keep to his commandments. At the moment she is agnostic and she was even began to become involved in wicca some months ago before she stopped under my influence. Her family is ex-Catholic, but shes never been around the church. Here in the south, there is so much anti-Catholic bias already, I just worry that if I'm the only Catholic influence on her she might not see the church as anything but another one of those places that has burned her. What do you think bros ? What should i do ?

>>856232

Pray for her conversion as its a grace.

But also the man leads the woman, so be unapologetic about your faith. Invite her to church, watch pro Catholic stuff with her, etc.

>>856237

Alright, thank you. Our date is today ;-;

>>856237

>>856263

went well. gave her a miraculous medal after dinner. She wore it and didn't seem uneasy about it. was a bit uncomfortable in the restaurant, there was too much going on (hibachi). Rest of the date was perfect. We exchanged kisses on the cheek afterwards. It the first date ever for both of us. Maye thats a bad sign, idk. She did however express that she's not necessarily skeptical of Christianity, shes just got to work through her grandma's low iq takes and more importantly she holds resentment for The Father as a result of her mother dying and some other tragedies she's experienced at a young age. I think this is sadly somewhat common for women. But shes warming up. I think Christ will save her, bros.

Soz for posting my life story. ID changed bc im on my main pc right now.

>>850766

Pray for one, brah.

>>856357

I like to think the great Catholic Monarch is just around the corner. Like maybe he's a zoomer or something. I'm probably wrong though.

>>856441

Just do it bro.

Lmao

>>856441

1.Grave Matter: The act itself is intrinsically evil and immoral. …

2. Full Knowledge: The person must know that what they're doing or planning to do is evil and immoral.

3 Deliberate Consent: The person must freely choose to commit the act or plan to do it.

And here is a tip for scrupulosity: You are not that special. Let me explain. The #1 rule among demons: ANYTHING…BUT God. Demons will try to keep you focused on yourself and not on God. Remember, the damned in Hell are focused on their sins. I say this as someone who is scrupulous as well.

i've learnt that there are three types of latin mass: solemn, high and low.

can someone tell me how many types of novus ordo masses there are?

Would it be a sin to work as an order picker at a warehouse that sells all kinds of items, most of the items are neutral but some items are bad like condoms, tarot cards, bad books, immodest clothes etc.?

>>856607

Don't know if they have official names, but I've seen Liturgy of the Eucharist only, spoken Liturgy in vernacular, sung Liturgy, and Latin Novus Ordo

Pray for my parish. Due to low attendance, it looks like one of the churches in town is going to be closed. I've always thought mine would be safe since it's got a decent attendance each week, but I'm worried since my church has no priority compared to the others in town.

>>856839

Where you from, fren?

What's the name of your parish?

>>856843

I won't give a location, but it's called St. Mary's. I realize this doesn't narrow it down at all, but that's all I'm willing to say.

Hello my fellow cathobros, I have a question regarding the dogma on the Immaculate Conception.

My understanding is that the Virgin Mary gave birth without suffering because she was not affected by the original sin. Yet, I read the Revelation the other day and read this: "She was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth." This is the chapter "The woman and the dragon", and I've always been told that the woman was an allegory for the VM.

Isn't there a contradiction here?

Btw I'm not a larping protsh*t, I'm genuinely asking.

>>857008

Because that scene has more symbolical layers than just Mary. Normally its also associated with the new Israel, that is, the Church.

Example "With child, to signify that the Church, even in the time of persecutions, brought forth children to Christ. (Witham) It likewise signifies the difficulties which obstructed the first propagation of Christianity. (Pastorini)"

>>857008

It always happens, its literally the flesh and blood of Jesus hidden under the appearances of bread and wine.

The added ocasional visual miracle is simply showing what it really is to doubtful minds.

For example, that case in Argentina where after mass someone noticed a host that had been left there unconsumed. So the priest took it and put it in water for it to dissolve and be properly disposed.

But rather than dissolve it became bloody. The current Pope was the bishop there and had it analysed. It was shown to be heart muscle tissue, of someone who underwent a lot of stress, with cells still alive.

So everyone in that mass ate the same batch of consecrated hosts meaning they all ate the flesh of Christ, just under a different appearance.

>>857019

It always happens, its literally the flesh and blood of Jesus hidden under the appearances of bread and wine.

The added ocasional visual miracle is simply showing what it really is to doubtful minds.

For example, that case in Argentina where after mass someone noticed a host that had been left there unconsumed. So the priest took it and put it in water for it to dissolve and be properly disposed.

But rather than dissolve it became bloody. The current Pope was the bishop there and had it analysed. It was shown to be heart muscle tissue, of someone who underwent a lot of stress, with cells still alive.

So everyone in that mass ate the same batch of consecrated hosts meaning they all ate the flesh of Christ, just under a different appearance.

Gosh darn, what's the bible passage about "being a bug living in a kings castle?"

… to someone we shouldn't.

Got my latest "Northwest Catholic" in the mail yesterday. I did a quick flip through to see what heresies and abominations were going on in the diocese.

Yeah, there's the Archbishop saying the Novus Ordo Supper Service, handing out the holy Eucharist into people's hands.

Oh look, it's Bergoglio washing the feet of criminals, making a mockery of the Christ washing the feet of the Apostles. Again.

Then I saw an article that was 100% real Catholic, and a problem I seen both before Vatican II and after, in the Roman Catholic Church and the Novus Ordo Church…

People who pray for something they shouldn't… wealth, women, or to give up their cross in life.

People who pray to the wrong person for the wrong thing. Catholics pray to the Church Triumphant for them to pray for them. Those who pray e.g. the Blessed Virgin for this that or the other thing have forgotten she can give you nothing, all things come from God, and she is not God.

Besides being blasphemy, it alienates the protestants who know that's wrong. How often do you hear protestants use the excuse that Catholics worship Mary? Real Catholics who know their faith don't. We ask Mary to pray for us.

It's Straight out of The Book of Job. Job can give you nothing, but he will clean up your request and ask the master for you.

>>857022

>hidden under the appearances of bread and wine

lol, now that's just some cope. It's still literally bread and wine when you examine it

>they all ate the flesh of Christ, just under a different appearance.

Maybe you could say it became flesh later, but when the laymen ate it, it was still bread and wine

I'm reading the bible a second time. I'm going to have to read it several times to remember and understand it's contents.

One of the problems I had the first time I read the bible was that it was difficult to keep track of the towns and of the various persons and how one was related to another. Especially in the old testament.

Are there notes of the various towns and persons that you can use as you read along each book and chapter?

I could use wikipedia; is there something better

>>857008

Personally, I see another element to your problem.

>The BVM never suffered whilst giving birth because she was born spared from Original Sin

That's theology. It's exactly what it appears to be.

>Revelations

That's not straightforward at all. There's so many layers to things. You've got to recognise poetry when you see it and then avoid treating it like a literal fact.

I suffer from scrupulousity and social anxiety which prevents me from laying bare my inner most neuroses to a priest outside the formalities of mass or confession. One of my main stumbling blocks is specificity in regards to the enumeration of sins, having to be exact and recall your sins, their circumstances and quantity as best as you can. I understand that for your absolution to be efficacious on your part, one of the requirements is to confess your sins in 'kind and number', but would simply saying 'I confess any mortal sins (kind?) I have commit since birth (number?). To be anymore specific would cause me to be increasingly more overwhelmed.

>>857062

1) You only have to confess mortal sins. Venial ones are absolved during mass.

2) The priest isn't allowed to require you to identify yourself. Many violate the sacrament and require that you identify yourself. e.g. Bishop Sanborn tells his priest not to forgive someone who keeps confessing the same sin over and over. How can they do that unless they identified you?!

3) Padre Pio did not and cannot create Catholic Dogma. Catholic dogma only comes from the Holy Ghost, sent by Jesus Christ, to the true Vicars of Christ and is given to us by public revelations. Private revelations have been used by the wicked to corrupt and defile the Church. The Mother of God is horrified at the blasphamy done in her name. Fatima is false! No way would the Blessed Virgin, the meek and mild Mother of the Lord Jesus, ever try and stay his hand! It is a false personal revelation. Again, God promised to work through the Chair of Saint Peter and to send the Holy Ghost. Any other source is false!

4) You need to confess only Mortal sins. Mortal sins are grave, and named by the Lord Jesus Christ our Judge himself in Matt 19:16 (oddly, Protestants don't believe Christ, but quickly say they do and call Acts. They don't believe in Jesus if they deny his words!) There is another Gospel created by Saint Aquinas that makes every little thing a mortal sin. They do this out of love of money! The Summa is not from the Holy Ghost, not infallible, can be challenged on premise and logic, and not part of the Catholic faith. As the catechisms of Pope Saint Pius X and Saint Bellaremine say, a grave sin is harms someone else, be it man or God.

If Mary was preemptively saved and therefore excluded from original sin, wouldn't she be freed from all bodily defects ? She was spared labor pains according to the church fathers.

>>857185

And taken into heaven body and soul. Alive, not suffering death.

This is different than the beliefs of the Orthodox.

But that's since Pope Pius XII, and I'm not sure he was a true Pope since he changed the Tridentine Mass, thus undergoing the curse of Pope Leo XIII and he surrounded himself with Freemasons like Cardinal Bugnini instead of excommunicating them.

The college of cardinals was so corrupt that Roncalli had no problem being elected Pope after Pius XII.

What went wrong with the Catholic Church started long before Pope Pius XII, as even Pope Pius X knew about the wickedness. As Pope Pius XII he did nothing to stop it, even tolerating and not naming freemasons exposed by the Italian government.

The Catholic faith is not "Marion apparitions" and this effort to elevate the Mother of God to some standard of goddess is not just heresy, but outright blasphemy. This blasphemy has turned many a protestant away from the One True Church of Christ and to the wickedness of protestant-ism, which are all man made religions.

Christ the Lord said that he would send his Paraclete to the the Apostles, not his mother; and gave the keys to heaven to Saint Peter, not his mother.

Saint Paul, in the infallible and indefectible Bible says never put a woman in charge of teaching or in a position of authority; yet all that goes out the window when we hear of Marion apparitions and how Mary grants promises of heaven and even stayed the hand of God Almighty himself! Mary was an obedient servant of God's intent, not some "strong woman" who thwarts the will of God!

Fatima is false, as are the magic talisman that makes it so you don't need the sacrament of penance. The Rosary is for counting prayers, not a magic talisman.

The Catholic faith is found ONLY in the Bible and the infallible pronouncement of the true Popes. (Those who are an Anathema you are required by the faith to shun, so they cannot be a true Pope!)

All Marion Apparitions are not of the Catholic faith. You know this because the LORD GOD said he would send the Holy Ghost to the Apostles, not his mother to the laity. You also know this because Saint Paul, IN THE BIBLE, said that it is wrong to put a woman in charge of teaching. This is the Catholic faith!

Many Marion apparitions are Freemason lies. For example, Fatima got you to ignore the Catholic faith and do NOTHING while the Freemasons infiltrated the Church. They told you to expect it and you did nothing. They told you to expect the Jews to murder the Orthodox in Russia and you did nothing.

Pope Pius XII was probably a false Pope. Why do I say this? Because he had to know that "Cardinal" Bugnini was a Freemason - the Italian government made the names of all Freemasons public. You cannot be a Catholic and be a freemason - it is automatic ex-communication. yet, he not only didn't excommunicate Bugnini, he allowed Bugnini to change the Holy Mass, undergoing the Curse of Pope Leo.

The FSSP, having said that the laity can take the Holy Eucharist in the hand and that the Novus Ordo mass of Bugnini is legit are an anathema. You must shun them. You must shun the Novus Ordo.

>>857260

Sedes slowly morph into quasi-prots.

>>658214

Bump

I want Catholics beheaded

If I could kill every frat boy through a computer process I would

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0Elb6OlvIU&ab_channel=ScottyKilmer

We know who's who. The low IQ white people expose themselves by being "too sexy" or they make their whole lives revolving around their sexiness. That's where they're dead. And Thank God for that. Get rid of them.

If that's the kind of love you want to wait for

It's not ready yet

https://youtu.be/pXyUUUFtNJc?t=39

>>857448

Someday, maybe you could have your way

Right now's just not the time

Some things a man just got to do

I wish you could change my mind

Oh-oh-oh-oh

If you want a cowboy on a white horse

Riding off into the sunset

If that's kind of love you wanna wait for

Hold on tight, girl, I ain't there yet

No, I ain't there yet

No, I ain't there yet

>>857448

This love, is getting kind of dangerous

Feels like it's a loaded gun

My-my, it's turning like a cloud of dust

My heart always wants to run

Someday, maybe you could have your way

Right now's just not the time

Some things a man just got to do

I wish you could change my mind

Oh-oh-oh-oh

If you want a cowboy on a white horse

Riding off into the sunset

If that's kind of love you wanna wait for

Hold on tight, girl, I ain't there yet

No, I ain't there yet

No, I ain't there yet

https://youtu.be/pXyUUUFtNJc?t=34

Hold on tight girl, I aint there yet.

I cry now every time. I heard this song when I went into my mom's car when I didn't want to go into TJ Maxx. I cried listening to it. The song name is, "White Horse".

If you want a cowboy on a white horse, then wait. I'm the best man.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXyUUUFtNJc&ab_channel=ChrisStapletonVEVO

11 Then I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse! The one sitting on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war. 12 His eyes are like a flame of fire, and on his head are many diadems, and he has a name written that no one knows but himself. 13 He is clothed in a robe dipped in blood, and the name by which he is called is The Word of God. 14 And the armies of heaven, arrayed in fine linen, white and pure, were following him on white horses. 15 From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron. He will tread the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty. 16 On his robe and on his thigh he has a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords.

Everything should be done to reduce sadness for the Messiah. It should be done to make him stop crying. Every action anyone does or any thought anyone has should be had not in order that the Messiah does not suffer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXyUUUFtNJc&ab_channel=ChrisStapletonVEVO

My life is empty.

I just want love from one woman, a singular woman, and I can't get it. So I hate myself. I just want the one.

https://youtu.be/pXyUUUFtNJc?t=45

>>857457

empty? so fill yourself with writings by apostle paul. fill life with obeying that guidance.

>>857458

that is not reason to hate yourself. just keep searching praying and hoping.

>>857454

promoted violence violated #laws of u.s.

Hail Mary

Hail Mary

Hail Mary

Stupid asshole. You stupid winnie the pooh pricks worshiping a goddamned woman

>>857493

SHUT. THE winnie the pooh UP DUDE

UNDERSTAND WHO YOU'RE TALKING TO

WORTHLESS winnie the pooh IDIOT