/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>789860

>jesuits

what did you expect

That would be something like the Talmudic/Kabbalastic view, and Martin was a known Jew shill, plus >>789877 so this is not surprising at all.

he was a literal jew shill (got paid by jews), and I don't really think Fr. Martin was considered a theologian, more like church-pop historian/pundit

>>789903

>>789915

Would a Jew shill do any of the following?:

>Malachi Martin documents that a Black Mass was held in St Paul's Cathedral in 1963.  During this heinous affair, several cardinals "installed Lucifer to his appropriate place" in the Vatican, as "head of the church."

>Martin claims that a good deal of the child molestation occurring now is actually Satanic worship.  Part of the Luciferian rites of many of the priests, nuns, and hierarchy.  He intimates that many who engage in this kind of "worship" are indeed secret Masons.

>He also wrote a blockbuster entitled "The Jesuits: The Society of Jesus and the Betrayal of the Roman Catholic Church."  In that book, he details how the Jesuits became Communists in the 1960's, under their then Secretary General, Pedro Arrupe.  And he documents how they fomented Communist revolutions in several countries–especially in Latin American and Africa.

>>790082

>would a jewish shill make up lies about the Holy See?

yes, yes he would

>>790351

>i just believe whatever I read

do you really think a satanic black mass was held at a Cathedral? do you really think a bunch of cardinals got together and make Lucifer a pope?

do you want to buy some mix-tapes? i expose pope lucifer alongside some phat beats

>>790355

woe to thee of little faith, IP Hopping SSPX

>>790361

>FFS the Pope just passed law saying preists that witness sexual abuse have to report it to the local authorities and if they are found covering it up they are just as guilty.

100% chance that priests are going to start breaking the confessional seal over this and the Pope will endorse it. Priests who don't break the seal will be smeared as child molesters. This is how Satan will destroy the sacrament of reconciliation.

>>790361

If you say that Hell has triumphed over both the Church and the Seat, you call Christ a liar. You're already under Satan's sway.

>>790362

>100% chance that priests are going to start breaking the confessional seal over this and the Pope will endorse it

No, there is no way to prove that a priest heard anything in a confessional, unless the State bug-taps the confessional or sends false repentants.

>>789860

Is there any reason to thin they're the same? That quote can be interpreted either way.

>>790364

Here's how it will go: first some priests will break the seal of their own volition. This will set a precedent, and people will start demanding that a general "exception" to the seal is made for these crimes. But because, as you correctly pointed out, there's currently no way to know what a priest heard, there will be a push to create some kind of "confidential" record of confessions that certain Vatican and/or State authorities have access to so they can check. And bam, the seal is abolished.

>>790368

>Here's how it will go: first some priests will break the seal of their own volition

which is forbidden of the church, and may lead them to being defrocked.

>This will set a precedent, and people will start demanding that a general "exception" to the seal is made for these crimes

no, that's heresy and would cause a serious disturbance among everyone. Pope Francis is loose when it comes to tradition, but there's bounds he won't cross.

>>790371

I hope you're right but Pope Francis already crossed the giving Communion unworthily line and the weasel-word endorsement of homosexuality line, so I don't feel confident.

>>790379

>I hope you're right but Pope Francis already crossed the giving Communion unworthily line and the weasel-word endorsement of homosexuality line, so I don't feel confident.

Pope Francis wouldn't even register on the crisis the Pope Corpse trials or the anti-Pope episodes gave us, I really wish people would educate themselves. Not against you, in particular, but definitely against the SSPX schismatics.

>>790381

>the Pope Corpse trials or the anti-Pope episodes gave us,

The difference here is that no-one ever tried to actually change the doctrine of the Church and institutionalize these things as good. That was just regular old humans sinning and doing evil shit as far as I'm concerned. Just like the pornocracy Popes, sure they were evil sexual sinners, but the only souls they damned were their own, they didn't try to change the doctrine of the Church and get laypeople to endorse sodomy. Francis is much worse because he is leading millions of souls to hell with his wink-wink-nudge-nudge attitude to homosexuality.

>>790388

>The difference here is that no-one ever tried to actually change the doctrine of the Church and institutionalize these things as good

Francis hasn't done these things, and if he has, he's done a horrible job of it.

>Francis is much worse because he is leading millions of souls to hell with his wink-wink-nudge-nudge attitude to homosexuality.

?

Wasn't he just saying that homosexuals shouldn't become priests the other day?

The words "Devil" and "Satan" are distinct but, much like "Hell" and "Hades", they end referring to the same thing. "Devil" can trace its roots to Diabolos, meaning "Slanderer" in Greek, while "Satan" is a Hebrew word meaning "Accuser, or Adversary". Interestingly, there is already a distinction made between any adversary and the adversary in Hebrew; when it is used to refer to any person who opposes another they are called "satan" whereas when it refers to the great adversary it is called "ha-satan". I'm not sure how it works out in the New Testament, but the understanding should be that when Jesus tells Peter to "get behind me, Satan", he's not calling him the Satan, but he is certainly evoking that level of severity.

Having said that, Satan and Devil can be seen more as Titles than a name given to a specific entity. There are many Devils and Satans, but there is certainly only the Satan, who is also the Devil. It's a bit of a Catholic issue to start making these distinctions and ordering them. I won't go so far as to say it's actually condoned by the Catholic church, just that it's an error to focus so much on it. Same with the ordering of the Angels and how Heaven works. It's at best speculation.