Saint John Henry Newman was so right. His motto was that we should never prefer peace to holiness. Peace without the pursuit of holiness is a false peace. A lie and a deception. Papa Leo sat down with an adulteror and his mistress living in a state of the most profound public grave sin and never said a word. John the Baptist did things a little different.
I am not a fan of Charles and do not know what Pope Leo was trying to accomplish… but King Charles did marry Camilla and princess Diana is deceased. I suppose he let quite a bit of time go by between Princess Diana’s death and remarrying so that would be grave sin.
Yes but Camilla was married to another man and they have adult children. I don't wish to go further but I think the Catholic church is no longer strong on the indissolubility of matrimony.
As far as I know, Mr Camilla is still alive. We have to remember that ‘it takes two to tango’ and the wife isn’t always the victim. If I read the ‘Catholic Thing’ critique of the Pope’s recent Exhortation today (https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2025/10/23/leo-xiv-contra-leo-xiii/), he is a Marxist, which totally conflicts with the opinions of Leo XIII, whom he is using for ‘cover’. The Exhortation resembles a call to revolution (‘take’, with no conditions).
It seems to me that Catholics currently outnumber Anglicans in England, and that, following the new Archbishop of Canterbury, 80% of the worldwide Anglican Church has split into schism. Everything is moving in a prophetic direction, and soon the Warning announced at Garabandal will arrive.
Regarding world poverty, I would like to say two things. Lucifer is the one who moves great fortunes, and unfortunately, 10% of humanity has accumulated as much wealth as the remaining 90%. Great fortunes have not only been amassed unjustly, but their owners are willing to steal, murder, lie, and defame anyone who tests their patience. It’s not that they want even more money; they want it all.
I was listening to the Papal Posse this morning with sadness. I agree with everything they said. Mother Angelica said we should always maintain a Spirit of Joy no matter how bad things seem. I can this with Raymond Aroyyo. He certainly does not seem to let things get him down. I admire this.
A year or two ago I came to realize something about myself. Big deal! So, I came to realize something about the very way I think about things - concepts, problems and solutions. I think I have in the past been very influenced (perhaps corrupted? It's hard for me to be the judge of that - though I must!) by my education, especially in science and at university. But I am no longer guitly of Scientism. I came to realize that the Hegelian Dynamic speaks loudly within me. I behold a proposition or a problem or a concept and I begin to analyse it from various positions; what could be said from the positive aspect and from the negative aspect. Then I try to resolve the conflicts arising, and I try to come up with a higher synthesis which resolves any difficulties. That is the Hegelian Dialectic Method. The application of the method in scientific fields has often led to new paradigms. It is a far cry from the exhortation of Jesus to "let your yes be yes and your no be no'. As Taylor Marshall has pointed out, this method is also akin to the freemasonic and luciferian doctrine of 'ordo ab chaos'. Many have pointed out, including on this forum, that this 'concept, problem, solution' dynamic is part of the toolkit of the 'lefties', the Saul Alynskyites, the 3-letter agencies' and WEF's methods etc. One should note however that, even long before Hegel, St. Thomas Aquinas did employ a similar method in his Summa Theologia. He always gave the objections to his arguments before finally refuting them. But that is just it. He did not (at least I think so, I am open to correction) use the objections to go on to a higher synthesis. He simply acknowledged them and then refuted them, thus reinforcing his doctrine. With that said, it is easy for me to be affronted by the silver tongued way that Michael Lofton appears to be condemning the this universalism (Assisi 3.0) of Pope Leo and previous Popes but in the end throws up a smokescreen to justify it in the name of a new paradigm, 'a new way of looking at things which can make people confused'. And to be honest, that is how I feel about it. I am against universalism and modernism - the synthesis of all heresies. However, reverting to type, I really do want to know what is the correct way to view these matters. Yes, first and foremost I should pray for the light of the Holy Spirit to be shown to me. Perhaps I am very far from being correctly disposed to receiving His Light. But I want to give the opposing arguments a fair hearing (while in the background hearing - 'come out from them, what fellowship can good have with evil?'). I am not a professional Theologian or Philosopher but this is the gist of some opposing arguments. Can Doctrine develop significantly such that it changes in a way seemingly contradictory to previous Doctrine? In the Bible as a whole we see a Development. In the Old Testament, especially the Torah, the Lord can be seen as harsh in the sense that He commanded the destruction of whole cities and whole nations. (I understand and justify to myself this fact by the following question: Do you really think that God was going to allow the vulnerable, delicate little seed of His Revelation to His people to be snuffed out? God did what was necessary to establish His people, His Church. And besides, He is the Author of Life. The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away (Job)). In contrast, Jesus brought us a NEW commandment, 'love one another as I have loved you'. Jesus tells us that not one jot of the Law will pass away, and yet he says something like, 'you have heard it said in the Scripture "x", but I say "y"'. So there are clear developments in the progressive revelation of God's word. The Church has always maintained that the progressive Revelation of God's Word ended with the death of the last apostle. However, Jesus said that there was a lot which he could tell His disciples but that they would not be able for it yet. And that He would ask the Father to send the Holy Spirit to lead us into all truth. St. John says at the end of his Gospel that Jesus said and did many things which are not written such that there would not be enough space in all the books of the world to record them all (paraphrasing here). So, is it possible, is it just possible that Michael Lofton is right? That the Holy Spirit is still progressively changing His Church and its Doctrine through His Popes and the Bishops. That peace through the One World Religion, Unity and Peace among peoples is the God-ordained future for us. That Synodality is part of that process? That the Church has come up through an imperialist Roman hegemony (with its attendant errors and deficits) because God ordained that it still needed that protection? But that the old doctrines need to give way now to new ones which reflect the Mind of the God of Love. What mother would reject her son or daughter if they were 'gay'? Similarly, how can the Church reject homosexuals? Are these developments which are taking place before our eyes a reflection of the Lord's plea in St. John's Gospel, 'that they may all be one'? Are these modernist thoughts and arguments from the pit of Hell or could they possibly be from the Holy Spirits' Development of Doctrine? Doubtless, this may scanalise many of you but I ask in all sincerity.
I understand your dilemma as I have gone through the same thought process thinking what if I am wrong in my thinking and recent Popes are right? We were warned of division of cardinal vs cardinal & bishop vs bishop that there would be two camps. Is it possible for example that traditionalists are in the wrong camp? We always assume automatically that we are in the right camp. My deep Catholic instincts are automatically biased in favour of the Pope thats the way I am made. I have to say when Pope Francis changed the catechism on the death penalty it really shook me because if that can change then other teachings can change. My take is that we are facing diabolical disorientation on all sides. But God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. Certain things are set in stone like the 10 commandments can never change. Church dogma can never change. That is why these times are so confusing as relativism has become embedded in modern man's thinking and has entered the church causing mayhem.
Once I asked Alexa this: What is the probability of a protein forming by chance? His answer was: The probability is 1 divided by 10 to the power of 171, which is much greater than the number of atoms in the universe. On the other hand, with chance ruled out, there is another premise to consider. Everything is in motion. What is a protein today could be a piece of modeling clay tomorrow, but that doesn’t happen because there is an intelligent fine-tuning of the weak force (electrons, protons, neutrons, and subatomic particles), and there is also a perfect adjustment of the cosmological constant. These adjustments are expressed as decimal numbers and cannot tolerate even the slightest variation, because then the universe would collapse in an instant. That maintenance is carried out by the angels. God has told us: "I am who I am," and that is the concept of BEING, or, by way of analogy, we can understand it as EXISTING. There is neither reason nor law for the universe to exist, except for LOVE. Moreover, God then revealed himself to man, inscribed the natural law in their hearts, and, if that were not enough, came down to Earth, incarnate in the Virgin Mary, to reveal his Word to us, open the gates of heaven that had remained closed, and guide the Church. Discernment is a gift of the Holy Spirit, and the life of a Christian is a life in communion with his brothers and sisters. The real life of a Christian begins right after the priest says at Mass: I bless you in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. You may go and live in peace. Just as we set foot outside the temple again, the action begins. Jesus Christ had very harsh words for those who appeared like whitewashed tombs but stank on the inside. It’s no use being a bunch of prayer-mongers who seem to sweat holy water. Christianity is action and putting God’s Word into practice. Let our yes be yes. "Let our yes be yes, and our no be no." That's what that phrase means. As for ecumenism, it is simply a necessary path to arrive at the Truth. There is no other way to approach it, but the goal remains the same: to bring the truth of Catholicism to all people.
On another occasion, I asked God: Don’t you want another madman in love with you? And at that moment I became a madman.
Point 1. Hegel has been misinterpreted by others. He came up with the concept of Historicism, that there is a guiding force behind history. Marx took this and implied that it was the utopianism of the dictatorship of the proletariat which would take history to its end. However, Hegel was clear that the Guiding Force behind History is Jesus Christ, Logos. I think dialectic is useful, but only in the matters that God has left for men to discover. It is inappropriate and dangerous for those matters that have already been Divinely Revealed. Having been Revealed, these issues are known and are non-negotiable. One makes changes at one’s peril. Science is fine, in itself, but it errs when it strays into matters that have already been decided and Revealed to us, such as Creation, Consciousness and Morality, things that science does not have the tools to deal with, at all. Science needs to follow the definition given it by Fr. Stanley Jaki and keep out of areas it does not belong. Point 2. I do not think that God ‘developed’ in the course of moving through the Old Testament into the New. I think that it was men, specifically the Israelites who developed. God had to go at men’s pace. At the time of revealing himself to Abraham, mankind had fallen precipitously from where it had been in Eden. There was a great Catholic Priest and anthropologist, Father Schmidt, I think he was, in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, who discovered that the most primitive cultures who had been driven to the ends of the world by other men, such as Pygmies and some Australian Aborigines, were monotheists with a very strong sense of morality and Divine Justice, combined with a belief in an after-life. It seems these were the last bastion of Edenic knowledge, exiled by the great mass of men who had degenerated into the kind of savagery typified by the ancient Israelites. God had to deal with these as He found them and with their neighbouring tribes. He did not choose the Israelites because they were exceptionally good-maybe it was because they were exceptionally bad-it is sinners He wants to save, after all. Point 3. I would assert that the ‘Holy Spirit leading us to all truth’ is represented by the Tradition of the Church and has been expounded by the Fathers. The Gospels are brief accounts of events-reportage, if you will, with Teaching and Wisdom interspersed through it, but their primary purpose is to describe the events leading up to Christ’s Sacrifice and the Sacrifice Itself. Christ’s Ministry lasted three years. How much did He say to the Apostles and His disciples in this period? Probably very much, indeed, and they probably understood very little. The penny probably began to drop after the Crucifixion and Pentecost would have retrospectively enlightened the Apostles regarding all that The Lord had taught them. A small fraction appears in The Gospels, the rest was handed down orally in The Tradition and then recorded for posterity in the writings of the Fathers. The thing now is to preserve it more than develop it. The world hasn’t changed as much as some would like us to believe, nor have men. Modernists despise their forefathers, because the latter are so much like ourselves and modernists want to convince us that, instead, we have ‘evolved’ and are different, needing a new morality for ‘evolved’ men-bullshit I call it! Point 4. Modernism is most definitely from the pit of Hell.
If Pope Francis is right about the Death Penalty, then one has to accept that all previous popes were wrong. If they were all wrong about this very important issue, this removes all guarantees about all other issues. This would mean that The Traditionsl Church is without foundation. However, it would also deny any foundation for the present Church, because another pope might change anything at any time. Total chaos.
Who are the schismatics? The traditional Anglicans in Africa or the madmen (and even madder women) in England? [Leaving aside that all Anglicans are in schism from the True Church].
Apparently, Lucifer, who is said to have been a prodigy of beauty, clearly saw that matter, flesh, power, and hedonistic pleasure would prevail over the spirit. For a man, it is very easy to become entangled in the world because he first knows it thru his senses and then thru his instinctive appetites. Only with intellect and will can one counteract those worldly forces, and that effort isn’t worth it for many who end up falling into depravity. By the time they realize the trap, it’s already too late. Sinful excess always grows until it nullifies human will. We are clay vessels that can carry a treasure or, equally, a monster within our spiritual being. That treasure (the Eucharist) is what protects us, since by our very nature we are tempted to commit the sin we do not want to commit. Only God transforms us. By our own strength alone, we are incapable. All men are sinners. The mortal sin of homosexuality is as deadly as onanism or impure desire and lustful glances. But sin is not the same as the sinner. We are all sinners, and we cannot judge anyone or consider ourselves better than anyone else, because this works as described in the Parable of the Talents. To whom much is given, much will be required. Faith has been given to us, and as a result we will be held accountable. Can homosexuality be accepted by the Church? The answer is a resounding "no." Should the Church bless homosexuals? It cannot bless sin, but it can bless the sinner. Should the Church bless masturbators? No, it cannot bless sin but it can bless the sinner. What about thieves, greedy people, liars, etc.? The Holy Spirit holds the reins of the future for one simple reason: no one can compete with Him. The devil is a fallen angel who received his existence from God, and nothing can stand against Him. God uses him to grant us freedom. If we couldn’t choose between good and evil, we wouldn’t be free, and God doesn’t want slaves. God has created the visible and the invisible; everything is part of BEING. It can be represented by an endless line that fluctuates between positive infinity and negative infinity. On one infinite end lies Love, and on the other, the infinite absence of Love. On which end will we spend our eternity? For us, there is a time and a space. For the angels, there was an instant, since their free decision was complete, eternal, and absolute. Angels and men will be judged at the universal judgment, not as vengeance but as justice for those who were unjustly wronged.
Nevertheless, angels are pure intellects far superior to us, but the Queen of the Angels is human and is our Mother. Therefore, what matters is only Love, regardless of our intellectual abilities or the gifts we have received. God’s mercy toward mankind goes far beyond justice, because He has made it clear that if we ask for forgiveness with a sincere heart, we will be forgiven—and that is thanks to the Lamb of God. But his glory doesn’t end here, because the Lamb is also the Shepherd, gathering his sheep one by one. Ladies and gentlemen, we couldn’t be any more fortunate. We have a wonderful God.
