Twitter | Search | |
Hilary White
Hey guys... here's something to think about: what if Vatican I was, well, wrong?
Reply Retweet Like More
Hilary White 16 Jul 17
V-I doesn't have 1700 years of saints behind it. What was happening exactly then? The bulldozer of Modernia; Freemasonic salting of te earth
Reply Retweet Like
Hilary White 16 Jul 17
I'm not an expert, so this is a real (not snark) question; was Vat-II supposed to be the completion of V-I?
Reply Retweet Like
Gutsy 16 Jul 17
Replying to @Hilarityjane66
Even the opponents of Ultramontanism were OK with it. What we have is a Bad Pope.
Reply Retweet Like
Kansas Catholic 16 Jul 17
Replying to @Hilarityjane66
I have thought A LOT about V1 since the most recent 1Vader5 podcast.
Reply Retweet Like
Kansas Catholic 16 Jul 17
Reply Retweet Like
Kansas Catholic 16 Jul 17
Replying to @Hilarityjane66
To some extent it was. V1 had a schema on the Church that (supposedly) was competed with LG. Of course a V1 LG would have been orthodox.
Reply Retweet Like
iJFM 16 Jul 17
Replying to @Hilarityjane66
Yep, infallible popes awfully hard to square with last 50 years of functional dissolution and reversals of doctrine
Reply Retweet Like
Hilary White 16 Jul 17
No, I was thinking more about the formulation of infallibility. Some objected that a definition would end up backfiring & I think this is it
Reply Retweet Like
Hilary White 16 Jul 17
Replying to @gutsy9
Yeah but the bad pope didn't come out of nowhere. It wasn't an asteroid from the sky. We've got a MUCH bigger problem than Hor-hay
Reply Retweet Like
Hilary White 16 Jul 17
Replying to @KansasCatholic
Got a link?
Reply Retweet Like
Kansas Catholic 16 Jul 17
Replying to @Hilarityjane66
Reply Retweet Like
Hilary White 16 Jul 17
Yes, I've done the reading for this course.
Reply Retweet Like
Kansas Catholic 16 Jul 17
Replying to @Hilarityjane66
The V1 stuff starts at 41:36.
Reply Retweet Like
Hilary White 16 Jul 17
Replying to @KansasCatholic
Oh, Peter's podcast... yeah. I've been meaning to get to this. I'll pretty much listen to anything Peter has to say.
Reply Retweet Like
tornpage 16 Jul 17
Replying to @Hilarityjane66
Not Vatican I. What actually said in VI is wrong?Problem is non-infallible teaching on indefectibility, Mag can't error, etc.
Reply Retweet Like
Novus Ordo Watch 16 Jul 17
Replying to @Hilarityjane66
Well, what if Vatican I was right and Bergoglio just isn’t the Pope?!
Reply Retweet Like
DD 16 Jul 17
Replying to @Hilarityjane66
R&R's final destination is the same as Protestantism: Every man his own arbiter of Truth. Every man his own Pope.
Reply Retweet Like
Gutsy 17 Jul 17
Replying to @Hilarityjane66
Yes, he is the unmasking of the neocon myth that was so comforting from 1978 to 2013.
Reply Retweet Like