Michael Voris just put out his 5th video on the 50th Anniversary of VII

[JayneK]

Let me pose to everyone the question I asked Stubborn earlier.  What exactly is Pope Benedict supposed to have done at Assisi 3 that was so terrible and what evidence is there that he actually did it? 

The whole thing itself is an abomination in principle, but let's just start with the basics.

1) He convened and organized the meeting, which is anti-Catholic in principle.

Why do you think the meeting is anti-Catholic in principle?  What do you think happened there and just what Catholic principle do you think it violated?

1) You cited number one while excluding the other four, two of which are problematic in their own right.

2) I have already shown you repeatedly in times past. I do not have the time to present the same perennial teachings over and over again while you simply deny what they say. No evidence ever suffices to satisfy you (you simply don't find it convincing, as you say); what reason do I have to think this time will be any different?

I cited number one because that is the point I have a question about.  What do you think happened at Assisi 3?  This gathering had a different format than the earlier ones and was making a point to avoid having Catholics pray with non-Catholics.  If they did not pray together, what is your concern?  I do not recall you ever answering this in the past.

[Jackson K. Eskew]

Reflect on the following and then consider whether Benedict said anything like it at Assisi 3:

Selected Quotes from the
Writings of St. Alphonsus Liguori
On the Necessity of the Catholic Church for Salvation

"We should constantly thank the Lord for having granted us the gift of the true faith, by associating us with the children of the Holy Catholic Church. How many are the infidels, heretics and schismatics who do not enjoy the happiness of the true faith! Earth is full of them and they are all lost!"

"Consider, moreover, the special love of God towards you in allowing you to be born in a Christian land and in the bosom of the true Church. How many people are born of idolaters, Jews, Mohammedans or other heretics: and all of them are lost!"

"We must believe that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true Church; hence, they who are out of our Church, or they who are separated from it, cannot be saved."

"Mary obtains salvation for all who have recourse to her. Oh! If all sinners had recourse to Mary, who would ever be lost? . . . He who is protected by her will be saved; he who is not will be lost."

"If you persevere until death in true devotion to Mary, your salvation is certain."

"Innovators say that the Lord gives each of the faithful a clear knowledge of Scripture. Behold, the 'private interpretation' of the heretics which has produced such a variety of creeds! Hence, after all of the Congresses and Synods they have held, they have never been able to draw up a formula of uniform belief; hence, everyone knows that among the Reformers there are as many formulas of faith as there are individuals. This alone is sufficient to show that they are in error and do not have the true faith. God arranged that the true faith would be preserved in the Roman Church alone, so that, there being but one Church, there would be but one faith and one doctrine for all the faithful."

"The Catholic faith alone produces miracles, which are never seen among heretics. Plants of this sort cannot grow in a soil cursed by God; they can take root only in that Church where the true faith is professed. . . God cannot sanction the performance of a miracle except in favor of the true religion; were He to permit it in support of error, He would deceive us.

"All the misfortunes of unbelievers spring from too great an attachment to the things of life. This sickness of heart weakens and darkens the understanding, and leads to eternal ruin. If they would try to heal their hearts by purging them of their vices they would soon receive light, which would show them the necessity of joining the Catholic Church where alone is salvation."

[Old Salt]

Pope Benedict XVI, not Benedict.

[Jackson K. Eskew]

Pope Benedict XVI, not Benedict.

I'll take this feeble answer as an admission that - though it was a perfect opportunity - we heard nothing even remotely like those words of St. Alphonsus from Pope Benedict XVI at Assisi 3. There were no exhortations whatsoever for these heretics, schismatics, and infidels to convert. This failure to call them to the truth was far, far from charitable.

"Hear, O earth: Behold I will bring evils upon this people, the fruits of their own thoughts: because they have not heard my words, and they have cast away my law. To what purpose do you bring me frankincense from Saba, and the sweet smelling cane from a far country? your holocausts are not acceptable, nor are your sacrifices pleasing to me....And they healed the breach of the daughter of my people disgracefully, saying Peace, peace: when there was no peace.... We looked for peace and no good came: for a time of healing, and behold fear."

-Jeremias 6:19-20; 8:11;15

[JayneK]

Pope Benedict XVI, not Benedict.

I'll take this feeble answer as an admission that - though it was a perfect opportunity - we heard nothing even remotely like those words of St. Alphonsus from Pope Benedict XVI at Assisi 3. There were no exhortations whatsoever for these heretics, schismatics, and infidels to convert. This failure to call them to the truth was far, far from charitable.

It was not the perfect opportunity to tell these people about their need for conversion.  The goal was to show that religion is not, as atheists claim, the primary cause of war.  The meeting was to show that people of various religions value and pray for peace and that they can cooperate with each other.  Exhortations such as you propose would have played right into the cause of atheists.

I have read nothing in Pope Benedict's writings that suggests he disagrees with St. Alphonsus.  But I can certainly understand the pope not deeming it prudent to use this gathering as you suggest.  Your posts lead me to suspect that you do not have a good grasp of what is involved in tact.  You seem to be the sort of person who thinks that truth can only be presented in an offensive way. 

[Jackson K. Eskew]

Pope Benedict XVI, not Benedict.

I'll take this feeble answer as an admission that - though it was a perfect opportunity - we heard nothing even remotely like those words of St. Alphonsus from Pope Benedict XVI at Assisi 3. There were no exhortations whatsoever for these heretics, schismatics, and infidels to convert. This failure to call them to the truth was far, far from charitable.

It was not the perfect opportunity to tell these people about their need for conversion.  The goal was to show that religion is not, as atheists claim, the primary cause of war.  The meeting was to show that people of various religions value and pray for peace and that they can cooperate with each other.  Exhortations such as you propose would have played right into the cause of atheists.

I have read nothing in Pope Benedict's writings that suggests he disagrees with St. Alphonsus.  But I can certainly understand the pope not deeming it prudent to use this gathering as you suggest.  Your posts lead me to suspect that you do not have a good grasp of what is involved in tact.  You seem to be the sort of person who thinks that truth can only be presented in an offensive way. 

The words of St. Alphonsus quoted above were surely offensive to many of his time, as they are to most today. Should we then bowdlerize St. Alphonsus, the Council of Trent, and other pre-Vatican II sources so as not to offend the exquisitely delicate sensibilities of today's lost? What about charity? Charity demands that we don't water them down. In fact, to cut through today's unprecedented static, such unvarnished words should today be presented more forcefully than ever. Are we of the Church Militant or not? Are we unaware that the world is on fire?

Pope Benedict had a great opportunity to speak the unvarnished truth to that gathering of the lost. It would have shocked them, as it would have shocked the world. This would have been good.

And remember that the Holy Ghost is completely unconcerned with whether His words offend anyone. For example:

"Love not the world, nor the things which are in the world. If any man love the world, the charity of the Father is not in him."

-1 John 2:15

"Who is a liar, but he who denieth that Jesus is the Christ? This is Antichrist, who denieth the Father, and the Son."

-1 John 2:22

"Adulterers, know you not that the friendship of this world is the enemy of God? Whosoever therefore will be a friend of this world, becometh an enemy of God."

-James 4:4

"Know also this, that, in the last days, shall come dangerous times. Men shall be lovers of themselves, covetous, haughty, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, wicked, without affection, without peace, slanderers, incontinent, unmerciful, without kindness,traitors, stubborn, puffed up, and lovers of pleasures more than of God: Having an appearance indeed of godliness, but denying the power thereof. Now these avoid."

-2 Timothy 3:1-5

"For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables."

-2 Timothy 4:3-4

[JayneK]

It was not the perfect opportunity to tell these people about their need for conversion.  The goal was to show that religion is not, as atheists claim, the primary cause of war.  The meeting was to show that people of various religions value and pray for peace and that they can cooperate with each other.  Exhortations such as you propose would have played right into the cause of atheists.

I have read nothing in Pope Benedict's writings that suggests he disagrees with St. Alphonsus.  But I can certainly understand the pope not deeming it prudent to use this gathering as you suggest.  Your posts lead me to suspect that you do not have a good grasp of what is involved in tact.  You seem to be the sort of person who thinks that truth can only be presented in an offensive way. 

The words of St. Alphonsus quoted above were surely offensive to many of his time, as they are to most today. Should we then bowdlerize St. Alphonsus, the Council of Trent, and other pre-Vatican II sources so as not to offend the exquisitely delicate sensibilities of today's lost? What about charity? Charity demands that we don't water them down. In fact, to cut through today's unprecedented static, such unvarnished words should today be presented more forcefully than ever. Are we of the Church Militant or not? Are we unaware that the world is on fire?

Pope Benedict had a great opportunity to speak the unvarnished truth to that gathering of the lost. It would have shocked them, as it would have shocked the world. This would have been good.

Gathering people together on the pretense of praying for peace and then preaching at them would not have drawn anyone to Christ.  It would have been seen as evidence that the Catholics are dishonest and not to be trusted.  It would decrease our ability to present the truth to the world.  The anger that such a deceit would provoke among the participants would play right into the hands of the atheists claiming that religion is the main source of conflict and wars.  Acting as you propose would defeat the purpose of the meeting and  would have caused great harm.

And remember that the Holy Ghost is completely unconcerned with whether His words offend anyone. For example:

"Love not the world, nor the things which are in the world. If any man love the world, the charity of the Father is not in him."

-1 John 2:15

"Who is a liar, but he who denieth that Jesus is the Christ? This is Antichrist, who denieth the Father, and the Son."

-1 John 2:22

"Adulterers, know you not that the friendship of this world is the enemy of God? Whosoever therefore will be a friend of this world, becometh an enemy of God."

-James 4:4

"Know also this, that, in the last days, shall come dangerous times. Men shall be lovers of themselves, covetous, haughty, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, wicked, without affection, without peace, slanderers, incontinent, unmerciful, without kindness,traitors, stubborn, puffed up, and lovers of pleasures more than of God: Having an appearance indeed of godliness, but denying the power thereof. Now these avoid."

-2 Timothy 3:1-5

"For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables."

-2 Timothy 4:3-4

None of these passages show what you claim they do.  You do not seem to see the distinction between telling the truth and causing offense.  Telling the truth is important.  Offending people should be avoided when possible.

[Jackson K. Eskew]

Gathering people together on the pretense of praying for peace and then preaching at them would not have drawn anyone to Christ. 

But there wouldn't have been any pretense at all, because he would have instructed them that true peace can only be found in the one true Church of Christ. He thus would have exhorted them all to, if they sought genuine peace, convert. Instead, all of the Assisi events pushed the world's conception of peace - which is no peace at all.

"Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, do I give unto you."

-John 14:27 (emphasis supplied)

[INPEFESS]

Let me pose to everyone the question I asked Stubborn earlier.  What exactly is Pope Benedict supposed to have done at Assisi 3 that was so terrible and what evidence is there that he actually did it? 

The whole thing itself is an abomination in principle, but let's just start with the basics.

1) He convened and organized the meeting, which is anti-Catholic in principle.

Why do you think the meeting is anti-Catholic in principle?  What do you think happened there and just what Catholic principle do you think it violated?

1) You cited number one while excluding the other four, two of which are problematic in their own right.

2) I have already shown you repeatedly in times past. I do not have the time to present the same perennial teachings over and over again while you simply deny what they say. No evidence ever suffices to satisfy you (you simply don't find it convincing, as you say); what reason do I have to think this time will be any different?

I cited number one because that is the point I have a question about.

O.K. But there are problems with the others, too. Why do you ignore that?

  What do you think happened at Assisi 3?  This gathering had a different format than the earlier ones and was making a point to avoid having Catholics pray with non-Catholics.  If they did not pray together, what is your concern?  I do not recall you ever answering this in the past.

The very purpose of the meeting itself is contrary to the mission of the Gospel as taught by Our Lord, Jesus Christ.

[Norbert]

It was not the perfect opportunity to tell these people about their need for conversion.  The goal was to show that religion is not, as atheists claim, the primary cause of war.  The meeting was to show that people of various religions value and pray for peace and that they can cooperate with each other.  Exhortations such as you propose would have played right into the cause of atheists.

I have read nothing in Pope Benedict's writings that suggests he disagrees with St. Alphonsus.  But I can certainly understand the pope not deeming it prudent to use this gathering as you suggest.  Your posts lead me to suspect that you do not have a good grasp of what is involved in tact.  You seem to be the sort of person who thinks that truth can only be presented in an offensive way. 

The words of St. Alphonsus quoted above were surely offensive to many of his time, as they are to most today. Should we then bowdlerize St. Alphonsus, the Council of Trent, and other pre-Vatican II sources so as not to offend the exquisitely delicate sensibilities of today's lost? What about charity? Charity demands that we don't water them down. In fact, to cut through today's unprecedented static, such unvarnished words should today be presented more forcefully than ever. Are we of the Church Militant or not? Are we unaware that the world is on fire?

Pope Benedict had a great opportunity to speak the unvarnished truth to that gathering of the lost. It would have shocked them, as it would have shocked the world. This would have been good.

Gathering people together on the pretense of praying for peace and then preaching at them would not have drawn anyone to Christ.  It would have been seen as evidence that the Catholics are dishonest and not to be trusted.  It would decrease our ability to present the truth to the world.  The anger that such a deceit would provoke among the participants would play right into the hands of the atheists claiming that religion is the main source of conflict and wars.  Acting as you propose would defeat the purpose of the meeting and  would have caused great harm.

And remember that the Holy Ghost is completely unconcerned with whether His words offend anyone. For example:

"Love not the world, nor the things which are in the world. If any man love the world, the charity of the Father is not in him."

-1 John 2:15

"Who is a liar, but he who denieth that Jesus is the Christ? This is Antichrist, who denieth the Father, and the Son."

-1 John 2:22

"Adulterers, know you not that the friendship of this world is the enemy of God? Whosoever therefore will be a friend of this world, becometh an enemy of God."

-James 4:4

"Know also this, that, in the last days, shall come dangerous times. Men shall be lovers of themselves, covetous, haughty, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, wicked, without affection, without peace, slanderers, incontinent, unmerciful, without kindness,traitors, stubborn, puffed up, and lovers of pleasures more than of God: Having an appearance indeed of godliness, but denying the power thereof. Now these avoid."

-2 Timothy 3:1-5

"For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables."

-2 Timothy 4:3-4

None of these passages show what you claim they do.  You do not seem to see the distinction between telling the truth and causing offense.  Telling the truth is important.  Offending people should be avoided when possible.

News flash: absolute truth is offensive, the gospel is particularly offensive, and in the modern Western hemisphere in particular, NOTHING is more "offensive" to more people than the existence of hell, or absolute truth generally. 

Offending people can be avoided?  Not if we're doing it right.