"RORATE" Traditional Latin Mass in the Archdiocese of Toronto

Friday, 4 March 2016

Giovanni Battista Montini to be a Saint?

Reports out of Rome are that a second "miracle" is being attributed to Paul VI thus opening now the pathway for his canonisation.

Look, the Saint Machine is considered "infallible." 

Yet.

He presided over the "self-demolition" and opened the door for the "smoke of Satan" and one encyclical does not erase the damage this man did to the Catholic Church.

http://padrepioandchiesaviva.com/uploads/Chiesa_viva_441_S_en_New_Corrected.pdf

Oh well, who am I to judge?

32 comments:

Bruvver Eccles said...

Still nothing for Pope Pius XII, then.

Terri said...

Reading Monsignoir Luigi Villas analysis of the VII papacies is so overwhelming but very necessary .....I'm amazed that more traditional Catholics aren't aware of his work and sacrifice for The Holy Catholic Church.sadly the canonization of Paul the VI is one more wound the church has to bear.

Karl Rahner Jr. said...

They will do anything to canonize Vatican II.

Hans Georg Lundahl said...

What encyclical is supposed to be good?

Btw, I am not rooting for Pius XII either.

Barona said...

Paul VI may well be a saint, but it is another question as to whether or not declaring it so. There can be no doubt that the last years of his life were spent in penitence and regret. My concern is the "political" motivation behind it. St. Dismas is a saint because he repented and Our Lord forgave him. We hope and pray that this too was Paul VI's fate.

I have a suggestion to the Roman Authorities: why not start canonizing the "little people"; those who show us a way of holy living in everyday life. It is true that Blessed Elizabeth of the Trinity is under consideration for canonization. I think her example of life is what Christians need. We need to be given examples of quiet, heroic, saintly living to emulate.

Mark Thomas said...

Vox said..."He presided over the "self-demolition" and opened the door for the "smoke of Satan" and one encyclical does not erase the damage this man did to the Catholic Church. Oh well, who am I to judge?"

Vox, the Church teaches that we have the right to make known to Churchmen our opinions and concerns in regard to this or that issue. I would like to read your opinions on this matter.

Vox, I agree that, unfortunately, many policies and decisions enacted by Pope Blessed Paul VI failed to renew the Church as he had hoped. That, of course, is very much the case in regard to his liturgical revolution. I am convinced that he acted in good faith. However, his reforms often failed to benefit the Church.

In fairness to Pope Blessed Paul VI, radicals within the Church had taken great liberties in regard to the Pope's reforms. Radicals took the reforms into directions not intended by Pope Blessed Paul VI.

We would do well to recall that which Angelo Cardinal Amato, Prefect of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints, declared in regard to Pope Saint John Paul II's Canonization:

"Pope John Paul II is being beatified not because of his impact on history or on the Catholic Church [emphasis mine, here and elsewhere], but because of the way he lived the Christian virtues of faith, hope and love..."

(Cindy Wooten, Catholic News Service, April 1, 2011 A.D. "John Paul II being beatified for holiness, not his papacy, speakers say.")

If elevated to Sainthood, Pope Blessed Paul VI would reach that stage as the result of his personal sanctity. The supposed success or failure, however one may with to measure that, of his Pontificate is one thing...his sanctity is a different matter.

Throughout Church history, Popes have made prudential decisions that have been good and bad. But a Pope's management skills and prudential decisions are separate from the issue of his sancity.

Example: Pope Venerable Pius XII is beloved in many ways by many Catholics. I believe that in many ways, he was a great Pontiff. However, he made several prudential decisions that I believe failed to benefit the Church.

Pope Venerable Pius XII tapped Monsignor Bugnini to help guide the reform of the Roman Liturgy. Pope Venerable Pius XII instituted radical Holy Week reforms, overthrew the midnight Eucharistic Fast, threw the Holy See's prestige and weight behind the United Nations Organization, and opened the door to Catholic participation in the Ecumenical Movement, which he insisted was inspired by the Holy Ghost. Hmmm...how well did those decisions work out for Holy Mother Church? Not well, at least in my opinion.

However, I have great appreciation for his sanctity and anticipate with joy that he will be recognized as a Saint. I feel the same way about Pope Blessed Paul VI.

We should always, in line with the Church, separate the sanctity of a Pope from the supposed success or failure of his Pontificate.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Guardian said...

Just a point of characterization before I make my opinion known.

Based upon what the Church teaches, ANY Pope cannot be canonized solely on their personal piety. Why? Because the Pope is responsible for all the Souls on Earth, Catholic and non-Catholic just like every bishop is responsible for all the Souls in their diocese, Catholic and non-Catholic.

Based upon that, I find it VERY hard to believe that either Paul VI OR John XXIII are Saints with perpetual access to the Beatific Vision. The damage they did to the Church logically prevents me from accepting their Sainthood. John Paul II, I believe, suffered for the sins of his life and papacy right before our very eyes. In that suffering, he helped to expunge that which he was responsible for.

This is yet another case of the False Church reigning.

my blog: aguardian.blogspot.com

Mark Thomas said...

Vox, another point in regard to the "failed" Papacy of Pope Blessed Paul VI. Let us recall the "failed" Papacy of Pope Saint Celestine V. His governing skills were poor and his Pontificate threw the Church into turmoil (when has that not been the case?). He was treated poorly by Pope Boniface VIII. Pope Saint Celestine V was imprisoned. It was a terrible time for the Church.

However, Pope Saint Celestine V isn't judged upon his Pontificate's colossal failings. He is judged upon his sanctity. He is a Saint despite his chaotic Pontificate. It is all about Pope Celestine V's sanctity. That would apply as well to Pope Blessed Paul VI should Holy Mother Church raise him to the altars.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

john said...

Regarding JPII and how he lived the virtues of Faith, hope, and love, he provided a great example of hope in "faiths," given all the pagan religions he seemed to be in love with. I guess he also hade lots of "love," particularly the love of all of the wacko Masses he presided over, plus the "free love" Catholic Woodstock a.k.a World Youth Days

Guest said...

Sister Lucia of Fatima, the last seer of Fatima, as well as Blessed Jacinta and Blessed Francisco, should be canonized too.


Anonymous said...

The speech Pope Paul IV made to the United Nations when he handed over the Papal Tiara stating that the world must look to the United Nations for peace in the world .So far they have brought nothing but population control in the form of abortion and euthanasia .Thats some legacy ,not to mention the Catholic priests ambushed by execution squads, going into Russia to minister to Roman Catholics ,betrayed by Monsignor Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini ,a fact that caused Pope Pius XII to collapse and have to take to his bed for days with the shock ,when the result of his investigation was made known to him. I'd like to see the Catholic Priests who were shot or sent to the Gulag to die a slow death canonised ,not the man who betrayed them.

Anonymous said...

Mark you have some good points, but when these Pontiffs are canonized we won't hear anything about it being about their personal sanctity. Francis, the rest of the churchmen as well as the secular media will make it all about the (bad) things they did in the Church. It will be all political. Their canonizations are just another way to reinforce the evil revolution in the Church and to continue to destroy it. At best, there will be minimal lip service to their sanctity.

viterbo said...

What a wicked man Montini was; a servant of satan who created a new religion, the express purpose of which was, and is, to attack, mock and deny the Catholic Church.

Anonymous said...

http://padrepioandchiesaviva.com/uploads/Paul_VI.._beatified_english.pdf

Peter Lamb said...

Dear Mark, Personal sanctity in a mason who worshiped lucifer? Who is photographed wearing the ephod - the insignia of the High Priest of the Jews - at the United Nations? Who was a practicing sodomite? Who murdered Priests sent to the Soviet Union? Have a heart!

Mark Thomas said...

Anonymous said..."...but when these Pontiffs are canonized we won't hear anything about it being about their personal sanctity. Francis, the rest of the churchmen as well as the secular media will make it all about the (bad) things they did in the Church. It will be all political. Their canonizations are just another way to reinforce the evil revolution in the Church and to continue to destroy it. At best, there will be minimal lip service to their sanctity."

Anonymous, I agree with you about the secular news media. They would focus attention away from personal sanctity. You are 100 percent correct. But then, we know how they operate. We know what to expect from them.

However, we can turn the tables on the news media. Should he be canonized, the pro-life movement worldwide will seize immediately upon Pope Blessed Paul VI's outstanding pro-life record. In particular, the pro-life movement will promote to the hilt Humanae Vitae.

The canonization (if that comes to pass) of Pope Blessed Paul VI would place Humanae Vitae front-and-center within the Church. Enormous publicity would be granted to Humanae Vitae.

The canonization (if that happens) of Pope Blessed Paul VI would offer a tremendous boost to the pro-life movement.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Hans Georg Lundahl said...

When Rev de Nantes came to him with a dossier for accusations against him, he could have accepted dossier and, unable to judge his own case, authorised a committee to judge him.

Instead he called Italian police - contrary to Lateran Treaty of 1929, contrary to independence of the Vatican.

AND Bergoglio himself claimed he had sent contraceptives to sisters in Africa after they were raped.

THAT, unlike sodomy, which may be a rumour, unlike ephod, which may be photoshopped, is clear impediment for canonisation.

Mark Thomas said...

Peter, we disagree with each other in regard to Pope Blessed Paul VI. We can do so in the spirit of peace. I am sorry, but I don't accept the rumors in question about Pope Blessed Paul VI's supposed homosexuality and Masonic connection. Peter, anybody can spread rumors about anybody. But nobody has ever offered one bit of proof that Pope Blessed Paul VI was a sodomite and Mason.

Let us recall that books and countless article have been written that "proved" supposedly that Pope Venerable Pius XII was "Hitler's Pope". The Pope in question was supposedly a Nazi sympathizer. But not one critic of the Pope has ever offered any proof of that. It is all talk.

The are claims that...Pope Saint John Paul II sold Zyklon B to the Nazis. Pope Benedict XVI was a Nazi. Pope Saint John XXIII was a communist. Bishop Fellay is a liberal who is selling out the SSPX to "modernist" Rome. Pope Venerable Pius XII helped Nazi war criminals escape to South America.

Okay. Now, where is the proof?

The Masonic connection charge against Pope Blessed Paul VI is bizarre in light of the following: When shown a dossier in regard to Monsignor Bugnini's supposed Masonic connection, Pope Blessed Paul VI removed Monsignor Bugnini from power and exiled the Monsignor to Iran.

In his book about the reform of the Roman Liturgy, Monsignor Bugnini offered that he was "fired" as the result of Pope Blessed Paul VI's belief that he (Monsignor Bugnini) was a Freemason. Monsignor Bugnini said that he couldn't even obtain an audience with Pope Blessed Paul VI to refute the claims in question. The Pope dismissed Monsignor Bugnini immediately.

It is bizarre to claim that Pope Blessed Paul VI was a Freemason as not one proof of his induction and membership in that organization exists. It is bizarre to advance said claim when he dismissed Monsignor Bugnini immediately and exiled him to Iran.

It is bizarre to claim that Pope Paul VI was a sodomite when not one shred of evidence exists to confirm that rumor...and on top of that, His Holiness had refuted said rumor publicly.

On top of that, Pope Blessed Paul VI refuted publicly the vile rumors in question about him. But I guess that people prefer to take the word, for example, of rumor-monger Roger Peyrefitte, rather than the word of Pope Blessed Paul VI.

Peter, you may wish to believe vile and unsubstantiated rumors/charges against Pope Blessed Paul VI. Conversely, as a Catholic, I intend to obey the Church's teachings in regard to not bearing false witness against my neighbor/brother.

Therefore, in absence of one shred of proof of any of the vicious rumors in question, I will stand with my brother in Jesus Christ, namely, Pope Blessed Paul VI.

Peter, we just have to accept that we disagree with each other. I wish you and your family peace and good health.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Peter Lamb said...

Dear Mark, please forgive me if I am wrong, but I get the impression that you have not yet read Fr. Villa's writings? Regarding the sodomy we have more than rumors. There is testimony from Hugh Montgomery, Franco Bellagrande, (?spelling) police reports etc, but let's forget about the sin against morals. Whether photoshopping could be done at the time of the ephod photos, I don't know. So let's forget about that too. Let's look at the masonry. Fr. Luigi states that Roncalli and Montini joined the same specified lodge on the same day. He provides their membership numbers, their code names etc. Those masonic documents will never be made public for us to see. If we can trust Fr. Luigi, if Fr. Luigi was not a liar, then we may accept that Roncalli and Montini were judeo-masons. If he was a mason, he was excommunicated the day he joined the masons. Look at the symbolism Montini had engraved on his mother's grave. Is that another lie, or photoshop? Franco also a liar? If Roncalli and Montini were excommunicated they were no longer Catholics. A non-Catholic cannot be elected Pope. Ergo their elections were invalid, ergo Vatican II was/is invalid. Ergo, all derivatives of VII are invalid. Please fault my reasoning. Here's a little list of Papal condemnations of judeo-masonry for perusal:
Clement XII: In Eminenti
Benedict XIV: Providas
Clement XIII: A. Quodie
Clement XIII: Ut Primum
Clement XIII: Christianae Reipublicae Salus
Pius VI: Inscrutabile
Pius VII: Ecclesiam a Jesu Christo
Leo XII: Quo Graviora
Pius VII: Traditi Humilitati
Gregory XVI: Mirari Vos
Pius IX: Qui Pluribus
Pius IX: Omnibus Quantisque
Pius IX: Multiplices Inter
Leo XIII: Humanum Genus
Leo XIII: Letter to Italian Episcopate
Leo XIII: Letter to the Italian People
Pius X: Vehementer
Pius X: Letter to France
Was Montini a man of heroic virtue and sanctity worthy to be raised to the altar, for the Faithful to venerate and imitate? Catholic canonisations are infallible. If Bergoglio canonises Montini, what does that tell you? False pope, false church!

Mark Thomas said...

Peter Lamb said that Pope Blessed Paul VI "worshiped lucifer."

Peter, could you explain as to why Pope Blessed Paul VI, whom you believe worshiped lucifer, warned Catholics against and denounced Lucifer?

For the full address in question, go here:

https://www.ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/p6devil.htm

CONFRONTING THE DEVIL'S POWER

Pope Paul VI

General Audience November 15, 1972 A.D.

"What are the Church's greatest needs at the present time? Don't be surprised at Our answer and don't write it off as simplistic or even superstitious: one of the Church's greatest needs is to be defended against the evil we call the Devil."

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Peter Lamb said...

Dear Mark, It's classic modernist double speak. Old trick of theirs. I think it was Pope St. Pius X who described it beautifully in Pascendi.

Mark Thomas said...

Peter Lamb said..."Dear Mark, please forgive me if I am wrong, but I get the impression that you have not yet read Fr. Villa's writings?"

Hello, Peter. I have read sections of the following (and hope to finish reading the remaining parts):

chiesaviva.com/paoloVI%20beatoin.pdf

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Dorota said...

There was a question posed why one and the same person might be a worshipper of Lucifer in secret and warn against such worship publicly.

The answer is quite simple for everyone who really wants to know. Some people, like high degree masons and cabala practitioners are double-faced. They believe that in order to be successful they must lie to and use the naivety of honest and well-meaning people.

It is a well known fact that low degree masons are often completely unaware what high degree masons believe and what is the real purpose of their charitable activities.

The Talmud promotes different moral codes for Jews and the so called goyim. While a Jew is not supposed to lie and cheat other Jews, he is encouraged to lie and cheat non-Jews. Islam has the Taqiya.

To put it simply - many people lie. Some psychopaths are very skilled at using other people's trust and love to harm them.

Peter Lamb said...

Thinking about it, Fr. Luigi Villa might be called the "Apostle of Catholics", as Saint Paul was the "Apostle of the Gentiles". Saint Paul encountered the Lord on the road to Damascus, was converted and commissioned to convert the Gentiles; Padre Pio encountered the Lord in a vision, was instructed to send Fr. Luigi to Pope Pius XII, who commissioned him to ferret out judeo-masons in the Church.
Father Villa has unveiled, exposed, reported and explained the origin; the genesis; the strategy and the goals of the judeo-masonic, New World Order Church of Man. How is it possible for any Catholic, who has read Fr. Luigi's report, not to understand, beyond a shadow of a doubt, what is going on, or where the Truth lies? Only the obdurate; the willfully blind; those without eyes to see, or ears to hear; those with hardened hearts, or ulterior motives could fail to discern the Truth about the conciliar popes, VII and the NWO church.

Mark Thomas said...

Peter Lamb said..."How is it possible for any Catholic, who has read Fr. Luigi's report, not to understand, beyond a shadow of a doubt, what is going on, or where the Truth lies? Only the obdurate; the willfully blind; those without eyes to see, or ears to hear; those with hardened hearts, or ulterior motives could fail to discern the Truth about the conciliar popes, VII and the NWO church."

Peter, I would counter with why would anybody who has read John Cornwell's "Hilter's Pope" not understand that Pope Venerable Pius XII was an anti-Semite who helped to enable Hitler and the Nazis? After all, Cornwell's book was "well-researched".

Peter, how could anybody read the following article about Pope Benedict XVI, and not believe that he is a evil man?

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/fighting_words/2010/03/the_great_catholic_coverup.html

After all, the article in question was "well-researched".

Peter, how could anybody not read the works issued by renowned theologians who have argued that Jesus never performed miracles? After all, said scholarly papers have been "well-researched".

Peter, how could anybody not believe the countless books and papers written and issued by non-Catholics over the centuries who have insisted that the Holy Catholic Church is false? After all, said books and papers were "well-researched"?

Peter, how could anybody not believe the countless books and articles that "proved" that the Traditional Latin Mass is dreadful and turns Catholics into "silent spectators" during Mass? After all, countless liturgical experts have insisted that the TLM is awful. They have demonstrated that "nobody" in the pews can possibly "understand" Mass in Latin.

All the above must be true as authors of books and articles can never, ever possibly be wrong. Therefore, all of the above must be true. Anybody who makes a claim must be taken seriously. Correct?

Well, Peter, I don't believe any of the above. Just because somebody makes a claim and offers supposedly "well-researched" information does not make said claim true.
That doesn't mean that a claimant is lying necessarily. It simply means that a claimant could misinterpret things. A claimant may be sincere in his beliefs. He also may be wrong in his beliefs. That applies also to Father Luigi's claims against Pope Venerable Paul VI.

Sorry, Peter. I stand with my brother in Jesus Christ, Pope Blessed Paul VI, who denounced publicly claims that he had led an unholy life. I will believe the word of Pope Blessed Paul VI. I will also adhere to the Church's teaching in regard to bearing false witness against people.

Pax.

Mark Thomas



Peter Lamb said...

Dear Mark, apparently Cornwell's book was not so well researched. Rabbi David G. Dalin, professor of History and Political Science, explodes the newly resurrected, widely accepted, yet utterly bankrupt smearing of Pope Pius XII, whom Jewish survivors of the Holocaust considered a righteous gentile, in his book "The Myth of Hitler's Pope: How Pope Pius XII Rescued Jews". Dalin says: "The liberal culture war against tradition - of which the Pope Pius XII controversy is a microcosm - must be recognized for what it is: an assault on the institution of the Catholic Church and traditional religion ... The myth of Hitler’s Pope persists despite well-documented historical evidence that Eugenio Pacelli was one of Hitler’s earliest and most consistent critics and that, as both the Vatican Secretary of State and subsequently as pope, was in fact a friend of the Jewish people who was instrumental in rescuing and sheltering a great many Jews from the clutches of the Nazis ... The personal testimonies and judgment of Pius’s Jewish contemporaries — including numerous Italian Jewish Holocaust survivors and Jewish military chaplains serving with the Allied forces during the Nazi occupation of Rome — that also bear witness to Pius XII’s historic role in rescuing and sheltering Jews, should also help restore his historic reputation as a friend of the Jewish people who should receive long-overdue recognition as a “righteous gentile.”
Pope Benedict XVI certainly was/?is an evil man.
Mark, the purpose of research is to provide objective evidence to substantiate, or refute an hypothesis, or to discover facts. This Fr. Luigi has done regarding Paul VI. Whether you accept, or reject the evidence is your own prerogative. :)

Hans Georg Lundahl said...

Quotes marked by italics. Part 1.

The Masonic connection charge against Pope Blessed Paul VI is bizarre in light of the following: When shown a dossier in regard to Monsignor Bugnini's supposed Masonic connection, Pope Blessed Paul VI removed Monsignor Bugnini from power and exiled the Monsignor to Iran.

In his book about the reform of the Roman Liturgy, Monsignor Bugnini offered that he was "fired" as the result of Pope Blessed Paul VI's belief that he (Monsignor Bugnini) was a Freemason. Monsignor Bugnini said that he couldn't even obtain an audience with Pope Blessed Paul VI to refute the claims in question. The Pope dismissed Monsignor Bugnini immediately.

It is bizarre to claim that Pope Blessed Paul VI was a Freemason as not one proof of his induction and membership in that organization exists. It is bizarre to advance said claim when he dismissed Monsignor Bugnini immediately and exiled him to Iran.

Dismissal of one accused Mason without due process is hardly a proof he was not a Mason himself. It can as easily be due to a hysteria of guilt.

Lack of proof? You can consider the photo of him with ephod as photoshopped and thus a faked proof (we live in times when such is possible), but that does not amount to a total lack of proof.

Fr. Luigi states that Roncalli and Montini joined the same specified lodge on the same day. He provides their membership numbers, their code names etc. Those masonic documents will never be made public for us to see.

Barring some kind of revolution which makes Masonic documents public, like what happened under Pétain in France.

If we can trust Fr. Luigi, if Fr. Luigi was not a liar, then we may accept that Roncalli and Montini were judeo-masons. If he was a mason, he was excommunicated the day he joined the masons. Look at the symbolism Montini had engraved on his mother's grave.

I would like to know both more of Father Luigi and of the gravestone of Montini's mother.

Is that another lie, or photoshop? Franco also a liar? If Roncalli and Montini were excommunicated they were no longer Catholics. A non-Catholic cannot be elected Pope. Ergo their elections were invalid, ergo Vatican II was/is invalid.

There is an easier way to say this.

Montini had researched about "obiter dicta" in Holy Writte. In Church documents there may be obiter dicta which are not infallible just because the document is, but in the Canonic Books there can be no obiter dicta, since God is author of everything. Obiter dictum is clearly opposed to "all scripture is inspired and useful".

Therefore Montini was an Apostate before election, since denying inerrancy of Scripture, since incurring the excommunications of Trent.

Hans Georg Lundahl said...

Part 2, continued:

Wait, I am now perusing a document by Father Luigi Villa.

If he said Montini was a Mason, that could be simply bad research, since it seems he is not giving personal testimony but resuming research about Montini.

Obviously, the document he quotes, the speech by Montini, is a clear act of apostasy, condemned in Syllabus of Pius IX, of venerable memory:

Sorry, by Roncalli, no, Montini:
________________________

And so, let us open directly the pages of the First Address to the Council, in which Paul VI made his own, manifestly, the principle of “Modernist heresy” that Pope John XXIII has already expressed, in his Opening Address of the Council, on October 11, 1962, (an Address, however, which had been inspired by the then Archbishop of Milan, Monsignor Giovanni Battista Montini), in which he said the following:

«Neque opus Nostrum, quasi ad finem primarium, eo spectat, ut de quibusdam capitibus praecipuis doctrinae ecclesiasticae disceptetur, sed potius ut ea ratione pervestigetur et exponatur, quam tempora postulant nostra».

And here is the substance in the English language:

«...But, above all, this Christian doctrine be studied and exposed through the forms of literary investigation and formulation of contemporary thought».

Now, one such “principle” is unheard of in the history of all the century of the Ecclesiastical Magisterium, as it takes the place of the “dogmatic” principle, alone to offer proof and certainty of the “Catholic truth”, and the teaching Church has always taught that the “reason of believing” does not lean at all upon scientific conquests, achieved through man’s intellect, for the “reason of believing” rests exclusively upon the AUTHORITY of REVEALING GOD and upon that of the SUPREME MAGISTERIUM OF THE CHURCH, which received from Jesus Christ the mandate to teach it officially and in an infallible manner.

______________________

OK, both.

There was a question posed why one and the same person might be a worshipper of Lucifer in secret and warn against such worship publicly.

The answer is quite simple for everyone who really wants to know. Some people, like high degree masons and cabala practitioners are double-faced. They believe that in order to be successful they must lie to and use the naivety of honest and well-meaning people.

That is pretty obvious.

raphaelheals said...

There is too much posturing and not enough spiritual childhood, not enough humility. He who tries to exalt himself will be humbled and he tries to humble himself will be exalted.

Mark Thomas said...

Peter Lamb said..."Dear Mark, apparently Cornwell's book was not so well researched. Rabbi David G. Dalin, professor of History and Political Science, explodes the newly resurrected, widely accepted, yet utterly bankrupt smearing of Pope Pius XII, whom Jewish survivors of the Holocaust considered a righteous gentile, in his book "The Myth of Hitler's Pope: How Pope Pius XII Rescued Jews"."

Dear Peter, I agree that the "Hitler's Pope" accusation against Pope Venerable Pius XII is preposterous. However, my point is that many "experts" — Gentile and Jewish, even Catholic "experts" — insist that Pope Venerable Pius XII was "Hitler's Pope". They insist that Cornwell's book was well-researched.

You (and I) can cite Rabbi Dalin's work to prove that Cornwell and Cornwell's ilk are wrong in regard to Pope Venerable Pius XII. However, in turn, dozens upon dozens of "experts", Jews and Gentiles, can be cited who insist that Rabbi Dalin is wrong.

Again, Expert A says that Pope Venerable Pius XII was "Hitler's Pope". Expert B says that Expert A is wrong. Along comes Expert C who says that Expert B is wrong. Expert C says that Expert B is wrong...it never ends.

The same applies to the charges in question against Pope Blessed Paul VI. You claim that Father Luigi charges in question are "well-researched". Conversely, I can find experts who insist that Father Luigi's claims are preposterous. Again, just because somebody has claimed that Charge X is true and "well-researched" doesn't make that so.

As to Blessed Pope Paul VI, the Church has recognized his "heroic virtue" and his outstanding practice of faith, hope, and charity. Peter, I will thrown in with the True Church's findings in regard to Pope Blessed Paul VI. I accept Holy Mother Church's understanding of Pope Blessed Paul VI.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Anonymous said...

Now how does all the Popes of the post Vatican II get to be Canonized so quickly the ones who created the Crisis in the Church allowed the Sodomite Bishops and Priests to fester their evil in the Church without doing a thing about it. It's amazing. Pope Pius XII and Pope Leo XIII was more Saintly then these post Vatican II Popes who defended the Catholic Church and were about saving souls not concerned about kissing the Koran or changing the Liturgy. It's amazing.

Hans Georg Lundahl said...

Leo XIII, OK.

Pius XII?

He had his sides.

HGL's F.B. writings : Debating with Sungenis, Mainly
http://hglsfbwritings.blogspot.fr/2016/03/debating-with-sungenis-mainly.html


Note that it is only one of the subdebates that I come in on Pius XII in. N° VII. There are a few words in Munificentissimus Deus which are not very correct, to say the least.

And of course the one in 1951, next year, when on 22nd of November he made a very bad allocution. He "admitted" that it was proven earth was 5 billion years old in it.