TRADY IS THIS YOUR POPE!? Delusional disorder is a psychiatric diagnosis denoting a psychotic mental disorder that is characterized by holding one or more non-bizarre delusions[1] in the absence of …More
TRADY IS THIS YOUR POPE!?
Delusional disorder is a psychiatric diagnosis denoting a psychotic mental disorder that is characterized by holding one or more non-bizarre delusions[1] in the absence of any other significant psychopathology. Non-bizarre delusions are fixed beliefs that are certainly and definitely false, but that could possibly be plausible, for example, someone who thinks he or she is under police surveillance. For the diagnosis to be made, auditory and visual hallucinations cannot be prominent, though olfactory or tactile hallucinations related to the content of the delusion may be present.[2]
To be diagnosed with delusional disorder, the delusion or delusions cannot be due to the effects of a drug, medication, or general medical condition, and delusional disorder cannot be diagnosed in an individual previously diagnosed with schizophrenia. A person with delusional disorder may be high functioning in daily life and may not exhibit odd or bizarre behavior aside …More
Delusional disorder is a psychiatric diagnosis denoting a psychotic mental disorder that is characterized by holding one or more non-bizarre delusions[1] in the absence of any other significant psychopathology. Non-bizarre delusions are fixed beliefs that are certainly and definitely false, but that could possibly be plausible, for example, someone who thinks he or she is under police surveillance. For the diagnosis to be made, auditory and visual hallucinations cannot be prominent, though olfactory or tactile hallucinations related to the content of the delusion may be present.[2]
To be diagnosed with delusional disorder, the delusion or delusions cannot be due to the effects of a drug, medication, or general medical condition, and delusional disorder cannot be diagnosed in an individual previously diagnosed with schizophrenia. A person with delusional disorder may be high functioning in daily life and may not exhibit odd or bizarre behavior aside …More
Timothy Johnson
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
"It's Timothy Johnson's pope!" exclaims kfarley immediately after I had pointed out that "Pope Michael" is no more a pope than Joseph Ratzinger! I made a similar comment on this antipope's Youtube video over a month ago.
Come on kfarley. Surely you've got more to offer than strawman arguments and juvenile abuse. The children I teach behave in a more grown-up manner than you. You need to start …More
"It's Timothy Johnson's pope!" exclaims kfarley immediately after I had pointed out that "Pope Michael" is no more a pope than Joseph Ratzinger! I made a similar comment on this antipope's Youtube video over a month ago.
Come on kfarley. Surely you've got more to offer than strawman arguments and juvenile abuse. The children I teach behave in a more grown-up manner than you. You need to start using the wits God gave you in a more constructive and thoughtful manner.
Come on kfarley. Surely you've got more to offer than strawman arguments and juvenile abuse. The children I teach behave in a more grown-up manner than you. You need to start using the wits God gave you in a more constructive and thoughtful manner.
Weaver I invite you to get your friend Jim Condit Jr. to speak. I'm betting he won't because he knows you are mentally retarded and even to Mr. Condit you are an embarrassment. Let's see if I am correct Mr. koala-get your friend Mr. Condit to speak! Come on koala let's see you rally some support from your idiot brigade!
2 more comments from kfarley
Timothy you should read what your friend the koala bear was saying last night! You and he make a good pair. The koala was making lewd comments about our Holy Father and showing himself as the total imbecile he is! Timothy, you are in the company of complete morons. Sedevacantists are mentally inferior individuals.
Timothy Johnson
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
This man is no more pope than is Joseph Ratzinger. But at least he doesn't seek to delude Catholics with the kind of evil teaching found in antipope Ratzinger's new book:
Catholics should not target Jews for conversion to Christ even though Jews need to believe in Christ in order to be saved.
Thesis from Jesus of Nazareth: Holy Week by Josef RatzingerMore
This man is no more pope than is Joseph Ratzinger. But at least he doesn't seek to delude Catholics with the kind of evil teaching found in antipope Ratzinger's new book:
Catholics should not target Jews for conversion to Christ even though Jews need to believe in Christ in order to be saved.
Thesis from Jesus of Nazareth: Holy Week by Josef Ratzinger
Catholics should not target Jews for conversion to Christ even though Jews need to believe in Christ in order to be saved.
Thesis from Jesus of Nazareth: Holy Week by Josef Ratzinger
REVTHREEVS21
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Pope Michael Weaver: YOUR A HYPOCRIT, WEAVER, A PROTESTANT HYPOCRIT, WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME, WEAVER, YOU MASTURBATED, WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME, YOU LOOKED AT A WOMAN IN LUST! And here, you falsly attack, a SOON TO BE CANNONIZED SAINT, a Saint that was extremely HOLY! HERE IS WHAT YOUR FUTURE IS, POPE MICHAEL WEAVER, YOUR NOT FOOLING ME, OR KFARLEY, OR JESUS CHRIST, WHO IS RECORDING, EVERY WORD YOU …More
Pope Michael Weaver: YOUR A HYPOCRIT, WEAVER, A PROTESTANT HYPOCRIT, WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME, WEAVER, YOU MASTURBATED, WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME, YOU LOOKED AT A WOMAN IN LUST! And here, you falsly attack, a SOON TO BE CANNONIZED SAINT, a Saint that was extremely HOLY! HERE IS WHAT YOUR FUTURE IS, POPE MICHAEL WEAVER, YOUR NOT FOOLING ME, OR KFARLEY, OR JESUS CHRIST, WHO IS RECORDING, EVERY WORD YOU SAY...HERE IS WHAT AWAITS YOU, THIS IS THE FATE OF HYPOCRITS, LIKE YOURSELF.
--"Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye." (Matthew 7:1-5)
YOUR NOT VERY BRIGHT ARE YOU, POPE MICHAEL WEAVER.
--"Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye." (Matthew 7:1-5)
YOUR NOT VERY BRIGHT ARE YOU, POPE MICHAEL WEAVER.
This koala bear is now making homosexual statements. This is a very bad sign. The last time a koala bear started talking in a homosexual manner was on Star Search in 1984. The koala bear started making advances towards Ed McMahon then it charged Dick Clark in a sexually provocative manner-well to make a long story short the had to put it down.
One more comment from kfarley
REVTHREEVS21
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Weaver, your entire Sedevacanist movement is a mess. Not just this one nut. All of you are nuts! Your whole movement, is a house of Cards.
Almost all such conspiracy thinking is rooted in this fallacy."
SOME RADICAL TRADITIONALIST FALACIES EXAMINED
In about mid-March 2003, on one of the many talk-fest forums, a Radical Traditionalist [who I here call "Peter"] made the following statements:
"And …More
Weaver, your entire Sedevacanist movement is a mess. Not just this one nut. All of you are nuts! Your whole movement, is a house of Cards.
Almost all such conspiracy thinking is rooted in this fallacy."
SOME RADICAL TRADITIONALIST FALACIES EXAMINED
In about mid-March 2003, on one of the many talk-fest forums, a Radical Traditionalist [who I here call "Peter"] made the following statements:
"And there sure as Hell have been no saints made yet through the Novus Ordo mass."
"If anyone has gotten into heaven recently, it is in spite of the new mass. All the good values that Mother Teresa had were formed way before the new mass. All the elderly people I know and respect who have excellent Catholic values learned them before the new mass too and have followed practices like saying the rosary or wearing the scapular in these wretched modern times.
"Name me one virgin martyr like St. Maria Goretti, or one holy priest in the last 30 years who has been formed by the Novus Ordo. That will be about as easy as me finding a good looking 20 year old virgin Novus Ordo bride!
"I do not disagree that a Novus Ordo mass can be valid, but I do think many are invalid due to the wrong intentions of the priest. And even if it is celebrated validly, it still does not change the fact that there are inherent flaws within the Novus Ordo mass that give Catholics Protestant notions about faith.
As far as the grace given in the Novus Ordo, if there is any, it is merely a trickle and fundamentally connected with the intentions of the person receiving it, in comparison to the flood of grace given by the perfect expression of Catholicism in the Latin mass."
Before treating with the main thrust of the claims, I will quote from one of the responses relative to any "20 year old virgin Novus Ordo bride."
"INSHMO, anyone who sees a causal relationship between the Novus Ordo Mass and the sexual revolution (the latter of which really began with the invention of 'The Pill' in the early 60s) has a few shingles loose on his or her roof.
Moreover, to argue that one was caused by the other merely because one preceded the other is like arguing that World War II was caused by Mickey Mouse because Walt Disney created Mickey Mouse 20 years before WWII began.
This sloppy kind of 'reasoning' is what is known in Logic as the informal fallacy of 'Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc': 'A' came before 'B', therefore 'A' was the cause of 'B'.
Almost all such conspiracy thinking is rooted in this fallacy."
As Pharaoh (Yul Brunner) allegedly said to Moses (Charlton Heston): "So let it be written - so let it be!"
The parameters that Peter has set, upon which he rationalizes his claims, is the period from the promulgation of the Paul VI's Missale Romanum in 1969 to the present year - a period of 34 years. His statements are absolute: "no saints" - by which he means, I presume, no persons identifiable as saints, that is, no canonized saints.
In excluding the likes of Mother Theresa, it seems that only those persons who have been "over the age of reason" as at 1970 AND who have died any time between 1970 and 2003, and who have been "formed by the new mass" qualify.
It is illuminating and interesting to apply Peter's standards to the same 34 years after the promulgation of Quo Primum Tempore of Pope St Pius V in 1570. I have extracted the details of all Saints who are in the General Calendar of Saints in "The New Marian Missal for Daily Mass," published 1957. It is valuable to have the hindsight to see precisely what saints WERE acknowledged as saints from this period.
First of all, I will state the names and post 1570 death dates of those saints listed in the missal. Their relevant Date of Birth will follow:
Francis Borgia
1572 - 1510;
Teresa of Avila
1582 - 1515;
Charles Borromeo
1584 - 1538;
Aloysius Gonzaga
1591 - 1568;
John of the Cross
1591 - 1542
Paschal Baylon
1592 - 1540:
Philip Neri
1595 - 1515;
Peter Canisius
1597 - 1521.
1. NONE of the above was canonized within Peter's 34 year span - that is before 1604. In fact, the earliest canonization was that of Charles Borromeo in 1610 - 40 years after Quo Primum Tempore.
2. For the sake of simplicity, let us assume the age of reason to be 5 years of age. According to Peter's "logic" we are then limited to persons born from 1565 onwards That eliminates all except Aloysius Gonzaga who was born in 1568. Yet, still using Peter's own standard, he (St. Aloysius) should also be eliminated - for he was canonized outside Peter's parameter: St Aloysius was not canonized until 1726.
3. "Name me one ... in the last 30 years who has been formed by the Novus Ordo," asks Peter.
Well, inasmuch as no-one in 1604 would have been able to satisfy Peter's standard - so, too, is the matter a non-question to-day. However, one may read of Seven Holy Martyrs of the Catholic Church who died in 1996 for the Faith of the normative Mass of the Roman Rite atThe Cistercian Martyrs of Atlas
However, as Our Divine Lord has promised to be with the institution entrusted to St Peter (and ALL his successors) until the end of time; and as it is a Dogma of the Catholic Faith that the pope will be the Bishop of Rome until the end of time - then, I am sure that faithful Catholics will continue to number themselves among the flock of the shepherd appointed by Jesus Christ and whose Church has been guaranteed the oversight of the Holy Spirit - again until the end of time.
May God bless our holy father, Pope John Paul II.
One could expect such statements made by Peter to come from a protestant from times past concerning the Tridentine Mass.
The facts are that the very FIRST Rite of Mass consisted solely in Our Lord, Jesus Christ, giving a normal Jewish Blessing over the bread; then breaking the "bread", and then giving it into the hands of His Apostles. He then said a Jewish blessing over a cup of wine, and gave it to His Disciples. He said: Do this (or these things = bless, break, eat; bless, give, drink) as a commemoration of Me.
There are now some 36 variations of that first Rite which are approved by the Catholic Church. There are numerous Orthodox and other Eastern Rites which are not in communion with the Holy See which are also recognized as being valid.
The Masses of all the Rites, which are conducted by persons who have the power given by Apostolic Succession - ALL of them have the parameters of:
valid orders
valid matter
the intention of "doing what the church does."
The Savior gave to His Church the perpetual power to determine the form of Consecration. What He required to be done was to "do these things in commemoration of Me." Most certainly, the Pope exercised his office on the matters of Faith and Morals in promulgating the Novus Ordo - yet, we see "traditionalists" like Peter acting as if they are the possessors of the infallibility normally granted to the Vicar of Christ!!! They cede a "Novus Ordo mass can be valid, but I do think many are valid due to the wrong intentions of the priest."
Almost all such conspiracy thinking is rooted in this fallacy."
SOME RADICAL TRADITIONALIST FALACIES EXAMINED
In about mid-March 2003, on one of the many talk-fest forums, a Radical Traditionalist [who I here call "Peter"] made the following statements:
"And there sure as Hell have been no saints made yet through the Novus Ordo mass."
"If anyone has gotten into heaven recently, it is in spite of the new mass. All the good values that Mother Teresa had were formed way before the new mass. All the elderly people I know and respect who have excellent Catholic values learned them before the new mass too and have followed practices like saying the rosary or wearing the scapular in these wretched modern times.
"Name me one virgin martyr like St. Maria Goretti, or one holy priest in the last 30 years who has been formed by the Novus Ordo. That will be about as easy as me finding a good looking 20 year old virgin Novus Ordo bride!
"I do not disagree that a Novus Ordo mass can be valid, but I do think many are invalid due to the wrong intentions of the priest. And even if it is celebrated validly, it still does not change the fact that there are inherent flaws within the Novus Ordo mass that give Catholics Protestant notions about faith.
As far as the grace given in the Novus Ordo, if there is any, it is merely a trickle and fundamentally connected with the intentions of the person receiving it, in comparison to the flood of grace given by the perfect expression of Catholicism in the Latin mass."
Before treating with the main thrust of the claims, I will quote from one of the responses relative to any "20 year old virgin Novus Ordo bride."
"INSHMO, anyone who sees a causal relationship between the Novus Ordo Mass and the sexual revolution (the latter of which really began with the invention of 'The Pill' in the early 60s) has a few shingles loose on his or her roof.
Moreover, to argue that one was caused by the other merely because one preceded the other is like arguing that World War II was caused by Mickey Mouse because Walt Disney created Mickey Mouse 20 years before WWII began.
This sloppy kind of 'reasoning' is what is known in Logic as the informal fallacy of 'Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc': 'A' came before 'B', therefore 'A' was the cause of 'B'.
Almost all such conspiracy thinking is rooted in this fallacy."
As Pharaoh (Yul Brunner) allegedly said to Moses (Charlton Heston): "So let it be written - so let it be!"
The parameters that Peter has set, upon which he rationalizes his claims, is the period from the promulgation of the Paul VI's Missale Romanum in 1969 to the present year - a period of 34 years. His statements are absolute: "no saints" - by which he means, I presume, no persons identifiable as saints, that is, no canonized saints.
In excluding the likes of Mother Theresa, it seems that only those persons who have been "over the age of reason" as at 1970 AND who have died any time between 1970 and 2003, and who have been "formed by the new mass" qualify.
It is illuminating and interesting to apply Peter's standards to the same 34 years after the promulgation of Quo Primum Tempore of Pope St Pius V in 1570. I have extracted the details of all Saints who are in the General Calendar of Saints in "The New Marian Missal for Daily Mass," published 1957. It is valuable to have the hindsight to see precisely what saints WERE acknowledged as saints from this period.
First of all, I will state the names and post 1570 death dates of those saints listed in the missal. Their relevant Date of Birth will follow:
Francis Borgia
1572 - 1510;
Teresa of Avila
1582 - 1515;
Charles Borromeo
1584 - 1538;
Aloysius Gonzaga
1591 - 1568;
John of the Cross
1591 - 1542
Paschal Baylon
1592 - 1540:
Philip Neri
1595 - 1515;
Peter Canisius
1597 - 1521.
1. NONE of the above was canonized within Peter's 34 year span - that is before 1604. In fact, the earliest canonization was that of Charles Borromeo in 1610 - 40 years after Quo Primum Tempore.
2. For the sake of simplicity, let us assume the age of reason to be 5 years of age. According to Peter's "logic" we are then limited to persons born from 1565 onwards That eliminates all except Aloysius Gonzaga who was born in 1568. Yet, still using Peter's own standard, he (St. Aloysius) should also be eliminated - for he was canonized outside Peter's parameter: St Aloysius was not canonized until 1726.
3. "Name me one ... in the last 30 years who has been formed by the Novus Ordo," asks Peter.
Well, inasmuch as no-one in 1604 would have been able to satisfy Peter's standard - so, too, is the matter a non-question to-day. However, one may read of Seven Holy Martyrs of the Catholic Church who died in 1996 for the Faith of the normative Mass of the Roman Rite atThe Cistercian Martyrs of Atlas
However, as Our Divine Lord has promised to be with the institution entrusted to St Peter (and ALL his successors) until the end of time; and as it is a Dogma of the Catholic Faith that the pope will be the Bishop of Rome until the end of time - then, I am sure that faithful Catholics will continue to number themselves among the flock of the shepherd appointed by Jesus Christ and whose Church has been guaranteed the oversight of the Holy Spirit - again until the end of time.
May God bless our holy father, Pope John Paul II.
One could expect such statements made by Peter to come from a protestant from times past concerning the Tridentine Mass.
The facts are that the very FIRST Rite of Mass consisted solely in Our Lord, Jesus Christ, giving a normal Jewish Blessing over the bread; then breaking the "bread", and then giving it into the hands of His Apostles. He then said a Jewish blessing over a cup of wine, and gave it to His Disciples. He said: Do this (or these things = bless, break, eat; bless, give, drink) as a commemoration of Me.
There are now some 36 variations of that first Rite which are approved by the Catholic Church. There are numerous Orthodox and other Eastern Rites which are not in communion with the Holy See which are also recognized as being valid.
The Masses of all the Rites, which are conducted by persons who have the power given by Apostolic Succession - ALL of them have the parameters of:
valid orders
valid matter
the intention of "doing what the church does."
The Savior gave to His Church the perpetual power to determine the form of Consecration. What He required to be done was to "do these things in commemoration of Me." Most certainly, the Pope exercised his office on the matters of Faith and Morals in promulgating the Novus Ordo - yet, we see "traditionalists" like Peter acting as if they are the possessors of the infallibility normally granted to the Vicar of Christ!!! They cede a "Novus Ordo mass can be valid, but I do think many are valid due to the wrong intentions of the priest."
REVTHREEVS21
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment