The Romans attempted to squash the Church.
The Muslims sought to conquer Christendom.
Napoleon made the pope his captive and sought to control the Church.
The French Revolution sought to eradicate the Church.
Stalin sought to wipe it out.
Mao sought to imprison and/or kill any and all Christians.
Hitler, according to Goebbels, sought to destroy the Church.
They have all failed. Today, who are we worried about?
Them?
Them?
To be honest, I worry about some of these people.
I know they will not succeed in destroying the Church. No one will. But the damage they are all capable of can be measured in lost and confused souls. Pray for them. Pray for the Church. Pray for all the souls out there whose fate is balanced on the edge of a knife.
Pray that the Church sounds a certain trumpet once again.
April 30, 2025 at 3:19 pm
If you got a good church president, would he do mass deportations of heretics and build a big beautiful wall? Or maybe tariffs for those entering the church from falaw religions? What kind of president are you hoping will be elected by the electoral college that votes without the people having voted?
April 30, 2025 at 4:25 pm
Good and bad. Popes have been elected without the help of the faithful and she has stood for 2 thousand years. Don’t mess with something that isn’t broken. How many popes in the past were elected by the people? Our Lord gave the apostles the power that whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven. Whatever is loosed on earth will be loosed in heaven. He gave them administrative power in His Church with those words. The Church is not a democracy thanks be to God and it was not given to us because of what we wanted but what we needed.
May 1, 2025 at 3:50 pm
“Popes have been elected without the help of the faithful and she has stood for 2 thousand years.” Maybe it would have been better if the Cardinals had been counted among the faithful, huh?
OK, I know what you mean; you mean the laity. Even then, though, your statement if not strictly true. For one thing, there have been times when papal elections were much more political and corrupt than even the worst suggestions about recent elections. This was part of the problem with the Babylonian Captivity of the Papacy, and it is part of the reason for the Schism of 1378. The king of France might not have been “the average Joe”, but he was still laity — exactly the same as Macron, who is trying to nudge the upcoming conclave, is today.
For another thing, several Popes have been elected by acclamation. In a real sense, this is more democratic than any US presidential election.
If the Holy Spirit can use a Pope elected by Cardinals and prevent him from teaching error ex Cathedra, it is no greater miracle to use and safeguard a Pope elected by any other method — by acclamation, by lots, whatever. The reason it would be a bad idea to involve the laity in selecting a Pope is not because of the effect on the *Pope* so elected, but because of the effect on the laity who would be involved in the election. Every priest, from the smallest parish to the Pope himself, has to represent the members of the Church to God — but he also has to represent God to the Church. A Pope elected by the laity would be perceived as representing the people in the Church to themselves, and there is no need for that.
May 2, 2025 at 6:55 am
“The gates of Hell will not overcome it” is a bad translation of Matthew 16:18. It makes it seem like the Church is on the defensive against a powerful aggressor. A better translation would be “the gates of death will not withstand it”. The church is assaulting death and defeating it. Death’s power is at an end.The verse is intended as a promise of the liberation of the dead from their place of imprisonment.
May 2, 2025 at 10:28 am
I dunno. “Gates” always sounds defensive to me. To make the Church sound defensive, it would need to be something like, “The battering rams of hell will not overcome it.”
May 2, 2025 at 7:12 pm
There is hardly a day goes by that I don’t come across some Catholic writer misconstruing the “gates of hell” passage, as if were some sort of guarantee of ecclesiastical fidelity. It is no such thing, and if Catholics would get out more and study harder, they would soon discover this.
May 3, 2025 at 3:00 pm
Please feel free to share your alternative understanding — with or without any reason to accept it.
May 5, 2025 at 12:51 pm
“There is hardly a day goes by that I don’t come across some Catholic writer misconstruing the “gates of hell” passage, as if were some sort of guarantee of ecclesiastical fidelity. It is no such thing, and if Catholics would get out more and study harder, they would soon discover this.”
Ah, thank you G.Poulin for your input but you will forgive me if I don’t accept mere opinion from someone I don’t know nor their authority or credentials to teach us. I prefer to listen to the Church of 2000 years, and her authority to teach given by Christ Himself. The gates of hell will not prevail against the Church stands as it is written and meant in scripture, passed down to us by the Church of 2000 years, that it is our guarantee that Christ will defend His Church to the end that “the gates of hell will not prevail.” Period. We are the Church Militant.