MHFM denounced McElroy

News tip

before watching.

How about the counter Church in Detroit?

A priest was not burying a suicide at a crossroads, but probably even in hallowed ground.

He very cautiously suggested the suicide MIGHT not make it to Heaven.

Obviously, he should have said unless the judgement was unusually clouded or he had time to repent after the lethal act on himself, but too late to reverse it, he was in Hell. However, this is not the end of the story.

Detroit "diocese" or "archdiocese" forbids this priest to hold speeches on funerals for the future, because the family and the friends got upset. Obviously, family and friends wanted a guarantee the suicide's troubles were over and he was fine now. Probably not the case. Minimum, he might need prayers to get him out of purgatory, if his judgement was very clouded or if he had time to repent while not being able to reverse the lethal act.

Video

"Bishop" McElroy & The Counter Church In San Diego
vaticancatholic.com | 19.XII.2018
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dd893AoA_h4

I

6:17 Every other now extant religious belief is in error. Not on all points, but certainly on some. Not where they agree with Catholicism, but where they disagree.

Second Temple Judaism was not, it's what diverged to Catholicism or Rabbinic Judaism over accepting or rejecting Our Lord. But we no longer have second temple Judaism. Rabbinic Judaism is not the same thing.

6:31 Actually what he says is not heretical here.

This is the precise rationale for Florence council to say anyone who dies outside the Church is damned (if it was a conciliar decision, and not one directed by Pope to Armenians so to speak in private, or unless the wording allows for partial conversions, like CSL's to Christianity but not full Catholicism).

Why is a Nestorian at risk of damnation? Because his tenets suffice to refute the Nestorian errors, which he should do and therefore become Catholic. Why a Copt or Armenian? Dito.

Why a Waldensian or Lollard (this was before Protestants proper and after Albigensians)? His tenets involve accepting Matthew as canonical, and this involves indefectibility of the Church as per 16:18 or 28:20.

Why a Jew? His tenets involve Genesis, where the patriarch's prophetic blessing on Juda means the Hero must have already come before Herod the Great died.

Why a Muslim? His tenets involve the true God has spoken, and decided to preserve the community accepting His revelation : but this refutes the Muslim tenet that Jews had apostasised before God sent Jesus and Christians before God sent Mohammed.

Why an idolater (of Grego-Roman type)? His tenets usually involved Platonism, that is recognition of there being one God, and then some lame excuses for even so adoring Greco-Roman gods and why Hesiod is not to be taken too literaly and so on. However, this was rather the concern of St Paul in Romans 1 than of Florence, since Greco-Roman paganism was gone.

6:38 Here his resumé is fake, Catholicism says Catholicism is the truth.

II

7:05 An individual man or woman has a conscience and therefore the conscience may have certain rights. For instance, a heretic burned at the stake like Tyndale had the right to reason about Romans 3 first, which Tyndale did with his Inquisitor Latomus. They even wrote books answering each other.

A community as such does not have a conscience, any more than it has eyesight.

You cannot say "Catholics see 20/20 and Protestants 19/20 and Jews 14/20" because each Catholic, Protestant or Jew has his own eyes and his optician will not go after what his confession is.

Similarily, each man or woman is judged on how he responded to the light given to his individual conscience, not on the conscience of the community he belongs to, since such a thing does not exist. There is Catholic doctrine, binding on individual consciences, since true. There is Protestant or Rabbinic Jewish doctrine, not binding on the individual consciences except where incidentally true, that is, where agreeing with Catholicism.

III

7:34 - 7:36 "many leaders from different parishes and in fact different faith communities"

The Catholic has a certain duty to obey a parish priest and a bishop, if the parish priest and bishop are Catholic.

The Protestant has no corresponding duty to obey his "vicar" or "pastor" and the Jew no corresponding duty of obeying his rabbi.

Some times God uses the "leaders" (CSL hated that word, it was too "dynamic" for his judgement) to bring someone to the Catholic truth, and sometimes they are useful in a civil justice sense, like Imams preaching against terrorism (when they do), but we cannot tell Protestants, Jews, Muslims or anything "we expect you to obey your leaders, as we obey Pope, Bishop, Parish Priest".

AND among those who can with some realism still be hoped about as being bona fide non-Catholics, why would their "leaders" be such a group, when they have arguably had more access to Catholicism and to Catholic apologetics than some of the rest and are doing gatekeeping?

This shows how mischievous it is to ask in their "leaders" for prayer ... apart from the fact that one shouldn't be praying with a non-Catholic unless he shows inclination to become a Catholic.

Like praying the Rosary with someone not yet received into the Church.

IV

8:25 The Pittsburg shooter was no Catholic.

Result of his action, 11 Jews, having done no worse to society at large than remain Jews, were deprived from future possibilities of converting.

It may have been God's judgement on them, but that's like God has the right to use evil men, not that men have the right to be evil.

Nebuchadnezzar was also God's judgement, but that doesn't make the deportation from Jerusalem a just or lawful act.

V

9:51 "the duty for us all in our conscience to be faithful to our own religious tradition in dialogue..."

No such duty exists, once you realise Reformation was backstabbing of tradition, you have no duty to remain faithful to the Reformation.

That's why there are such things as converts from Protestantism! I'm one, thank God!