Pope St Gregory the Goat retweeted
Dear friends, please subscribe to my substack, as I will be releasing a killer work against the Orthodox on the Council of Florence
substack.com/@papacy101?utm_…
Pope St Gregory the Goat retweeted
Replying to @C2Antiquity
@C2Antiquity is seemingly silent on the matter of ROC' rebaptism policy on other E"o"s
Pope St Gregory the Goat retweeted
Truly demonic
The Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) has officially mandated the rebaptism of Ukrainian Orthodox Christians and banned them the use of the Ukrainian language in divine services.
On October 22, the Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church approved a document titled "Guidelines for the Reception of Individuals from Ukrainian Schismatic Structures Wishing to Join the Russian Orthodox Church." It applies to people in Russian-occupied territories who were previously affiliated with the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church (UAOC), the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyiv Patriarchate (UOC-KP), or the Orthodox Church of Ukraine (OCU).
The document outlines three procedures for joining the ROC. Notably, it stipulates that individuals baptized within the OCU, UOC-KP, or UAOC must undergo the Sacrament of Baptism again to join the ROC. Different rules apply to those originally baptized within the ROC, the Roman Catholic Church, or a Protestant denomination.
Regarding the accession of entire congregations to the ROC, the document states that such a community may not demand a distinct liturgical order or a special administrative status. Furthermore, the use of any language other than Church Slavonic in divine services is prohibited—even though the ROC elsewhere permits the use of various other languages, ranging from English to Japanese.
Hating St Paul is a top 5 sign of being a total reprobate
Dan Bilzerian WENT OFF on Paul the Apostle while speaking to SNEAKO, saying he persecuted early Christians before becoming one of Christianity’s most influential figures and questioning why Christians follow his teachings. ✝️
“He was a total f*cking scumbag. You may not believe that guy is going to hell, but if you believe the story that all of a sudden God just decided to say, ‘Hey, this is the way, and now I want you to be a prophet.’ You've been a f*cking shitbag, scumbag, m*rdering innocent people your whole life. And now I want you to be the guy? I don't think that's correct.”
Pope St Gregory the Goat retweeted
If Alex Sorin thinks that you can’t worship the Trinity while believing in the Filioque, what does he do with the Latin saints who not only taught the Filioque but required its profession to be a true Christian?
Pope St Gregory the Goat retweeted
According to Alex Sorin, James white isn’t a Trinitarian because he believes in the Filioque, I guess St Augustine alongside all the other Latin Fathers and the Latin Church aren’t trinitarians then either.
According to Alex Sorin, James white isn’t a Trinitarian because he believes in the Filioque, I guess St Augustine alongside all the other Latin Fathers and the Latin Church aren’t trinitarians then either.
Pope St Gregory the Goat retweeted
This is a reminder to please keep Pope Leo in your prayers as he recovers from surgery 🙏
Pope St Gregory the Goat retweeted
The fact that a glutton, warmonger and liar like Christopher Hitchens is still enabling the slandering of Mother Teresa to this day is a disgrace
The Missionaries of Charity still do incredible work for the poorest of the poor all over the world, while those who do nothing for them, like Hitchens and this complete nobody on Joe Rogan, have the gall to criticise them
🚨 NEW: Joe Rogan was in shock when historical storyteller Cody Tucker revealed that Mother Teresa was actually a horrible person who kept dying patients in horrible conditions while massive donations flowed to the Vatican:
TUCKER: “She's a scumbag. Mother Teresa never did anything good.”
CONTEXT: In 1994, a physician named Robin Fox visited Mother Teresa's Home for the Dying in Calcutta.
Fox wasn't some anonymous critic.
He was the editor of The Lancet, one of the world's most prestigious medical journals.
And what he described was deeply troubling.
Medical care was inconsistent.
Some decisions were made by nuns and volunteers without formal medical training.
Basic diagnostic investigations were rarely available.
And the facility did not have strong painkillers in its medication supply.
Fox described a patient with a high fever who initially received paracetamol and an antibiotic before a visiting doctor suspected malaria and changed the treatment.
His central objection was that patients who might have treatable conditions weren't being reliably distinguished from people who were actually dying.
Think about that.
Someone could arrive believing they were receiving medical care when they might have needed a proper diagnosis, referral or treatment.
And this wasn't the only criticism.
In 2013, three Canadian academics published a critical review of Mother Teresa's life and work in the journal Studies in Religion.
They questioned her approach to caring for the sick, her political relationships and the management of the enormous donations her organization received.
One of their central concerns was whether a religious belief in the spiritual value of suffering had been allowed to influence the standard of care provided to vulnerable patients.
Mother Teresa believed suffering could have profound spiritual meaning.
But there's a difference between helping someone find meaning in unavoidable suffering...
AND FAILING TO RELIEVE SUFFERING THAT MEDICINE COULD PREVENT.
There is also an important complication.
During the 1990s, India had extraordinarily restrictive regulations governing access to morphine.
Human Rights Watch later documented that India's medical morphine consumption collapsed by approximately 97% between 1985 and 1997.
Even major hospitals struggled to obtain adequate pain medication.
So the absence of strong painkillers at Mother Teresa's facilities does not, by itself, prove she deliberately withheld them because she wanted patients to suffer.
And Fox acknowledged something critics often leave out:
The home he visited provided cleanliness, wound care and genuine kindness to desperately poor people.
The Missionaries of Charity also cared for people whom hospitals had turned away.
Mother Teresa saw her mission primarily as offering dignity, love and spiritual comfort to the abandoned, rather than operating conventional hospitals.
Critics have questioned the Missionaries of Charity's financial transparency for decades.
But Tucker's more specific allegation that Mother Teresa funneled donated money to the Vatican rather than caring for patients has not been established by the evidence reviewed here.
That distinction matters.
IMPORTANT NOTES: Mother Teresa received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979.
The Catholic Church canonized her as a saint in 2016.
To millions of people, she remains one of the greatest symbols of compassion in modern history.
But the historical record also contains serious criticisms that deserve examination rather than automatic dismissal.
The most disturbing question isn't whether Mother Teresa personally believed suffering had spiritual value.
It's whether that belief, combined with the way her facilities operated, ever resulted in people enduring pain or illness that could have been treated.
Because there is a fundamental difference between helping someone die with dignity...
And allowing someone to suffer when they might not have needed to.
Pope St Gregory the Goat retweeted
Replying to @bbqchips221 @ElijahElishaRap
It was the apostolic see what done away with robber synod of Ephesus, called the council of Chalcedon and condemned the thug Dioscorus. Here is quote from Pope St Gelasius to prove me point.
“But let us not pass over this, that the Apostolic See has often, as was said, by the custom of the elders, had the power, even with no synod preceding, both to absolve those whom a synod had unjustly condemned, and to condemn, where no synod existed, those who needed it. For an Eastern synod had condemned Athanasius of holy memory, yet the Apostolic See received him and absolved him, because it did not consent to the condemnation of the Greeks. Likewise John of Constantinople, of holy memory, a synod of Catholic prelates had certainly condemned, and in a similar manner the Apostolic See also ALONE absolved him, because it did not consent. Likewise Flavian, of holy memory, condemned by an assembly of bishops in the same way, the Apostolic See ALONE did not consent and absolved him. And moreover, Dioscorus, prelate of the second see, who had been received there, it condemned by its OWN authority, and by not consenting it set aside that impious synod, and for the sake of truth it ALONE decreed that the Synod of Chalcedon be held. In that synod it ALONE granted pardon to the countless bishops who had fallen in the Robber Council of Ephesus and were asking forgiveness, and it nonetheless struck down by its authority those who stayed in their perfidy. The assembly gathered there to restore the truth followed this authority: for just as what the first see had not approved could not stand, so what it judged should be judged, the whole Church accepted.



























