E. Michael Jones

Hideous architecture and it's entirely possible masonic influence caused it to be like this - but it doesn't mean the chair of Peter is empty, it means bad design at best and masonic subversion at worst (both of which are not new problems)

@pontificatormax, even you? I think it's crazy how nobody thinks this is a big deal. Pope Paul VI destroyed the Church and the Audience Hall was made in his name and all the symbolism is pretty disturbing. Very revealing for those with eyes to see.

There isn't a single crucifix in the whole Paul VI Audience Hall, just a demonic looking sculpture of "Jesus rising from a nuclear crater in the Garden of Gethsemane", mind you, not descending from Heaven, and an architecture of a serpent biting the Vatican City.

Yes, it's a wicked looking place. But hideous, maybe even evil buildings aren't something that an outsider looking at the faith is going to care much about. Context is important. Roosh and others are probably going to care more about the central claims of the faith in light of V2

Not true. This is related to V2, and knowing this played a part in my conversion, like a solid evidence of how evil V2 was. Also, I said "BTW", since it is related and nobody seems to care about it, but I already gave my suggestion to Roosh V:https://twitter.com/davidxlima/status/1141581574951067648 …

please stream this conversation!!!

@rooshv Somebody who writes a book called "Pope Francis in Context" is not going to give you the red pills on Vatican II. I implore you to seek understanding on this topic not from laymen, but from upstanding clergy who have remained loyal to Holy Mother Church in this apostasy.

Why would Roosh wanna join catholic when he is already born into the superior orthodox church?

They are techincally in communion with Eastern Orthodox who have accepted them as in communion with eastern church. Therefore not much issue.

Sorry (not sorry), but Mono/miaphysitism is not Chalcedonian Orthodoxy. Curious to know how you think they're in communion with us.

The EOC and OOC have made joint documents saying dyophysitism and miaphysitism express the same theological understanding of Christology and the schism was over linguistic/semantic issues.

Source? Big if true.

If the statement is taken to be a restoration of communion, why is there still a division between our Churches? I'd be curious to know what formal steps must be taken to officially declare the schism is over. Quote above sounds close to such a statement.