Yes or No?

Yes or No?
Posted by Ann Barnhardt – April 16, AD 2013 1:48 PM MST
Michael Voris has hit the nail on the head and has come up with a question of extreme simplicity that will allow anyone to instantly discern the orthodoxy of any clergy, religious or layperson. The question is:

“Do you desire that everyone in the world be Catholic? Yes or no.”

If the answer you get is anything other than an instantaneous, emphatic, and unqualified YES, then there is a massive, massive problem and all future dealings with that person should be addressed and parsed with the full knowledge that the person is NOT properly catechized at best, or a heretic or apostate at worst.

No matter who it is.


I would encourage one and all to start asking this question. Frequently.

Spes Unica.

Get AQ Email Updates

8 comments on “Yes or No?

  1. How things come around, Father Feeney was warning about this way back in 1950.

  2. One more question: Is A Barnhardt the chick with a pink AR-15 with a rosary wrapped around it?

    Just askin’ ….

  3. Thanks, Tim. Thought I recognized the name.

  4. Did not Pope John Paul II himself say that we should NOT try to convert people of other religions to Catholicism?

    If so, how, then did he become “Blessed”?

    Is that idea not also expressed in Dignitatis Humanae?

    Are the teachings of Vatican II all really Catholic?

    • How then are the teachings of an ecumenical council then not correct? Because it was only pastoral? Because the documents do not clearly condemn any propositions and are too vague and contradictory to be understood as teaching anything? Where was the Holy Spirit’s protection?

      We know that religious freedom, for instance, was insisted upon by the U.S. bishops. Mention of the Jews had to be balanced with praise for Moslems, per the Arab bishops (Patriarch Maximos Saigh was an important spokesman for the “progressive” majority.) A European coalition came prepared with their own peculiar theology, while most other bishops were caught on their back foot.

      Yet, when Lumen Gentium says things like atheists are not denied the means of salvation, isn’t that different from saying they are saved? Doesn’t that mean that atheists are given the means to understand the truth of the Catholic faith and enter the Church, where their salvation may be completed? In fact, LG cites to the Summa, article III which deals with Christ’s headship over all men. St. Thomas recognizes that in many cases, people are in Christ in potentiality only (Catholics in mortal sin, those outside of the Church). Isn’t it preferred, if possible, to read the documents as not contradicting past teachings? If not, that opens up a whole ‘nother problem, obviously.

      Finally, doesn’t your argument prove too much? Are you prepared to defend burning heretics at the stake as a matter of policy (let alone running your sword through their bowels, although it is a great quote).

      I am not hostile. I have been studying this for a long while and trying to figure it out on my blog. The V2-nistas certainly gave us an interesting puzzle.

  5. Roberto, I don’t know specifically, off the top of my noodle, if JPII actually SAID or wrote that ( I wouldn’t be surprised if some portion of that kind of mangled thought did run like a thread in some of the expressions he wove, however ).

    Anyway, ecumenism is a SIN. It was condemned time and time again by the holy popes of yore.

  6. I do not recall anything in Vatican II documents saying Catholics may not proselytize. In fact, Lumen Gentium says all are called to the Catholic Church, the Church is necessary for salvation, and anyone who knows Christ made the Church necessary cannot be saved outside of it. It also said missions are important and must be continued.

    The USCCB has said Catholics cannot proselytize because that would be unecumenical (Go and Make Disciples, 1992 & 2002, right up to 2012 docs on their new evangelization web pages), but Dominus Iesus, drafted by Cardinal Ratzinger’s CDF and signed by JPII says evangelization is a goal of ecumensim, the exact opposite of what the USCCB says. (Unless you want to split hairs and say proselytizing is badly done evangelization, and the USCCB supports evangelization, which is proselytizing done properly and respectfully. As usual, no can say anything clearly or consistently.)

    Practically, ecumenism is much easier and far more favored than proselytizing, but nothing commands the former nor prohibits the latter in my opinion. (I recognize the authority of my bishop, but not the national conference, and in any case think Dominus Iesus trumps “Go and Make Disciples” etc.) I don’t do ecumenism, let alone interfaith. I do try to proselytize subtly.

Leave a Reply