You'll need to give a reason as to why you're calling him satanic.
Agree. While you and many others have reservations about him, to accuse him of being Satanic is too much.
I'm not even Catholic and I have to concur with the above comments. Isn't it possible that your post was a bit over the top? Personally I would take a deep breath and contemplate a little humility before casting that kind of judgment.
I suppose that a consequence of "the first steps towards the adaptation of the Roman Missal to the new outlook and mentality of our own times", to quote Paul VI on Pius' new rite of Holy Week, is that most people today no longer believe in either Angels or demons.However, one cannot but think something was very seriously wrong with Pius as the accounts of his corpse visibly rotting at an alarming rate as he lay in state with the guards of honour collapsing due to the noisome stench are both horrific and chilling.
Devil no- instrument, perhaps. But still he was a more decent fellow than Charles Wojtyla. Rubricarius : dont forget Father Zosima's corpse...
Rubricarius, I thought that was something to do with his private physician, whom John XXIII later banished from the Vatican for life? I agree that the alarming rate of his decomposition was disturbing.F.G.S.A, my opinion of Pius XII couldn't be lower than it currently is. Some of the most currupt 10th century popes, fornicators, murderers, simony etc, the Borgias with their mistresses don't come close to him in my opinion - at least none of these reprobate men destroyed the Sacred Liturgy.
Before you make any more comments about Pius XII, I suggest that you read Book I of The Dark Night of the Soul by St John of the Cross, paying particular attention to Chapters 2 and 5. The saint's words seem to describe your attitude towards those with whom you disagree rather too close for your comfort
I don't know what moved you to malign this Holy Man, but i'll suggest you reconsider.There is a six part biography of him with English subs on youtube that you can watch. Ii'll give you a link to the last part hereLast Years of PIUS XIIYou can start from the beginning if you want on that guy's youtube page.The guy imo had Marfans Syndrome but never complained about it. Most likely the reason his body decayed fast(if that story is to be believed at all)
A little humility on your part would be nice. After all, while you have been called many things for your disregard of the Trads, they've never ascribed satanism to you.
Patricius, we mustn't demonise people, even (especially) those we're very angry with - even with our tongues in our cheeks.I'm glad FGSA mentioned Father Zosima. Read more Dostoyevsky! It's all there...
John Paul the Great's corpse rotted whilst on display too. Doesn't mean he was Satanic, in fact St Therese of Lisieux's body rotted quite quickly once she was buried. There was hardly anything left to exhume when she was made a saint!
I must admit to failing to see anything 'holy' or remotely attractive about Pius XII. The photographs of him standing on the sedes gestatoria encouraging the crowds to adulate him strikes me as narcissism. Paleo-Traditionalists such as Evelyn Waugh seemed very clear in their estimation of Pius' pontificate: "Many of the innovations, which many of us find so obnoxious, were introduced by Pius XII" (Letter to the Catholic Herald, 19 Aug 1964 in Reid, S ., 'A Bitter Trial', St. Austin Press, 2000, p.40)The Mexican-American journalist Mary Ball-Martinez eloquently wrote "That the Second Vatican Council is the point of departure for so many commentators is understandable. While a look at events of earlier years would make it easy to pick up the strands of change, it would also mean having to confront the figure of Eugenio Pacelli, Pope Pius XII, a discomforting prospect for liberal and conservative alike. For the Left with the passage of years, if not in his lifetime, Pacelli was an arch-conservative, sadly unenlightened and probably anti-semetic. For the Right, at this distance, a saint. In both cases his life and work have come to be overlaid with pious and impious myth.Probably no pope in history has been as misunderstood. He has been revered and scorned, loved and hated for all the things he never did and never was. No pope in history did as much to change the Church; yet Catholic conservatives look on him as the last firm pillar of orthodoxy. No pope in history ever did as much for the Jews; yet Jewish writers to accuse him of indifference to their fate. No pope did as much to oblige the Marxists; yet he is hailed in the West as an anti-Communist hero of the Cold War." (Ball Martinez, M., 'The Undermining of the Catholic Church', 1991, pp.24-25An excellent analysis on the mutilations to the rites of Holy Week was posted on Rorate Caeli yesterday: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2010/07/reform-of-holy-week-in-years-1951-1956.htmlOf course the reform of Holy Week was but one of so many changes Pius brought in, most of which Paul VI or the Council gets the blame for.
Brother,I suggest that you delete this post. There is no better way to alienate those who might otherwise take your thoughts seriously than this foolishness. Neither Tolkien, nor Gandalf would be proud of this.An interested reader,