= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
NancyLebovitz comments on How can we get more and better LW contrarians? - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (328)
Why do you think the Devil might have tainted the temporal Church through the Second Vatican Council?
So this is getting into really crazy conspiracy theories, but I notice Vatican II came soon after the Church's failure to release the Third Secret of Fatima, which given the way Church authorities reacted to it IMO seems to indicate that it did indeed predict something like ongoing or imminent Satanic infiltration, or something similarly potentially disruptive to the termporal Church. FWIW I'm pretty sure this conspiracy theory only sounds even halfway plausible if you already accept as legitimate the various prophecies and miracles of Fatima.
ETA: Not sure what to make of the fact that if I was in a Dan Brown novel this is definitely a hypothesis I should keep to myself. I fear I'm not being very genre savvy.
Considering this among other things, I want to see the contrarian awesomeness that would be you writing a series of posts on the Orthospehere explaining your positions and theories regarding the Church and global history.
Regardless if this turned to be an epic troll or the birth of a new cult, it would be extremely entertaining.
Given how correlated his novels tend to be with reality, I'd decrease my belief in the hypothesis.
Upon reflection I remembered reading that there was serious cause for concern years before Vatican II. (N.B.: Linked blog seems to be generally epistemically careful but is big on conspiracy theories.)