I rarely feel compelled to do “follow-up” posts on a given topic on consecutive days, but the Cardinal Burke post from yesterday is screaming for one.
Let’s take a walk down memory lane…
February 20, 2014: Cardinal Walter Kasper delivered his now infamous address to the Extraordinary Consistory of Cardinals.
February 21, 2014: Pope Francis hailed Kasper’s address as “profound and serene theology … theology done on one’s knees.”
As news of the Bishop of Rome’s breathless praise for Kasper’s assault on the Catholic faith spread, so-called “traditionalists” and “conservative” Catholics alike were understandably outraged.
It was in this atmosphere that on that very same day, February 21st, L’Osservatore Romano published a speech given by Cardinal Raymond Burke to the Dignitatis Humanae Institute (the same group involved in the BuzzFeed interview) wherein His Eminence offered reflections on the pontificate of Pope Francis.
National Catholic Register reported on the speech saying, “Cardinal Burke Praises Pope Francis’ Efforts to Re-Christianize the West.”
LifesiteNews stated, “Cardinal Burke has defended the pope.”
Fr. Z applauded Cardinal Burke for “explaining” the pope.
No small number of tradition-minded Catholics, some of whom now have their drawers in a knot over yesterday’s post, lamented their disappointment in Cardinal Burke; some even going so far as to suggest that he was a sell-out and a coward.
My take was entirely different.
On February 25th, I published a post making the case that Cardinal Burke’s speech, if read carefully, reveals some very pointed criticism of the pope, and is more properly understood as an exercise in ecclesial gamesmanship and a bit of Romanità.
Fast forward to the present…
It seems to me that Cardinal Burke, in his BuzzFeed interview, was once again engaging in a similar brand of ecclesial gamesmanship; his words having been carefully chosen so as to criticize the pope for harming the Church without saying so verbatim.
His Eminence’s… ahem… “clarification” left virtually no room for confusion, however; only the pope can provide what is lacking; i.e., he alone is to blame for allowing this crisis to persist. Cardinal Burke said:
As the now published verbatim interview reveals, I was perfectly clear that it was a lack of clarity about where the Holy Father stands on issues related to marriage and Holy Communion that had caused the harm. It is precisely for this reason that I subsequently said that only a statement from the Holy Father himself could now remove this lack of clarity.
While such non-distinctions may be appreciated among some in Rome, in the real world, not so much.
Those who are as yet still able to think clearly realize that one cannot point a finger of blame at another individual’s irresponsible behavior (in this case the pope’s silence as to his position) without also necessarily indicting the individual himself (in this case, the pope).
If you, dear reader, are among those who still can’t manage to grasp this reality, try invoking the Burke defense in a court of law: “I’m innocent, Your Honor, my unwillingness to behave responsibly, however, is guilty as hell,” and let me know how that works out for you.
In any event, Cardinal Burke was perhaps too clever by half.
Unlike L’Osservatore Romano, BuzzFeed didn’t immediately publish a word-for-word transcript of the interview as I suspect he assumed they would. As it is, the nuance he intended, utterly lame though it may be, was lost.
Blaming the media, of course, is low hanging fruit. It has long been the papal apologists’ favorite defense in the face of the preposterous, and some among our traditional brothers and sisters are apparently prepared to join them in defense of Cardinal Burke’s meaningless clarification.
For my money, however, BuzzFeed’s initial report, excerpted below, was entirely appropriate:
Burke said … the pope had “done a lot of harm” by not stating “openly what his position is.”
The quotation marks in this excerpt are precisely where they belong, and the conclusion is perfectly logical.
All of this said, Cardinal Burke’s excessive Romanità is also plainly revealed in his contention that “the pope has never said openly what his position is on the matter.”
Really?
There is a point at which the overuse of nuance threatens to undermine one’s credibility, and in my estimation, Cardinal Burke is unnecessarily walking a tightrope here.
He was among those present when Pope Francis heaped effusive praise upon Cardinal Kasper’s presentation to the Consistory, for crying out loud!
No, Pope Francis didn’t explicitly say, “Kasper’s position is my position” (for he too was indulging in some Romanità), but no one with any sense whatsoever, including Cardinal Burke, has any doubt whatsoever where the pope stands. He has made his position entirely clear for those with ears to hear in any number of ways. (Remember his phone call to the divorcee from Argentina?)
The point is this; Cardinal Burke is way overplaying the Roman game.
While it was perhaps advisable for the Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura to craft his words very carefully back in February so as to preserve his position in Rome, where he arguably might do more good than elsewhere; as of today, that ship has all but sailed.
Cardinal Burke has personally confirmed that he about to be transferred to a mere figurehead position (Chaplain of the Knights of Malta), and this after having been stripped of his place on the Congregation for Bishops shortly after speaking critically of Evangelii Gaudium in an interview with EWTN last December.
The only thing left at this point for Cardinal Burke to preserve is the truth, plain and simple.
Look, Rome is on fire; subtle suggestions that there’s a hint of smoke emanating from Domus Santa Marta aren’t useful, and the fact that Cardinal Burke apparently doesn’t recognize as much tells me that he hasn’t been entirely spared the diabolical disorientation that ravages so many in the Church today, even if in lesser degree than most.
The bottom line is simply this: Cardinal Burke’s interview with BuzzFeed received considerable attention for a good reason.
Any time a Curial cardinal publicly calls out the Roman Pontiff for the harm that he is causing the Church, it’s a big deal.
In spite of Cardinal Burke’s attempt to put that toothpaste back in the tube, apparently for no better reason than to preserve the nuance with which he deliberately labored to speak in the first place, the fact remains that he most certainly did point a finger of blame at the pope, and very rightly so as most on these pages would readily agree.
And guess what? The pope knows it, even if some among our friends are unable to recognize as much.
As such, this story remains big news; not because Cardinal Burke can save the day, but because the climate in Rome for the remainder of this dreadful pontificate, especially among the College of Cardinals, is important – not just for the present oment, but as an indication of where we might be headed.
And this brings me back to the conclusion to yesterday’s post; no one in Rome is capable of fixing this mess other than a pope, current or future, who is willing to do as Our Lady of Fatima requested. No one.
Blessed Mother has promised that this will happen; it’s just a matter of when. In the meantime, we’ll pray and fast and keep our eyes wide open.
On which note, while Cardinal Burke’s meaningless distinction, ostensibly ordered toward providing a clarification of his comments, has been enough to cause some otherwise intelligent people to relegate this most newsworthy of events in Rome to just one big misunderstanding, I for one have no such intention.
Here’s a book which helps to explain what’s happening now, through what has been happening for the past 100 years:
—
One Hundred Years of Modernism, Fr. Dominic Bourmaud. (Yes, Lionel it’s from the SSPX but good nevertheless!)
—
It is clear that all present Bishops have been taught the same things: The Bible is myth, evolution is truth, modern man is different from man 2,000 years ago, progress is always good, dogma and logic are outdated, feeling and experience have more value…on and on.
So why should Cardinal Burke be different? But still, what are we proposing? Who do we go to? We will need as many imperfect bishops/cardinals as we can muster over the next year.
—
For pete’s sake, why would we alienate these imperfect guys by all the buzz over their imperfections?
Speaking of evolution, I thought the next post was going to be about Francis’ words on the “Big Bang” and evolution from yesterday.
Newspapers are making a big deal about them.
Just look how far Bergoglio has got with his “blasphemy bingo card”:
Insult the Church (God not Catholic) – check!
Insult an Apostle (Matthew clung to his money) – check!
Question a miracle (multiplication of the loaves) – check!
Insult Our Lady (might have felt deceived by God) – check!
Patronize Our Lord (only pretended to be angry) – check!
Deny the existence of God – Bingo!
What Cardinal stands up for God Almighty?
Thanks Louie, Barbara and Bert.
One poster said not long after Francis’ rise to pope as “good let him set fire to Rome” as the last thing we need is a diabolical disoriented papacy with a conservative veneer. Hopefully this reign of Papa Pancho will awaken churchmen who are in deep slumber. It is very unfortunate that soon as a cardinal or bishop make the most respectful criticism of the pope you can pretty much expect some sort of retraction not long after.
Dear Louie,
“the fact remains that he most certainly did point a finger of blame at the pope, and very rightly so as most on these pages would readily agree.”
Amen, and even if we are disappointed in the tactics being practiced, at least the toothpaste is all over the place,…..and the Pope should be happy that Catholics are out there “making a mess” no? eh? …. 🙂
OT: I was thinking about the situation of the SSPX and why Rome would threaten them and I recalled the syncretistic event that apparently happens every year in the Cathedral of Buenos Aires. The one-year anniversary of last year’s event falls in mid-November – if you recall the members of the SSPX accompanied by awake NO Catholics interrupted the syncretistic event, rightly viewing it as a profanation of a Catholic worship space. Note, the warning from the Archbishop to the SSPX faithful came out about a month before this anniversary. This must have been a gave embarrassment to the Pope who apparently prides himself on the obeisance he shows to those who deny Christ. So I wonder if this had anything to do with it.
Off topic but I’m so upset by the Pope’s blatherings I wanted to put this out there:
—
http://thetruthwins.com/archives/44-reasons-why-evolution-is-just-a-fairy-tale-for-adults
—
This evolution nonsense is very damaging to the Papacy. We must remember that this is not just about Francis – its the PAPACY that is losing all credibility. It’s going to take 50 years to get over this, that is if we start this year.
—
Our Lady of Fatima pray for us.
The heresy of evolution is one of the most damaging ridiculous pieces of nonsense out there that we’ve been propagandized with for years!
Also for those of you interested in science, I highly recommend looking into Geocentrism. Yes! The Modernist Scientific Establishment has been lying and covering that up as well from the common knowledge of the general public!
Thanks to Sungenis and Delano, all that is about to change! Check out their new documentary – The Principle, playing in Chicago, and looking to expand in the weeks and months ahead!
http://www.theprinciplemovie.com/
Indeed, we should support Cardinals like Burke etc. when they do act and promote orthodoxy. However, this doesn’t mean we should refrain from criticising them with concern to anything erroneous they may be spouting either deliberately or accidentally. One can fully support someone like Cardinal Pell when he voices concern over the Papacy and Gradualism, while still simultaneously confronting him about his erroneous views of Scripture and Science.
Dear Barbara,
The clown nose was his defining moment visually. Pushing for reception of the Eucharist in mortal sin was his defining moment morally. Every ridiculous thing he does from here on, just decreases the number who will take him seriously, and increases our chances of being heeded by people in our lives. This is a good thing. Evolution is becoming a joke to more and more people.
___
The papacy will recover with the first good Pope God next sends us, in His time. The minute he speaks, relief and joy will flood over us. And it will only get better and better after that. Visualize it, and give your blood pressure a rest.
🙂 🙂
Dear Johnno,
We get your point, but it’s practical application requires some thought.
When speaking only of a Churchman’s position on a teaching, sure, you can say yes, I agree with what he said because it’s true, or not I can’t–it’s false.
___
But overall support for the man and his ministry is a different matter, which requires a judgment of whether he is trustworthy as a Catholic leader.
If a shepherd eats one sheep instead of guarding it, would you say he’s a good shepherd? And if a bishop teaches one heresy instead of guarding souls with truth (or molests one child) can you say he’s a good bishop?
___
When someone asks, what do you think of Cardinal Kasper, should I trust him? You don’t answer, well a year ago he said stealing is wrong, so yes.
You say, sadly, he’s proven to be a promoter of false teachings, so no.
The only question left, is how many heresies does he have to believe and teach to disqualify a personal endorsement. Our answer, is the same as the Church fathers: One.
Pope Francis merely offered the same usually vague niceties towards evolution that vaguely states that changes happen in nature. He doesn’t really define what ‘evolution’ he is referring to – micro or macro. Small changes within kinds are perfectly compatible with the Faith. The macro changes hypothesized however are simply fairy tales from the imaginations of atheists and pagans.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2014/10/on_evolution_po090761.html
–
Still however, no Pope should be using such vague languages to give the impression that our faith can by synthesized with materialist nonsense. Also, unfortunately I think the Pope mentions the Big Bang as if it were an established fact, when it is in reality a theory in crisis even within the current consensus community. What Fr. Lemaitre, probably due to the unwitting influence of modernism, proposed in an effort to synthesize Catholicism with Atheism, is a far different creature than what the ‘Big Bang’ has morphed into today. In fact, it is outdated, challenged by the findings of PLANCK, COBE, and the resurgence of theories that describe the Universe, comets and stars as an exhibition of Electric phenomenon and not a result of gases, explosions and gravity.
–
A big paradigm shift in Science is taking place. The Church and the Holy Inquisition was right in condemning Galileo’s heretical propositions. Dr. Sungenis has a brilliant article examining that this was the very issue of the Churchmen doubting the infallibility God promised His Church, that led to the Second Vatican Council, as an attempt to explain away the Church’s ’embarassment’ of the Galileo Affair and making nice with the modern world and re-defining her role with concern to the proclamation of Truth. This is something Cardinal Ratzinger claimed was the reason that led to VII.
Vatican II and the “error in Galileo Case”
Pope Benedict XVI Says Vatican II was Initiated Because of the “Error in the Case of Galileo”
http://galileowaswrong.com/vatican-ii-and-the-error-in-galileo-case/
–
The restoration of the Holy Catholic Church begins when we put God’s handiwork back in the center!
–
End this unholy ecumenism between the Church and the atheist science establishment! Put Copernicus and Darwin into their coffins and bury them beside the other heretics.
We can unfortunately only do what God expects us to do. Finding a 100% orthodox man is, dare I say it, impossible. I believe every man carries with him some misunderstanding about any given theological topic, even if only unwittingly. I myself learn something new everyday, and have held previous theological errors that I never knew I carried until duly informed and this was a long process over the course of several years.
–
Strategically, we’ll have to identify which heresies & errors are the most vital to fight/change in our day and age, and back the man who is best able to openly deal with them. Then everything else in due time.
–
1st by making every effort available to confront them and correct them openly as far as we are able.
–
2nd by evangelizing everyone we know. And educating everyone we possibly can.
–
3rd by raising orthodox children and filling them in the seminaries, who will be the priests, bishops and Pope of the future.
–
4th, if we are unmarried men, by considering leaving everything and becoming priests ourselves. assuming God is authentically calling one to such a service. (Hard, I know! I’m one to talk, who considered being a priest, but for various reasons have decided not to follow through, and I don’t rule out being comfortable in secular life as one of those selfish reasons.)
–
With regards to 3 & 4, Fr. Z has often spoken about young men in the priesthood now who hide their orthodoxy and make use of the net and other resources to make it out untainted. We do our own kind of infiltration, in a way.
–
In any case, I want to also point out that I don’t believe the problems of the world and Church today are something that can be solved by any human action. We need divine aid, and God has spoken that He will only do this through the Consecration of Russia. So quite frankly, we’re best to focus on screaming clear and loud that the Popes since Pius XI have failed in their duty and we are heading to certain doom if they continue to ignore Fatima’s prophecies and warnings. But I don’t think any of them will ever do it until they are forced to a position of absolute desperation once the Vision of the Bishop in White comes to pass, along with the annihilation of certain nations, and that Catholis today see with their own eyes the utter destruction of St. Peter’s Basilica by enemies and weep the same way the Jews wept over the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. The first being Solomon’s, the second time in 70 A.D. Portents of God’s judgement over them.
–
This can of course be avoided, but the point is fatally this – the identification of the world’s problems is that the majority of mankind don’t believe in God. Or rather live their lives as if He didn’t exist, and thus from this point need a wake-up reminder, one God will provide when His Church does what He commanded them to do!
–
The Consecration of Russia and all that it signifies to make it happen is my primary goal. Everything else is just a sideshow that only goes to prove the prophecies of Fatima were 100% correct. If we don’t do this, there’s a good chance that many of us here will be dead within the next few decades. And I don’t know about you, but I dearly need more time to live to get rid of my disgusting sinful habits. I do not want to go to Hell. I do not want to be robbed of my life suddenly. There is too much I have to change to be worthy of being in God’s presence.
–
Short answer: The Cardinal I’ll back is the one who has the balls and determination to use his authority as Pope to do the Consecration of Russia observing every explicit instruction that God provided through Mary. We need to find this man, and find him fast! Once the world has witnessed evidence that God exists and that He exists and acts through the Catholic Church, the rest can easily be set straight because now they will entertain orthodoxy and the Church & Scriptures more seriously.
More on the greatest source of instability in the Cahtolic Church today:
____
The diabolical ” KIRCHENSTEUER”.
____
Link here:http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/10/church-of-germany-church-of-simony.html
____
New Catholic writes:
” All talk of “poverty” and “humility” from the highest echelons of the Church must be dismissed as the irrelevant talk it is until the greatest money-related scandal in the Church, the German Kirchensteuer (Church Tax) system remains in place. No item is more single-handedly responsible for instability in the Church today than the Simoniacal Church Tax, which both renders “excommunicates” those German Catholics who refuse to pay it and makes the German Hierarchy use their immense wealth and financial resources as a tool of subversion and blackmail of the whole Universal Church.
.
A system that has emptied the Church in Germany at the same time as its wealth becomes a tumor threatening the health of the whole Church. When a Pope dismantles or at least decides on an overhaul of the Kirchensteuer system in Germany (and elsewhere where it works in the exact same simoniacal way), then all the talk of poverty will at last become believable.”
______
Unless we understand the diagnosis, we can’t find the cure. And to understand the diagnosis, you got to ” follow the money”. 😉
One for the ” Francis’s war on open dialogue” category.
_____
” The Votive Mass in the Traditional Rite with Cardinal Raymond Burke announced for November 5th, in the parish church of St. Leopold in Vienna Danube field-Floridsdorf was canceled.”
______
Link here:http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2014/10/abbot-primate-of-klosterneubergs.html
______
But hey, isn’t modernist Rome trying to reconcile with the SSPX?
_____
Maybe we should ask that modernist Rome reconcile with …. itself. 😉
Benedict b***h-slaps Francis!
_____
Pope Benedict Welcomes the Growth of the Ordinariate in England.
_____
Link here: http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2014/10/pope-benedict-welcomes-growth-of.html
____
EF:
“Our Lady of Walsingham’s enthusiastic laity has been patiently growing in body and soul. This is especially fortuitous in light of recent developments in the Church of England which has drifted still further away.”
____
But hey, didn’t Francis want the Anglicans to have stayed where they were?
____
How long until the Ordinariate experiences Francis “iron fist of ‘mercy'”? 😉
Community news, for Spanish Catholics.
_____
“Adelante la fe” — New Catholic Internet Site With Bishop Livieres and Roberto de Mattei
_____
Link here: http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2014/10/adelante-la-fe-new-catholic-internet.html
____
“The new Internet initiative is about the preservation, defense and the spread of the Catholic faith. The focus is also the non-negotiable values, the Holy Liturgy and the critical observation within the Church of events such as the recent Synod of Bishops, because the faith is to protect against attacks within the Church, as well as outside. ”
____
Time to brush up on my Spanish. 😉
Mundabor agrees with Mr. V. 🙂
_____
The Ways Of The Clergyman According To M
_____
Link here:http://mundabor.wordpress.com/2014/10/29/the-ways-of-the-clergyman-according-to-m/
_____
Mundabor concludes:
” I suspect, in fact, that now a very complicated and subterranean game will begin, in which both sides will alternate public interventions with a very intensive corridor work. The result of this work will, probably, only become clear in October 2015. I cannot tell you how it will end. I am fairly optimistic, but then I always am. I carry the Roman sun inside, and if at times I do not see the shadows, I still think this Roman sun is a very good help in seeing the reality around me. Yes, I have my worries for the huge battle in front of us.
.
But Cardinal Burke’s clarification is, as far as I am concerned, not one of them.”
_____
Got to be an optimist. Remember the “gates of hell” and all that…:)
SSPX don’t have to capitulate anymore says…..Fr. Z. 🙂
______
Fr. Z.: “Juxtaposition for your consideration”
______
Link here:http://wdtprs.com/blog/2014/10/juxtaposition-for-your-consideration/
______
Fr. Z comments:
“Frankly, I think we need what the SSPX has to contribute. I pray for a reconciliation. Soon.”
______
Nice to see that Fr. Z is “seeing the light”. 🙂
______
Now if he could only ‘splain that to Francis. 😉
One for the “eternal optimist in me” category. 😉
_____
ASK FATHER: How to support young priest whose pastor doesn’t want the TLM?
_____
Link here:http://wdtprs.com/blog/2014/10/ask-father-how-to-support-young-priest-whose-pastor-doesnt-want-the-tlm/
_____
Fr Z suggests:
“…write a supportive letter to the bishop about this good young priest! It will go into his file. Don’t mention the Extraordinary Form, or any quarrels you’ve had to land you outside of the pastor’s good graces. The the bishop what a delightful young priest this associate pastor is. Remember: bishops tend to only get letters of complaint. Obvious letters of support will get his attention and, in time, could pay off. They wind up in a priest’s file and counterweigh any difficulties in the future.”
_____
The KISS strategy is in order: K eep I t S imple S tupid! 😉
It simply seems to me that Cardinal Burke was merely sending a warning shot to the Pope -this time. His clarification of his words merely help the Pope not Cardinal Burke to keep face . Louie, as you say the Pope got the message
but not the wider Catholic world. Well perhaps it was only intended for the Pope and he’s got the message loud and clear. It won’t be like that next time-
Dear Johnno,
It seems we think very much along the same lines -especially on the role of prayer and sacrifices leading to the solutions God has promised when Mary’s Immaculate Heart triumphs which you have just expressed with a passion and completeness that was inspiring. Thank you, as nothing but the love of God and fellow man motivates such discourse. 🙂 🙂
And God bless Louie V and priests like Father Nicholas Gruner, who tirelessly remind us of these vital truths.
One for the “natural fit” category. 🙂
_____
“Wymyn At Wyrk. “Priestesses” doing their thing. Hijinx ensues.”
_____
Link here:http://wdtprs.com/blog/2014/10/wymyn-at-wyrk-priestesses-doing-their-thing-hijinx-ensues/
_____
Fr. Z comments:
” You simply have to grit your teeth and get into the part where they have written their own “eucharistic” prayer.”
.
Note: I think the wymyn folks EP is much better than the Bouyer EPII written on the back of an envelope late one night at the Roman trattoria in order to meet the editors deadline the next morning. (Still chuckling).
+
“Honestly, these poor people are so confused. I am pretty sure most of them have no clear idea of how sacrilegious this is.”
.
Note: For these folks to “have an idea of how sacrilegious this is”, they would first have to be Catholic. 😉
_____
All in all, there are 25,000 different registered Christian denominations in the US. This video, IMHO is by far the most “natural” of “environments” for the Pauline/Bugninian N.O.liturgical service (if that what this is). Let’s face it, the N.O. was designed for protestants, wymyn and children.
S.Armaticus
SSPX don’t have to capitulate anymore says…..Fr. Z.
Please see
https://akacatholic.com/topic/sspx-appeal-to-bishop-marcello-semeraro-to-endorse-vatican-council-ii/#post-5193
(Dear Barbara, and all, hold on to your chairs)…
Pope Francis is at it again having met with with (deceased) Tony Palmer’s Ark community,–thankful they’re still carrying the torch, and saying even more outrageous things than he did last summer–if that’s posible: Basically urging them to ignore all our diffferences (Their heresies) because only division is evil. Forget it [dogma] and let’s just go preach the Gospel together.
___
.. “this dream which was Tony’s..of being able to walk in communion. We are sinning against Christ’s will, because we continue to focus on our differences; our shared baptism is more important than our differences.”
___
–” We all have the Holy Spirit within us,..we all know that there is a father of lies, the father of all division, the anti- father, the devil who pushes in and divides, divides. Tony and I spoke so much.. of going ahead, in what unites us, praying that the Lord Jesus with His strength help us and not let what divides us divide us even more. [others say, ‘Amen!’] ! It’s crazy to have this treasure and yet prefer imitiations of that treasure – the imitations are our differences. What we should care about is the treasure: Father, Son and Holy Spirit, the vocation to holiness, the call to preach the Gospel in every corner of the earth, with the certainty that He is with us”
– he’s not with me because I’m Catholic, he’s not with me because I’m Lutheran, He’s not with me because I’m Orthodox. A theological mess!!
[perfect description of what he’s fostering?]
___
HERE’S WHERE IT GET’S REALLY SCARY IF HE’S THINKING OF EUCHARIST IN SYNOD-STYLE, AGAIN….
–“We each have in our Churches excellent theologians. That’s another way to walk together also. But we shouldn’t wait for them to reach agreement! That’s what I think. [Applause].”
–” Tony told me.. Whe he was a young boy in school, the black and the white children would walk and play together. When mealtime came, they were separated. And they would say, “but we want to eat together!” And that desire he had inside of him to walk together so we can eat together at the banquet of the Lord.! ”
–This desire for unity,…fulfilling together Matthew 25, without making an institution, but freely, like brothers.
(thanks to Mundabor for mentioning this fiasco in a recent post)
http://www.aleteia.org/en/religion/news/pope-francis-tells-protestants-we-must-pray-and-work-together-5833514347921408
God’s CLEAR instructions for Bishops– from Paul to Timothy and Titus:
“I charge thee, before God and Jesus Christ, who shall judge the living and the dead, by his coming, and his kingdom: Preach the word: be instant in season, out of season: reprove, entreat, rebuke in all patience and doctrine.”
___
“For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables.” [fables -like the “sin” of focussing on differences]
___
And to Titus “:Embracing that faithful word which is according to doctrine, that he may be able to exhort in sound doctrine, and to convince the gainsayers. For there are also many disobedient, vain talkers, and seducers: especially they who are of the circumcision: Who must be reproved, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre’ s sake.”
___
” 13.. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith; Not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men, who turn themselves away from the truth. All things are clean to the clean: but to them that are defiled, and to unbelievers, nothing is clean: but both their mind and their conscience are defiled.”
And it’s not the devil, the “anti-father” that brings division when it comes to truth and falsehood, but God, Himself. (Gospel of Matthew)
“Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword. [35] For I came to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.” [36] And a man’ s enemies shall be they of his own household.
___
[bible footnote: ” I came to set a man at variance”: Not that this was the end or design of the coming of our Saviour; but that his coming and his doctrine would have this effect, by reason of the obstinate resistance that many would make…]
Dear S.Armaticus,
Juxtaposition in this case is a MUCH needed EXposition of the utter, complete, total hypocrisy of the Pope’s many-times now expressed desire to extend fully embracing “welcomes” to adulterers–even to join our Communion lines, while remaining silent (or approving or pushing for it?) while his best buddies work even harder to make sure no Catholic one dares approach and kneel for Communion at an SSPX TLM.
___
And what’s even more astonishing is how SSPX members are being PUNISHED until the non-dogmatic VII and the anti-dogmatic post conciliar thinking are fully ratified and accepted by them, (never) because of some imaginary “danger to the Faith”, while the Pope says to Protestant heretics:] and let’s just go preach the Gospel together!.” ” We are sinning against Christ’s will, because we continue to focus on our differences; our shared baptism is more important than our differences.”
–” We all have the Holy Spirit within us,..we all know that there is a father of lies, the father of all division, the anti- father, the devil who pushes in and divides, divides. and let’s not let what divides us divide us even more
It’s crazy to have this treasure and yet prefer imitations of that treasure – the imitations are our differences. What we should care about is the treasure:
– he’s not with me because I’m Catholic, he’s not with me because I’m Lutheran, He’s not with me because I’m Orthodox. A theological mess!!
–”We each have in our Churches excellent theologians. That’s another way to walk together also. But we shouldn’t wait for them to reach agreement! That’s what I think..”
–” Tony told me.. When he was a young boy in school, the black and the white children would walk and play together. When mealtime came, they were separated. And they would say, “but we want to eat together!” And that desire he had inside of him to walk together so we can eat together at the banquet of the Lord.! ”
But NOT at an SSPX banquet of the Lord? Why not, they’re Baptized…
–This desire for unity,…fulfilling together Matthew 25, without making an institution, but freely, like brothers.
If you are in the neighborhood…
____
St. John Cantius -Chicago All Souls day.
.
Link: http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2014/10/all-souls-at-st-john-cantius.html#.VFIynFfN40s
+
St. Cyprian – Washington DC All Saints day.
.
Link: http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2014/10/all-saints-solemn-high-mass-in.html#.VFIy6FfN40s
_____
And not necessarily in that order. (I’m partial to SJC since it’s my home parish….sort of.)
____
And if your traveling, could make it a two-fer. 😉
Dear Lionel:
Fr. Z position is newer, therefore his position supersedes the position of bishop Semeraro.
_____
And even if this is not the case, I refuse to succumb to the “spirit of diabolical disorientation”. 😉
_____
PS And don’t you either…. 😉
– and that is just a fraction of the blasphemies. Lord, have mercy!
Dear Indignus:
Another excellent post.
.
W/r/t the SSPX/TLM, it’s Francis’s personal obsession.
.
What’s fascinating however is this: no matter how much he capitulates the position of Church teaching to the protestants, he can’t seem to pull any of them away from their protest.
_____
The only effect that his pandering to the protestants has is to make them more entrenched.
_____
And here I will suggest the following observation made by Einstein, namely: the definition of insanity is doing the same thing repeatedly, but expecting a different outcome each time. 🙂
______
Maybe someone should suggest to the bishop of Rome to try …. Catholicism. 😉
______
PS Look how well it is working in the Anglican Ordinariate. 🙂
This is a most edifying and enlightening and encouraging story of how a man mired in the unnatural sin of Sodom repented and returned to the Faith and the moral life, with the grace of God and including by the prayers of Cardinal Burke:
http://www.clmagazine.org/article/index/id/OTI2Mw/
Barbara, there is no evidence for Darwinian evolution from one species to another: http://www.icr.org/home/resources/resources_tracts_scientificcaseagainstevolution/
living in a longterm state of mortal sin dulls the intellect and hardens the will, making the acceptance of falsehoods and rejection of the truth easier and widespread. Blessed Michael, defend us in battle . . .
Walking the Caesars’ lightrope as opposed to Truth’s tightrope…’positioning their centre of mass directly over their base of support’. That’s how tight’rope-walking works. And what’s THIER base of support’…? Judas treachery.
–
Our Lady of Fatima…Our Lady Seat of Wisdom…Mother of Christ, Virgin Most Powerful, Virgin Most Faithful, Stella Matutina/Morning Star…Queen…Queen OF Angels, Patriarchs, Prophets…Queen OF Apostles, Martyrs, Confessors…Queen OF Virgins, and ALL SAINTS. Regina Caelorum…the Most Holy Handmaid – True. Alien to and hated by Judas’ of V(illan) 2(you).OPN
–
http://www.mostholytrinityseminary.org/articles.html
http://www.novusordowatch.org/wire/index.html
–
The still, stagnant pool of contemporary Katolosism is a source of…unwellness. We all know this.
–
The still lucrative wollow of catholic indifference is a panacea to devils like bergoglio in thier ironically crawlyBLK ceremonies.
–
Sleeping Beauty…you need no errant Prince to awake you…the Saviour seated at the right hand of the Father Almighty courts you…wake up!
–
Oh dear…’let’s get unconscious…’ wasn’t that a maddddonnnahh cut.
–
For whom does Burke Work? Truth of Lies?
Which reminds me – Robert Sungenis’s film, “The Principle” showing the weakness of the Copernican Principle is currently showing in Chicago.
The only outcome (and probably the desired one) of false ecumenism can be the GAOTU, and God reduced to a mere peculiar interpretation of said being.
They groundwork is already there.
Thank you Johnno for the link, it is very interesting.
Dear Lynda,
Thanks VERY much for this inspiring testament to the Power of God, unvarnished Truth, and prayer, which Burke and another Catholic priest offered this man; and also for the truth is reveals of the hideous network of evil working undercover in confessionls.
— He writes:”This is the type of advice that convinced me to leave the Church.” :
“I heard every heresy about sexuality and our Lord…– “You’re gay and the Church calls us to accept our sexuality. And the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops is very close to this position—and this is the position–If you are attracted to members of the same sex, that is natural for you. And for you to deny that and resist that is to go against natural law. I believe, as an ethicist, that you can have a male roommate and be intimate—of course without genital expression. But if you do slip in that regard, it would not be a mortal sin.”
___
–But a totally different experience with Burke when he announced in a letter he was leaving the Church: ” Burke said he would pray for me and look forward to the time when I would reconcile” “As one of Wisconsin’s most outspoken “gay” activists, I thought, “What arrogance!” I replied with a letter accusing him of harassment. .. I asked how he could dare to write to me. My efforts failed to put him off. Bishop Burke sent one more letter assuring me that he wouldn’t write again—but…he would welcome me back with open arms.”
___
–On August 14, the feast of Saint Maximilian Mary Kolbe and the vigil of our Blessed Mother’s Assumption, divine mercy penetrated my soul..the Lord would seize me that very afternoon and bring me to another place outside of Sodom, to the very judgment seat of His healing mercy, the holy Sacrament of Penance.”
..” an inner voice spoke to my heart. It was gentle, radiant and clear inside my soul.” “Like all persons—single, married and religious—I am called to chastity.” ..” –I confessed my sins to a local, humble, devout Catholic pastor of souls and received absolution. As an essential part of my recovery, a good Catholic family gave me shelter until I could find my own home.”
___
–“As someone who suffered in the state of mortal sin for many years, I assure you that there is no happiness outside of the moral order. The only authentic response to the challenge of same-sex attraction and sin is the truth in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.”
–“While some malign Archbishop Burke for his fidelity to God, Church and all souls, I say that he is a true shepherd of the faithful and a presentday Athanasius. I tell you that he remains a mentor and an inspiration to me.
Johnno – BINGO! Our Lady of Fatima pray for us.
Dear Salvemur
All we know from our research is that He’s said many times he works for God Who is Truth, and seems to have managed to speak no heresy in all these years, unlike so many others.
Could make it a three-fer (!?) – and go see The Principle film playing in a cinema in Chicago (see Theprinciplemovie.com).
Yes, WE get the distinctions but the poor world doesn’t. And by the way, I think it’s wrong to even begin to think that God would create a spark of life, then sit back and ‘let it evolve.’ And God is magical – in that He did create something from nothing – and He did create everything – in however long it took Him. And it just goes against everything I believe to think He “let” us get to the point where we were “ready” for a soul. Horse pucky!
—
That may not be exactly what the Pope said but that’s what most will get at first reading. And there’s nobody in my family or circle who will read or even think in any greater depth.
—
God created man – Adam and Eve – and they were created whole. Period. Please show me if I am mistaken that this is what the Church teaches.
—
And, of course, I agree that there is obviously change with species.
Yes, it just gets better and better – keeps this ole heart pounding – who needs a defibulater? My husband and I have agreed if we start having a heart attack we’ll just read the latest Pope Francis ‘WORD” to each other, with an Italian accent!!!!
Dear S.Armaticus,
This point you bring up struck us way back when we first read of his activities in Argentina, and becomes more and more obvious with every subsequent ecu-meet and greet. Does it seem to you too, that HE is the one pushing indifferentism the hardest every time?
___
We look at videos and read the reactions of his visitor once they leave, and they all sound like they’re placating him to his face, but assuring their followers back home that it all means nothing more than the P.R. they do with any other false religion. They denounce every notion or implication that they might be softening their great revolt in any way, and press for increased patience and support because of how cleverly they are taking advantage of Rome’s prestige and the notoriety it gives them to be in photos and press stories with the leader of billions of Christians–some even reminding their flocks of how greatly that increases their chances of increasing their numbers by syphoning off the Catholics who will become more attracted by what they have to offer, now that the watered down version of the Faith is so manifest. And the Pope presses on ever harder with his walk together, work together, eat together, forget doctrine mantras the devil is division and the Spirit is unity in unreconciled diversity…
(end mini-rant) 😉
Thanks for posting that, Lynda. Anyone who needs a breath of fresh air head over to the Courage website. The truth is proclaimed there – I have found much information there: God created Man and Woman, and there is NO OTHER.
Dear Berto,
GAOTU–related to false ecumenism = Grand Architect of the Universe?
Masonry? Yep, or something just like it in another model and make.
We believe that if he genuinely opposes homosexual sin, our Pope should correct his growing image of being it’s public champion, by speaking out against it loudly, and at least as often as it is misrepresent on a world stage as it was here
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2014/oct/28/elton-john-aids-event-pope-francis-my-hero/
at this Papal Pep-Rally”
—“Tues. night in New York, at his annual AIDS benefit, Elton John called Pope Francis “my hero” “for his compassion and push to accept gays in the Catholic church”.
—He said,” Francis is pushing boundaries in the church.
—He told the crowd: “Make this man a saint now, OK?”
— “It is formidable what he is trying to do against many, many people in the church that opposes. He is courageous and he is fearless, and that’s what we need in the world today.”
We all know he’s not being cheered for any public promotion of chastity.
Dear Mr. Verrecchio,
You are correct in saying, “no one in Rome is capable of fixing this mess other than a pope, current or future, who is willing to do as Our Lady of Fatima requested. No one.”
It is unfolding just as Our Lady prophesied at Fatima in 1917 and when She appeared to Mother Mariana de Jesus Torres in the 1600’s in Quito, Ecuador. Our Lady of Good Success is a prophesy for our times, and Mother Mariana offered herself as a victim for us in the times we are now living through.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0hDI6O-foM
Thank you, Mr. Verrecchio, for speaking Truth in these times of diabolical disorientation.
Dear Indignus,
You write: “Does it seem to you too, that HE (Francis) is the one pushing indifferentism the hardest every time?
.
He is pushing indifferentism, but not by design.
.
What I think is happening is that Francis knows, like the entire hierarchy that VII, and especially the N.O. “reform” have been a total disaster. He has to know since he sees the Vatican balance sheet. 😉
.
Bear with me, since we need to fill in some blanks.
.
The entire VII canard was based around the false notion that if we open up to the world, the world will flood into the Church. Seeing as that VII was a failure as early as 1966, the modernists had to create an excuse for why the VII was a failure. So they constructed the narrative that “if we become more like the protestants, then the protestants will end their protest and we can all be one big happy family. If you read anything about the liturgical reforms, what pops up like the sore thumb that it is, is that the Mass had to be protestantized. So Paul went ahead and allowed Bugnini to do it, and ended up making an even bigger mess than the VII fiasco. Having made two major blunders, the modernists couldn’t admit that they were wrong, to they created this grand delusion called the new springtime.
.
So what in essence happened is that by not “restructuring” the Church back to the Faith given to It by Christ and handed down from the Apostles through the generations, the modernists pretended that the” new springtime is just around the corner”. But seeing as how they still had the “patrimony” that previous generations accumulated, the modernists “carried on” in their make believe world even as their bottom line was deteriorating.
.
What I think changed the game is that the modernists funds might be running out. And it is this issue that probably is driving Francis to “become like the world” at this breakneck speed. It’s not his age in my opinion that is the motivating factor.
.
So on the one hand Francis has the “cash rich” German paymasters (and their government/media backers) and on the other hand he has his VII ideology.
.
And speaking of the VII ideology, I think this is the far worse problem. Anyone with half a brain could see that VII/N.O.is a disaster. But Francis just can’t let go. He can’t admit that he is wrong. So what does he do? He does a Stalin. Stalin wants to make communism work. But Lenin and himself reduced the Russian economy to shambles. So what does Stalin do? He blames the kulaks (anyone who owned a cow was considered a kulak) and orders his henchmen to kill the first million kulaks. That will teach them. But unfortunately for the living kulaks, the grain production decreased and the living conditions became much worse. So what does Stalin do? He ordered the killing of 5 million more. And this would have continued if not for WWII and the lend/lease program. Bizarre to a rational mind, but this is how ideologues think.
.
But back to Rome. 50 years on and modernist Rome is in essence funded by the German State trough the Kirchensteuer. The German church is in a bigger mess then the global church. But since the Germans have the “dosh” (no parishioners, but they have the dosh) Francis latches on to them to keep himself above water.
.
But Francis knows that the Kirchensteuer “dosh” is going to come to an end, since Germans are leaving the German church in droves so as not to pay the damned thing. So Francis has to have a longer term strategy. And this strategy is not to proselytize individual to the One True Faith, but instead to bring whole denominations of heretics into the Francis church. (Notice how he likes the evangelical “prosperity religion” crowd?)
.
Francis thinks that if he “relaxes” enough of Catholic doctrine, he will start getting back the “pew-sitters”, entire sects of them. And the desperation of Francis’s doctrinal “relaxations” really shows how desperate Francis is. But his strategy is not working. After the Francis “dog and pony” show in year one of this reign, the church numbers have actually dropped, and Tony Palmer went to meet his maker. I suspect year 2 is probably going much worse, and no new Tony Palmer on the horizon. This observation is supported by the more radical departures from the Magisterium that we are observing with each passing day.
.
So what is the answer? Well, Francis can return to the Benedict strategy. Benedict, who is a modernist like the rest of the Ionnian/Pauline papal line, differentiated himself from the rest in that he was actually intelligent. He saw the disaster that was VII/N.O., so he tried to ameliorate it. He, being the clever guy that he was, decided to start bringing the pew-sitters back in by relaxing the ban on the Immemorial Mass of All Ages. And he actually brought into the Church an entire sect (remember the Ordinariate). But what Benedict actually tried to do is not to return to the One True Faith, but rather save the N.O. by bringing it closer to the Tridentine Mass. Benedict hoped that the two would somehow ‘meld’ together and some sort of a N.O./TLM mishmash would arise that was acceptable to the conservatives and the less loony leftists. Well, what Benedict did not count on was how intransigent the lunatics were. And those lunatics with the help of the homo-mafia brought down his reign. What the significance of Benedicts’ downfall means, which people don’t fully understand yet, is that Benedicts downfall finally drove the stake through the heart of this silly reform of the reform and N.O. disguised at Catholic liturgy strategy. (See Bert, I do agree with you more than you think)
.
But what does Francis do? Well, since he isn’t the brightest star in the galaxy, and since he is no less ideologically inclined than Stalin, he does what every good communist dictator does: he launches a reign of terror… I mean mercy. What I think Francis is trying to do, besides settling old scores, is to terrify the living daylights out of anyone who is thinking about being Catholic. He is doing this out of hate, but also for the “optics”. What Francis is saying to the modernists, who have the cash to through at Francis and his church is that “I am keeping the Catholics at bay”. If you don’t support me, the next guy who takes my place will not push your social agenda like I am. The next guy will not be a “hero” to Elton John. On the other hand, he is pandering to the protestants in the hope of getting some movement from these sects into the Francis church. This movement would translate directly into the bottom line. And it is this pandering that comes across your radar as indifferentism.
.
But the problem is much deeper.
.
Ok I ranted now.
Dear Servant of Our Lady,
We agree this is a precious offering and one we should all try to imitate.
Here’s a short additional bit of info and beautiful pictures:
http://www.catholictradition.org/Mary/good-success.htm
Wow! Magnificent. Thank you, Indignus famulus.
I feel the need to point out that this word Chastity is most often not the clear and exat word we are to be using when it comes to abstaining from sexual activity. We have a very specific word for abstinence from sexual activity and it is called continence. It is one of the twelve fruits of the Holy Spirit and along with all the other eleven fruits is chastity. Chastity and continence are two separate states. One does not always have to be continent in order to be chaste but one most certainly has to continent in order to be continent.
One may ask, why make this distinction? We make this distinction in order to have absolute clarity about what is demanded. I noticed in one of the interviews with Cardinal Burke pertaining to the Synod and the divorce and remarried receiving communion, taht he said that they must be “chaste” if they insist on living together and wish to receive communion.This is where I feel he is way too soft and fearful of being more clear on this requirement of adulterous unions. Why doesn’t he use the word continent? The adulterous couple must remain continent. This might seem like not a big deal to some but it is. I beleive a lot of people have never even heard of the word continent or what it means. Continence is not only required for all those who are not married but it is also required of all married clergy. It is almost as if continence is a dirty word or a politically incorect word to use in our sophisticated and sex saturated world.
I can’t help but feel that Cardinal Burke’s use of the word chastity over continence shows a reticence to speaking more clearly. I am still going to pray for an increase in courage for Cardinal Burke.
Yes,
hasn’t the Modern Church already set up something very similar to the Freemasonic theology, with false ecumenism?
By recognising the Holy Spirit is at work in all religions seen as imperfect, rudimental, expressions of the same “theogony”.
This goes even further for the so-called Abrahamitic religions and cults.
(there’s even people inside the N.O. who judge Islam a simple catholic heresy).
So “Catholicism” has and ought to de facto, according to them, the same relationship with them as the Mason worship versus religions, from that pov, with the difference that they still think Catholics can know God, for now.
With recent openings, which could be described as deistic, such as Francis’ confused (are they though?) statements on the nature of God (there is no Catholic God, but ther’s plenty in older stuff also from other V2 “popes” etc..) it is possible they will start to deprive God (actually, the Catholic understanding of Him) of his uniqueness and qualities, in favour of a more fumous and ecumenical representation.
What I mean by that is, a shift (gradual, maybe) from an absolute gnoseological and onthological certainty of God being the Catholic God, to proclaiming relativistically it is simply a subjective interpretation/manifestation among many.
Therefore placing the “Catholic” Church and religion exactly where it needs to be in the hypothetical upcoming global indifferentistic antichrist religion, comprised of all cults directed and aimed in various ways, like sunflowers towards the sun, to an inneffable entity.
You’re very welcome. 🙂 🙂
One Hundred Years of Modernism, Fr. Dominic Bourmaud. (Yes, Lionel it’s from the SSPX but good nevertheless!)
Lionel:
Since 1949 there is modernism in the Catholic Church which has also been accepted by the SSPX and other traditionalists.
The SSPX and the St.Benedict Centers, and also the sedevacantists have the same position on Vatican Council II and salvation, as does Cardinal Walter Kasper.
Kasper I can understand.
But why do the traditionalists condone a modernist teaching?
S.Armaticus
I don’t know what you mean.
1. Cardinal Burke may have just been working along the lines of “Love the sinner, not the sin.” But then again, “confusion” being abstract, could not have “acted” to cause harm to the Synod. At any rate, it’s a coded message to the Pope, which, unfortunately His Humbleness will not acknowledge publicly because – well, because he is ever so humble.
2. I think Pope Francis remained silent not only because he had no sense of responsibility, but also because he was shocked [and possibly angered] to realize his agenda was defeated [at least for now.]. I think his being silent is at least the most decent thing he has done this far. A most talkative Pope suddenly at a loss for words [imagine that!], because, if he had spoken exactly how he feels, it would expose him as the heretic we all suspect him to be. At least his silence kicked the can of schism further down the road, to be dealt with some other time.
My two centavos.
Yeah well what Francis describes sound more like a Demiurge than God..
Indignus,
–
And yet he condones JP II’s heresies and errors by accepting his “canonization”… That’s how it works my friend…
God bless you Anastasia! I hope you are of childbearing years as that means you are one who is willing to walk the walk and not just talk the talk. Unfortunately, it was my experience that many “discovered” the truth about NFP just about the time they turned 50. If we do get a Pope that the traditionalists want, I think many will be shocked by what is required of them even in relations between husband and wife.
Dear Anastasia,
You’re entitled to your opinion of course, but the word “chastity” suits our purposes here, and we also have no problem with Cardinal Burk using it when doing interviews, and in fact, wish the Pope would use it more as well.
___
We think it’s understood by the general public to signify avoiding sexual sin, beause of it’s more freqent use in the Scriptures than the other term.. If the Cardinal were writing a treatise on the subject it would no doubt be more proper, beneficial and educational to use the more precise language, and he could toss it out there as an educational tool, occasionally, to send people hunting for their dictionaries on-line But we don’t see what he’s been doing as making him somehow remiss, as you seem to think. Here are a few examples of Scripture’s uses:
___
— 2nd Cor6: St. Paul says, “But in all things let us exhibit ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience,tribulation, necessities,distresses, stripes, in prisons.watchings, in fastings, In chastity, in knowledge, in longsuffering, in sweetness, in the Holy Ghost, in charity unfeigned.”
–Acts: 24 Drusilla his wife, who was a Jew, sent for Paul, and heard of him the faith, that is in Christ Jesus. [25] And as he treated of justice, and chastity, and of the judgment to come….
–Judith 15:11 For thou hast done manfully, and thy heart has been strengthened, because thou hast loved chastity, and after thy husband hast not known any other: therefore also the hand of the Lord hath strengthened thee, and therefore thou shalt be blessed for ever.”
The meaning is there, but not the term.
Dear Lionel,
We could be mistaken, but there may be a wee-bit of sarcasm in S.Armaticus’s last comment, referring with delicate subtlety to the way the VII Church imposes their novel meanings on the latest ideas, superseding tradition?
(and at the same time denies the New Covenant supersedes the Old?)
or are we giving him too much credit here? 🙂
Dear Ganganelli,
It could go the other way, with NFP being once more confirmed. Guess we’ll all have to be ready to adapt our views accordingly, in obedience. 🙂
Dear Indignus Famulus,
I understand your thinking but I bring this up to show our reticence to speak clearly out of fear of others reaction. I get the feeling that Cardinal Burke is aware of the difference between chastity and continence. Even if he were trying to be discrete out of a sense of modesty I believe now is not the time to be so delicate with ones words. If times were not so grave concerning sexual purity and sexual morality, I would agree, he would not be amiss. But we are most certainly living in different times where most people have lost most of their God given understanding on natural law and the primary purpose of marriage and it’s meaning. In times such as these were people have literally lost their marbles on sexual morality we are desperately in need of clarity and instruction.
Dear S.Armaticus,
You can give your fingers a little rest. Whatever the plan is, it ain’t workin’–unless it’s just simply to create chaos. In that case he’s a smashing success.
😉
Dear Berto,
It seems to us we’ve already been living through that phase you’re diagramming-with all the heretical philosophies like deChardin’s merging into the oneness of God etc. JPII tried to renovate his condemned junk which is how he ended up Kissing the Koran and being signed on the forehead with Shiva and telling himself it was all part of the big fulfillment of God’s plan for the many paths to merge into one. (In psychology they call it the mental disorder of “delusions of grandeur”) at Fatima and Akita Diabolical disorientation. We once talked with professionals about it, and they told us they never could quite tell where evil ends and mental illness begins, despite all the years of observations. We still think they should exorcise first and ask questions later.–even medical ones. Just a thought. But you’re right it all does seem to be a jumble of old and novel and twists and turns –dizzying. Frankly we think the Pope really is over the edge in a lot of ways. He may get up babbling one morning at the rate things are going. Then what would the procedure be, we wonder?
We’ll see. Things are certainly moving fast..
Dear Anastasia,
Personally I think it’s better to teach people to live chastely. Madonna, Lady Gaga and even Charlie Sheen could live in continence without giving up their public, unchaste behavior. Let’s all live chastely, as required of our state in life and the continence will flow where it belongs.
And he will continue to say these evil things, leading souls into error and sin – until he is formally confronted by the cardinals and bishops.
The wicked look to Pope Francis with glee. For he helps their wicked agenda.
Dear Mike,
I agree that we all need to be reminded to be chaste in act, words and deeds. But those who believe they are entitled to conjugal intercourse and sexual intimacy because they believe they are married like those who are living in adulterous unions and homosexuals like Elton John. These are the ones that we need to announce publicly their requirement to be continent and not just chaste. They can easily convince themselves that their sexual activity is chaste because it is done in what they believe is a marriage.
Here’s our thinking on this: First, you’d have to be God or a major council to declare the canonizations invalid, contrary to the decisions and promulgations of the Church. Second, anyone who accepts the canonizations is submitting to Christ’s authority as exercised by the Pope, without demonstrating anything about their beliefs regarding the teachings of the person canonized,, which may have been entirely different at their moment of death if they were heretical before then. But as far as we know, Burke has never spoken as if he believes any heresy.
Reading this, I was compelled to send a ‘Tweet’ to HH to let him know that the SSPX are actually Catholic and he should be equally merciful to them.
Since we’re imagining the world listening to anyone Catholic, then we would be insisting marriage can only be between a man and woman, which precludes any easy-convincing about chastity in marriage, and forces them to deal with the fact that they are in a single state, and any sex is off limits. So that declaration would be a priority.
Dear Indignis:
Spot on.. as always:)
S.Armaticus
The position of Bishop Semeraroa and the SSPX is modernist.
SSPX APPEAL TO BISHOP MARCELLO SEMERARO TO ENDORSE VATICAN COUNCIL II WITHOUT THE FALSE PREMISE FOR AN AGREEMENT
The Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) could announce that they accept Vatican Council II,without the premise( see Section A) and call upon Bishop Marcello Semeraro,the bishop of Albano, to do the same ( see Section B). Then the SSPX announces that after the bishop of Albano has accepted Vatican Council without the premise( Section C) they will accept the Council as such( Section C)….
Indignus Familus
And what’s even more astonishing is how SSPX members are being PUNISHED until the non-dogmatic VII and the anti-dogmatic post conciliar thinking are fully ratified and accepted by them, (never) because of some imaginary “danger to the Faith”
Lionel:
True.
However the SSPX can still affirm Vatican Council without the premise and it is traditional.
Indignus,
–
OK – so a man who promotes religious indifferentism to its wildest extreme – nay, a man is the very EMBODIMENT of religious indifferentism is a “Saint”. Right.
In addition to JP II “The Great”:
-promoting sacrilege/profanation of the eucharist (communion in the hand)
-promoting the freemasonic principles of the French revolution (Liberty, Equality, Fraternity/Brotherhood)
-condoning the worship of false gods/syncretism (Assisi I & II a mere 3 years before his death)
-look the other way and a complete mismanagement of the sexual abuse crisis by priests
-promoting openly heretical men to the cardinalate (Henri de Lubac, Hans Urs von Balthasar, Mahony, Martini etc etc)
-promoting liturgical aberrations/abuses
-further promoting the “cult of man” initiated by “Blessed” Paul VI
-furthering the “rights of man” without including first and foremost the rights of God.
-etc etc
–
Ah, those poor and hapless martyrs of the church! Too bad they didn’t know about JP II’s enlightened and lofty theology of indifferentism, they could have saved their necks and lived a few more years in this vale of tears if they had only been willing to offer a tad bit of incense to the false gods!
–
Maybe he is a “saint” of the schismatic conciliar church, but most certainly not a Saint of the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church.
–
With this kind of attitude, not only are we not getting out of the hole we find ourselves in, we are digging ourselves into an even deeper hole to get ourselves out of.
–
If you are not willing to pay attention to my rational arguments, why won’t you listen to those of people such as Fr Luigi Villa (who was tasked with Pius XII with unmasking Freemasonry in the Church), Roberto de Mattei, John Vennari, the whole team at “Tradition in Action” and very many other learned clergy and even bishops?
–
I recommend you read this work of Fr Luigi Villa written shortly before the “beatification” of JP II:
http://chiesaviva.com/430%20mensile%20ing.pdf
“Karol Wojtyla Beatified? NEVER!”
–
The bottom line is this: you do not need “to be God” (as you suggest) to differentiate good from evil, and thus sanctity from unholiness. There would be no sin if humans were not able to make this distinction (good/evil). The catholic church is not a cult or sect (as some would have us believe, such as Mike Voris). We cannot (and indeed are not) asked to dispense the use of our senses and intellect; indeed to do so would be sinful.
–
Chesterton said that when we enter the Church we are asked to take off our hat, not our head. That pretty much sums it up.
What makes these canonizations invalid is the lack of proper material for adjudication. When there is no Devil’s Advocate, and any material brought forward which might show heresy, or false teaching (all the errors of VII were seen as true and brought forth by the Holy Ghost) there is no true basis for judgment.
—
Hence the canonizations are invalid.
I wish I saw Pope Francis’ silence in such a light. I feel very uneasy about it. Sometimes the look on his face – when he is serious and silent as opposed to smiling and goofy – makes my blood run cold. I am probably wrong because sometimes a face in repose is just neutral, but somehow I feel he is just sitting there like a spider in the centre of his web.
—
God help me that I should live in times where these thoughts are even possible.
Dear Lionel,
You make a point here that a few others have noted is a variety of different ways and earlier comments on other blogs as well. As less-formally educated Catholics, we were struck when we first started on the internet, by the barrage of different ideas and expressions of “truth” we found on almost every topic of Faith being discussed. We watched over time as “clusters” formed, broke apart, re-formed, and this process continues- over nuances of thought on matters of great importance. What it has all led to, is the chaos we now see regarding issues that determine loyalty. Loyalty to the Church itself in some cases. Loyalty to the Papacy or the man who occupies it, or those who support him or appear to support him; or to those who oppose it or appear to oppose it.
All based on “premises”, which one “group” claims are true, its opponents claim are false, and the undecided give various reasons for doubting or believing which leave them uncommitted to either view and “wondering”.
So views go on being expressed -some with passion, others with caution.
And prayers continue to be said, asking God to help us find the truth in all these matters. One thing seems obvious to those of us who believe a legitimately elected Pope is guided by the Holy Spirit. He is obviously able to reject that guidance on non-promulgated matters-even to the point of teaching false ideas to others, in less formal ways. So we cannot trust such a person’s judgment, and we end up with the chaos you see here and elsewhere.
Fair to say? Despite all these depressing facts. WE believe a lot of good is coming out of this. We personally have learned one heck of a lot just by attempting to converse with so many people of differing views, taking time to pray, think, research, go back to Scripture and the Fathers and Papal teachings-everything we can find–which effort the internet (with caution) greatly assists. We allow God to help us by praying for His guidance, remembering His intentions expressed so well in the past, and trying to love every soul we meet, no matter how irritating their views or manners may be, without falling prey to arrogance or a superior attitude or being overly self-defensive or unduly angry. That’s not always easy, as we tend to be on the more aggressive side, personalities-wise. But we’ve been forced to grow as we stick to our convictions, which is another really helpful thing about all of this dialogue.
Bottom line we believe, is that we all need to keep on looking for truth, which means examining and re-examining our own and others expression of it, comparing it to what is known and defined, and what is written by others who were inspired from the past and present. And above all , keeping the Faith in God’s promises–to be with us till the end of time. Love everyone and hope with all your being for their and your own salvation, as we know God Loves us all.
Continue to work and pray, and leave the end-product to Him Who gave His only begotten Son for us. He will not fail us.
Indignus Famulus,
depends whom you take as point of reference inside the N.O. (it is truly a fluid “meltin’ pot” of even wildly different positions and heresies).
If you take Ratzinger&co, it seems to me they still regard Catholicism as the “top of the pyramid” so to speak, and the jump to it being regarded, self-admitted, as just one among many with no special status, OBJECTIVELY, has not happened yet.
It may seem like a small detail, but it changes everything.
It means a shift to a completely relativistic gnoseological theology.
I’m sorry I’m unable to express my thoughts more clearly, I’ve forgotten most of what I knew in the field of philosophy.
October 31, 2014
Bad theology among traditionalists
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/10/bad-theology-among-traditionalists.html
Dear In Hoc,
. It’s not we who have declared them Saints. We are only saying that if we have a legitimate Pope in God’s eyes, then, we aren’t going to bother speculating on whether or not those he officially promulgates are Saints, are actually Saints
Because..
The real issues here are- not whether our examinations of their lives turn up things we think surely should disqualify them from entering Heaven, as we have no way of knowing their internal disposition just before the moment of death, i.e. whether or not they made an act of perfect contrition, which is always possible, however unlikely.
But 1. Whether the person promulgating actually has the power and authority to do so.. i.e. is he a legitimate holder of the Papacy.
and 2. Is there teaching which states definitively whether Canonizations are “infallible”.
Personally, we assume the first is true unless or until he is officially declared otherwise by legitimate higher authority,
and regarding the second, we’ve seen arguments on both sides that have left us for the present time, sticking with the idea that they are infallible, and so not questioning them.
A lot depends on what happens with Pope Francis and whether he is somehow forced to resign, etc.
One comforting thought in this particular controversy… If someone in JPII’s position can do all the scandalous and negligent things he did and failed to do, and still make it to heaven, then there may be some glimmer of hope for schmucks like us. 🙂
Dear Barbara,
We’ve felt the same way many times since our first research into his life- history on March 13, 2013. When it’s not a “first reaction” thing, human emotional reactions to people’s faces are greatly influenced by how we feel about the good or evil we perceive them as having done. .
___
The first article we found (about our then “new” Pope) praised his liberality in promoting weekend “encounters” in which mostly unmarried- couples from the ghettoes, were given Holy Communion during all the Masses, which both shocked and delighted them. One couple was so impressed they came back the next week and asked to be married in the Church (the cause of the writer’s effusive praise of Bergoglio) He mentioned that the other twenty or so, went back to their lives of co-habitation, and he never mentioned the Mortal sins of Sacrilege and Grave Scandal, but went on to praise Bishop Bergoglio for promoting fast-track preparations for other Sacraments, and his popular practice of letting groups of people sit for an hour or so of teaching, and then Confirming them all.
–The next article we found, recounted his public tongue- lashing of all the priests under his jurisdiction at the time, who were insisting on following Church “rules” which conflicted with his ideas of “mercy”.
–[that in infant Baptisms–at least one parent be practicing the Faith and living in a state of Sanctifying Grace] He wanted those restrictions ignored in the cases of prostitutes who were not going to quit their jobs, because they are poor. So he called his priests all kinds of derogatory names, in public
___
– After that, the evidence piled up to the point where it’s very hard to see his face with any papal fondness flooding over us, and we learned to think of him as a mentally ill person whom God wishes to save, to help avoid continual anger.
–At least we knew early on, how bogus the neo-Catholic media claims were–that the poor man was just being misinterpreted by everyone, which helped lead us here to a certain Catholic named Verrecchio, who wasn’t buying it either. 🙂 🙂
.
Lynda,
Today the post seemed not to work, so we found the article here too: http://catholicismpure.wordpress.com/2014/10/28/coming-out-of-sodom/
Lynda,
Regarding you post at #19, if the link no longer works, we found the article here: http://catholicismpure.wordpress.com/2014/10/28/coming-out-of-sodom/
Thank you for the initial link.
Thank you, Indignus Famulus. God bless.
There is no modernism in the SSPX. Rather, you have adopted what has to be called [at least a pseudo] Feeneyist position. If you were to research this subject in-depth you would learn that the Church has taught that baptism of desire, even implicit, can be salvific, since Apostolic times, and that this position has been clarified over the millennia numerous times.
—–
The SSPX has never taught that any soul is saved by his false religion, but, perhaps – and probably rarely – *in spite of* it.
—–
You are either hung up on semantics or hold to the Feeneyist error. Honestly it is difficult for me to determine which it is. (I suggest the former due to your repeated emphasis on Archbishop Lefebvre’s statement about souls being saved “in” a false religion, but it should be apparent that that does not imply “by” or “because of” such false religion.)
Dear Lionel,
While there’s no way we could speak for the SSPX, having read some the answers their members have given you when you’ve made this statement before, it seems they are concerned about too many other issues to agree with you that they “can still affirm” Vatican II. And that was also the word after the last meeting with Rome. Have any of the hierarchy in the SSPX ever answered your letters?
A Catholic Thinker,
if there is no modernism in the SSPX, why are they purposefully using an incorrect translation of the Council of Trent on Baptism?
Why do they show such a ferocious hate for “Feeneyism” as if it was such a peril to the Faith in our times?
Can you care to show us exactly where has “the Church” taught universally that muslim, jews, atheists,satanists, voodoists, hindus, AND NOT CATECHUMENS ONLY, not only theoretically *could* but *are* saved “probably very rarely” with B.O.D.?
So according to Lefebvre and you, a let’s say moslem, poof! one day has “implicit baptism of desire” and is saved, while keeping on being a muslim as if it was nothing. IN their religion but not BY it.
And that has always been taught by the Church.. so effectively outside of
the Catholic CHurch indeed there is Salvation! Extra Ecclesia Aliqua Salus!
Dear In Hoc,
Just for the record, we agree with a lot of the things on your JPII condemnations list. But you probably already knew that. What we’re wondering is why it’s so vital to you to convince us to think as you do about things like the canonizations?
___
What difference does it make, really? Our acceptance of them doesn’t change where the Popes actually ended up. And if Francis is declared a heretic and posed, we will then accept just as readily that they are not valid–still making no difference to the reality of where they ended up.
___
We do use our heads to determine simple good and evil in our lives.. But we wonder if you’re not expecting simple people like us to ignore St. Paul’s advice about not delving into things that are too sublime for us, like sitting in judgment of the eternal destination of 2 Popes. Heck, we weren’t even present on their deathbeds to see if they repented of that long list of their sins. And we have as much to be upset about as anyone, with both of our families being greatly, so it’s not affection for their papacies that holds us back, it’s simple conviction that it’s not our place to do it, and we haven’t enough information about how it ended. Are you saying you don’t believe in perfect contrition, by the way?
That if all of that was repented of at the last minute there is no way God would forgive it and absolve them?.
*Ecclesiam.
Also a word to clarify what I think Lionel means with his (insistent, true) campaign for SSPX to recognize etc. etc.
He believes that B.O.D., while a possibility contemplated in numerous Church doctors et alia throughtout the years, should NOT be regarded as a real, tangible, present day certain phenomenon, as that would be irrational.
For all intents and purposes, we should consider it an hypothetical event which may have or may have not happened in the past for catechumens, and even more remotely for non-christians altogether.
Considering we have a whole DOGMA against it (indirectly or directly is debatable) and NO infallible pronounciation on the matter, I think his position is at the very least prudent and reasonable.
My personal opinion is different, but I can see the wisdom in his reasoning.
Berto.
Thank you!!
if there is no modernism in the SSPX, why are they purposefully using an incorrect translation of the Council of Trent on Baptism?
Lionel: Yes! Why?
Why do they show such a ferocious hate for “Feeneyism” as if it was such a peril to the Faith in our times?
Lionel:
Agreed!
Can you care to show us exactly where has “the Church” taught universally that muslim, jews, atheists,satanists, voodoists, hindus, AND NOT CATECHUMENS ONLY, not only theoretically *could* but *are* saved
“probably very rarely” with B.O.D
Lionel:
Agreed!
Berto:
So according to Lefebvre and you, a let’s say moslem, poof! one day has “implicit baptism of desire” and is saved, while keeping on being a muslim as if it was nothing. IN their religion but not BY it.
And that has always been taught by the Church.. so effectively outside of
the Catholic CHurch indeed there is Salvation! Extra Ecclesia Aliqua Salus!
Lionel:
Yes! This is not an exception to the dogma. It has nothing to do with the dogma.
Berto Slomovicci October 31, 2014 11:55
*Ecclesiam.
Also a word to clarify what I think Lionel means with his (insistent, true) campaign for SSPX to recognize etc. etc.
He believes that B.O.D., while a possibility contemplated in numerous Church doctors et alia throughtout the years, should NOT be regarded as a real, tangible, present day certain phenomenon, as that would be irrational.
Lionel:
Correct!
For all intents and purposes, we should consider it an hypothetical event which may have or may have not happened in the past for catechumens, and even more remotely for non-christians altogether.
Lionel:
Yes!
Considering we have a whole DOGMA against it (indirectly or directly is debatable) and NO infallible pronounciation on the matter, I think his position is at the very least prudent and reasonable.
Lionel:
The dogmatic teaching stands and is not contradicted by Vatican Council II since there are all hypothetical cases mentioned and hypothtical, theoretical cases cannot be exceptions to the dogma or Ad Gentes 7 in 2014.
My personal opinion is different, but I can see the wisdom in his reasoning.
Lionel:
There is no modernism in the SSPX. Rather, you have adopted what has to be called [at least a pseudo] Feeneyist position.
Lionel:
I have asked before for a definition of Feeneyism. What does Feeneyism mean for you?
Since if you refer to Feeneyism you are referring to theology. So explain your theology.
Most of the theology on this subject is non traditional and modernism. Please show us how do you agree or disagree with it.
For example if you check extra ecclesiam nulla salus/Fr.Leonard Feeney on the Internet there will be a reference to exceptions to the ‘rigorist’ interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney. Lumen Gentium 16 would be considered an exception.
This is false theology. Since it assumes that people in Heaven saved in invincible ignorance etc are visible and known on earth to be exceptions to the dogma.
This is Cushingism. It is the mistake of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.
So are you inferring that the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance are exceptions to Feeneyism?
Similarly the SSPX USA website has a section on Feeneyism in which they repreat the same irrationality of the Letter of the Holy Office.
So you may be choosing their position without thinking it through.
__________________________________________
If you were to research this subject in-depth you would learn that the Church has taught that baptism of desire, even implicit, can be salvific, since Apostolic times, and that this position has been clarified over the millennia numerous times.
Lionel:
Even if it is salvific, do you agree that we do not know any such case in 2014 for it to be an exception to all needing the baptism of water for salvation?
This would mean every Hindu, Jew, Muslim and Protestant would need ‘faith and baptism'(Ad Gentes 7) for salvation and we would not know of any exception, since we cannot know them.
—–
The SSPX has never taught that any soul is saved by his false religion, but, perhaps – and probably rarely – *in spite of* it.
Lionel:
True but Archbishop Marcel Lefebre has mentioned this in the context of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
So why metion it? Did he think these cases were known and visible to be exceptions to the dogma? They were exceptions to Feeneyism?
—–
You are either hung up on semantics or hold to the Feeneyist error.
Lionel:
What is the Feeneyist error? He could not see the dead on earth who were saved with the baptism of desire and who are in Heaven without the baptism of water? Who are these cases? Can there be such a case in 2014 ?
_________________________
Honestly it is difficult for me to determine which it is. (I suggest the former due to your repeated emphasis on Archbishop Lefebvre’s statement about souls being saved “in” a false religion, but it should be apparent that that does not imply “by” or “because of” such false religion.)
Lionel:
The issue is not if they are saved in their religion. The issue is are they exceptions to all needing the baptism of water and Catholic Faith for salvation in the present times? Do they contradict the traditional interpretation of the dogma?
Have any of the hierarchy in the SSPX ever answered your letters?
Lionel:
No
Have any of the hierarchy in the SSPX ever answered your letters?
Lionel:
No
____________
Lionel:
Could you ask them to respond to this blog post?
September 11, 2014
April 23-Sept.11,2014 – still no clarification from the SSPX
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/09/april-23-sept112014-still-no.html#links