Once upon a time there was a man hopelessly addicted to drugs who was making a mess not just of his own life, but of the lives of countless others as well; first and foremost, his family and friends.
Those who loved the poor man were at wits’ end; distraught by his destructive behavior, his dishonesty and his near total lack of concern for others; to the point where he simply couldn’t be allowed to stay in the family home any longer.
To make matters worse, this man was a teacher.
Initially, school administrators tried to help him overcome his addiction, but over the years as his grip on reality began spiraling further and further out of control it became necessary to remove him from his position lest he mislead the impressionable minds in his charge.
It was time, in other words, for rehab.
Fast forward to today.
With the process of rehabilitation complete, all things are new again!
The man once barred from his home has been welcomed back into the warmth of the fold where his family members now look up to him for guidance on how best to get wasted, often joining him in abusing various mind altering substances, telling lies and stealing from others.
Not to be outdone, the school board hired him to travel the lecture circuit to counsel teachers and students all over the district on the subtleties of licentiousness and debauchery.
And they all lived miserably ever after.
The only thing more ridiculous than this make-believe tale is the real life story of what passes for the “rehabilitation” of wayward theologians in the Catholic Church since the advent of the Council; the biggest difference being, the latter puts in jeopardy the eternal lives of all concerned.
In the case of Vatican II, those addicted to modernistic thought include the likes of Henri de Lubac, Karl Rahner, John Courtney Murray and Teilhard de Chardin, who sadly, never got a parade since his rehabilitation was posthumous.
Now we can add to the list one Gustavo Gutiérrez, the father of “Liberation Theology.”
In July of 2012, shortly after Fr. Gutiérrez’s former student and friend Archbishop Gerhard Mueller was appointed Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, I wrote a column outlining the tension that existed between both of these men and the theology of then Holy Father Benedict XVI.
Well, today we have a new Holy Father; one who has made earthly concerns, most especially the temporal plight of the materially impoverished, the centerpiece of his papacy.
In September, as a meeting was about to take place between Fr. Gutiérrez and Pope Francis, I wrote:
It’s pure speculation on my part, of course, but what I do expect to result from this meeting is some kind of statement about how Fr. Gutiérrez and Pope Francis share a common concern for the poor, along with accolades for “all that Fr. Gutiérrez has done in service to poorest among us,” or something to that effect, which the good Father and other Liberation Theologians will then treat as a green light for promoting, with renewed vigor, their twisted ideas. I hope I’m wrong. We’ll know soon enough.
Well, my hopes have been dashed yet again.
On February 25th, now Cardinal Mueller hosted an event in Rome to present his book “Poor for poor: The mission of the Church,” which is a collection of his writings on Liberation Theology as learnt at the knee of Fr. Gutiérrez.
Not only was Cardinal Mueller’s mentor present that day; he was honored.
As reported by Catholic News Agency:
Called on the stage for a short speech during the presentation of the book, Fr. Gutierrez, departing from the original ideas from his book “A Theology of Liberation,” stressed that “the idea of service comes directly from the Second Vatican Council.” Christians, he said, are called “to serve and to search for the image of Christ in every man and go toward the ends of the earth and peripheries, as Pope Francis invites us to do.”
One may reasonably wonder exactly how Fr. Gutierrez’s comments represent a departure from his “original ideas,” and I will tell you. As anyone interested enough to read “Notes for a Theology of Liberation” by Fr. Gutierrez can discover for themselves, they really don’t “depart” in any way whatsoever.
That little qualifier was added, likely by a clever editor, to give readers the impression that the liberation theologians themselves have been rehabilitated by a change in position, when in point of fact, the only thing that has actually taken place is that his collaborators have arisen to power.
This, by the way, should give readers a pretty good idea as to why CNA no longer finds my writing suitable for publication; I’m simply not willing to alternately twist or ignore reality for the sake of making the hierarchy look good while entire generations are left to perish.
In any event, according to CNA, “Cardinal Mueller explained that although Marxist ideology had sought to influence Liberation Theology, the two have ultimately been shown incompatible.”
That’s just lovely, but if we look to the 1983 letter that Cardinal Ratzinger sent to the bishops of Peru requesting an investigation of Fr. Gutiérrez’s work we find outlined therein the following areas of concern relative to the doctrinal deficiencies of Liberation Theology: (i)
– A Marxist view of history
– A selective reading of the Bible that overemphasizes the poor
– Treating the Holy Spirit as a source of revelation separate from the Church’s -Tradition and teaching office
– A class-ridden theology
– An emphasis on building the kingdom through class struggle; a process which also involves changing the structures of the Church
– Making the Church into a partisan group, an idea which puts in jeopardy the hierarchy and its legitimacy
– A neglect of the beatitudes
– A Marxist perversion of the Gospel
Let’s, just for the sake of being naïve, strike from this list all direct reference to Marxism. That leaves only half-a-dozen reasons to be deeply troubled by Liberation Theology!
And so it goes, my friends, in these dark days wherein the “rehabilitation” of wayward theologians is nothing more than a matter of equally wayward men infiltrating the halls of ecclesial power.
i. John Allen, Jr., Pope Benedict XVI: A Biography of Joseph Ratzinger (Continuum Int’l. Publishing, 2008), pg. 153.
Hooray! LibTheo now has its own Lucky Luciano!
Luciano was sent up the river but once US Naval Intelligence had a meeting of the capo di capos and the mob boss could “put out the word” in the New York harbor (which he ran, along with a major fish market located there), suddenly, transport vessels awaiting their dangerous voyages to England were no longer being sunk dockside (e.g., the Normandie) and all kinds of intelligence was suddenly forthcoming about Nazi and Mussolini’s agents working the docks.
Luciano got word to Sicily in due time and the OSS (under Gen. Donovan) worked hand in glove with the Mafia to sabotage and undermine Hitler’s regime on the island, aiding the Allied cause considerably.
For his contribution to the war effort, Luciano was paroled and given a pass to return to Sicily once victory in Europe had been secured.
Looks like Guitterez’s restoration has a precedent. Lucky guy!
Strange times are afoot.
Although, if one were to only listen to Catholic Answers, everything is fine… nothing to see here.
On a related note, I made the huge mistake to pop in my earbuds at work to listen to an “authentic Catholic” radio show called Vericast.net.
Nope, since I’m “hiding out at the TLM” I’m actually a noncatholic now.
Word to the wise, be careful what calls itself Catholic out there if your stuck in your cube and need something to listen to. This Vericast show devoted an entire show (Brother Bishop) to calling Louie Verreccio a protestant
One of the show hosts on EWTN praised the Pope so highly I nearly lost my lunch. Mother Angelica—-help!! Your station has lost direction since you left.
Excellent post Louie. I would hope that Fr. Gutiérrez is wiser than he was in 1983. At the very least, the collapse of Marxism everywhere it has been tried should have set him straight. And once again, the Church is vindicated in that the teachings of the Popes on the economy going all the way back to Pope Leo XIII have proved to be correct by the judgment of history.
When name calling starts you are (loosing) the battle!
I am with you Louie,you and others are fighting the good fight for Christ the King.
Pax et Bonum
There’s a few recent posts over at Rorate Caeli blog on the new inquisition in the Church. I am surprised that Fr Z is still posting. I don’t understand how he is free to do what he does. I enjoy his blog, but I don’t know or understand the circumstances that permit him to operate as he does. Does anyone?
Gang’s, surely you jest?
Somehow I don’t think that was the point of Louie’s post. It’s not Gutierrez who is wiser, although he still is a “wise guy”.
Over at Sandro Magister’s blog, there is a great piece titled :Bergoglio, the general who wants to win without fighting. In classic Italian style, Magister b*tchslaps Bergoglio. Just think about the title for a second. It’s like saying that Bergoglio wants to quench his thirst without wanting to drink water. In other words, it’s not about being thristy, or winning for that matter.
But the best part of the post is when Magister drills down into what really makes Bergoglio tick. And it would appear that it is simply a combination of below average intelligence and abject human vanity. When he was under “adult” supervision in Buenos Aires, i.e. the Nuncio, he stayed quite, read spineless. But now that the goddess of fortune smiled upon him, it’s payback time. And like they say, payback is a ……. well you get the rest.
Here’s the money quote:
“On the side opposed to Bergoglio were the prominent Vatican cardinals Angelo Sodano and Leonardo Sandri, the latter being of Argentine nationality. While in Buenos Aires the ranks of the opposition were led by the nuncio Adriano Bernardini, in office from 2003 to 2011, with the many bishops he managed to get appointed, almost always in contrast with the guidelines and expectations of the then-cardinal of Buenos Aires.”
Habemus Problema… o yea!
PS Thanks JPII.
And speaking of Marxists, this over at RC:
“Like it, swallow it – or get out.”
“Everything depends on how ‘Humanae Vitae’ is interpreted. Paul VI himself, in the end, urged confessors to be very merciful and pay attention to concrete situations. But his genius was prophetic, he had the courage to take a stand against the majority, to defend moral discipline, to exercise a cultural restraint, to oppose present and future neo-Malthusianism. The question is not that of changing doctrine, but of digging deep and making sure that pastoral care takes into account situations and what it is possible for persons to do.”
It’s all about interpretation, isn’t it? Nothing can be taken at face value. What is possible is for couples to decide NOT to use birth control. Does the Pope suggest there are concrete situations where birth control might be ‘pastorally applicable?’
“Like it, swallow it – or get out.”
lol. That’s quite the soundbite. I prefer it to ‘Who am I to judge?’
That could be the new slogan for the CATHOLICS COME HOME TV campaign.
“Like it, swallow it – or get out.”
This one for the “But they can’t kill them all” catagory.
Sanity sighting. Also from the RC: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/03/cardinal-caffarra-firm-stance-on.html
Cardinal Caffarra speaking about the “Kasper final solution” to Catholic morality writes:
“The proposed solution leads us to think that the first matrimony remains, but that there is also a second kind of cohabitation that the Church legitimizes. It is, therefore, an extramarital exercise of human sexuality that the Church legitimizes. But with this, the foundational pillar of the Church’s doctrine on sexuality is negated. At this point, one could ask: so why are not free [extramarital or premarital] unions approved? And why not relations between homosexuals?”
Like I said in an earlier post, I don’t think the next conclave will “take a walk on the wild side” by electing the son of Bergoglio. Too many witnesses at the scene of this crime.
You have to laugh S.Armaticus. I find life a lot easier if I don’t take this Church politics seriously. It is entertaining on the one hand, but also very sad, when you look at what they are doing to the Church of Christ, like some plaything for their ecclesial egos.
The battle lines are being drawn as we speak.
This over at Mundabor’s blog:
In military parlance, this period is what is known as “Preparatory Fire”. The artillery rounds are being lobbed to soften up the enemy before the infantry goes in.
Keep Bishop Egan in your prayers. He will need them.
St Michael Archangel,ora pro nobis
Archbishop Lefebvre, ora pro nobis.
And more good news from the front. Actually, from ground zero of the Great Apostasy: Deutschland.
The Proper Mass is growing.
Yes sport fans, you have heard that right. TLM is “booming” in Germany.
It is just a question of time before the hippie church is no more, a dead parrot…. Speaking of dead parrots, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npjOSLCR2hE
If I said it one, I have said it a hundred time, (in the immortal words of Rush): “Don’t doubt me on this”.
Sorry. Link here.
This looks like good news:
I came across this OPEN LETTER TO A FRIEND ABOUT FISHER MORE COLLEGE by Robert J. Drumm, former member of the Board of Visitors at Fisher More College, published 3-12-14 on John Vennari’s site. While it seems the issue has been accorded its fifteen minutes of fame that the Catholic press and bloggercorp will allot it (in deference to the MSMs practice) this is an issue that shouldn’t die or take a back seat; it’s integral to how the Traditional Catholic Faith is crushed. Although a long read, the reward lies in seeing the good faith efforts of FMC being thwarted by the cult of self, the self-sacrificing works of good Catholics castigated by misrepresentation and innuendo, and the all-out effort to suppress the fullness of the Catholic life, all from an “insider’s” view – one that was supposedly given by another at an earlier time.
This link should be copied to as many websites as possible and the “alternative” tale trumpeted.
I used to bite my tongue and hold my breath
Scared to rock the Barque and make a mess
So I sat quietly, obeyed politely
Ignored what learned in Baltimore
Forgot the Church that’s marked by Four
I stood for nothing, so I fell for everything
You made me sit, but I knelt down
Dusty sandals brushed on ground
You hear my voice, you hear that sound
Roaring Rosaries all around
You made me sit, but I knelt down
Get ready ‘cause I’ve had enough
I see it all, I see it now
We’ve caught the eye of the Tibre, we’re fighters, dancing through the fire
‘Cause we are Catholic and we’re gonna say our “Roar” sries
Louder, louder than the lion
‘Cause we are Catholic and they’re gonna hear us roar
Oh oh oh oh oh oh
Oh oh oh oh oh oh
Oh oh oh oh oh oh
They’re gonna hear us roar
Blogs are flyin’ like a butterfly
Stinging like a bee for Truth we’ll die
They call you zero, but you’re a hero
They made you stop, but you kneel down
Dusty sandals brushed on ground
They hear your voice, they hate that sound
Like lightening gonna strike Hell’s hound
They made you stop, but you kneel down
Get ready ‘cause I’ve had enough
I see it all, I see it now
We’ve caught the eye of the Tibre, we’re fighters, dancing through the fire
‘Cause we are Catholic and we’re gonna say our “Roar” sries
Louder, louder than the lion
‘Cause we are Catholic and they’re gonna hear us roar
Oh oh oh oh oh oh
Oh oh oh oh oh oh
Oh oh oh oh oh oh
They’re gonna hear us roar….
Ro-oar, ro-oar, ro-oar, ro-oar, “Roar”sries!!!
with apologies to Katy Perry’s, ROAR
(“even a stopped watch is right twice a day”)
God Bless, Louie, for pointing out how marxism is still stirring the pot in the church. This complete perversion of the Gospels has priests all over going ga ga for antichrist tyrants and preaching them at mass.
to me jesuitism and marxism have had an illegitimate spawn called marxjuism, and the clergy and the catechists are utterly committed.
long-skirts “roaring rosaries all around” – sounds like a marxjuists nightmare.
p.s. go Bishop Egan:
“Bishop Egan said that in order to evangelize and woo people toward Christ and the truth, Catholics themselves must first be convicted.”
that means give up the charity without truth marxism.
Pooh Bear said:
” I find life a lot easier if I don’t take this Church politics seriously. It is entertaining on the one hand, but also very sad, when you look at what they are doing to the Church of Christ, like some plaything for their ecclesial egos.”
Yes! It is just a game to them. Small petty people, who where (and still are) not smart enough to realize that they are in way over their head. This is what happens when the village idiots take over the reins of power. Obama is a good case in point.
And after 50 years of destruction and devastation of the nuchurch, they find themselves in a position where the Faithful left, so the collection plates are bare, the trust funds depleted through lawsuits due to “saying Bravo to homosexuality” during this period, and they now find themselves at the mercy of the Kirchensteuer, and the German special interests that stand behind it. Each time they go groveling for more “porridge”, they have to once again sell out Our Lord and give up parts of the one True Faith, the only means of salvation. What a sad and pathetic lot.
As for the entertainment value of this modernist spectacle, might as well sit back and enjoy it. There is not much else that one can do. Besides, praying that is.
Lord have mercy on this clowns!
The modernists trying to hold down the fort… in Costa Rica. Link at RC here:
The money line:
“This, dear readers in more privileged areas, is the reality in most of the Catholic world. Is there a thirst for the Latin Mass in Latin America? Yes there is, desperately: it was the traditional Latin liturgy that was the liturgical instrument of the greatest work of evangelization ever accomplished, the conversion of what would become Latin America. But violent rejection is what is found instead in many places. It appears beyond comprehension because it is beyond human understanding, as this hatred for the Traditional Mass cannot come from a mere human source.”
It’s “beyond comprehension” for anyone who does not understand the mindset of your run of the mill Marxist revolutionary.
It’s just that simple.
it’s my understanding that Jesuit-Marxists left planet real some time ago, therefore the Real, Christ, the Truth, are little more than manipulable sky-pies for them – and they, little more than useful idiots for those who call half a century a day, in great architect minions speak.
I know I’m in the right place when LongSkirts is a regular! Thankyounonce again Mr V
@ EGIL: THIS IS BIG.
READ THIS: http://mundabor.wordpress.com/2014/03/16/convert-to-the-one-church-not-to-francis/
IT’S THE NEXT BEST THING TO SEEKING COUNCIL FROM A SSPX PRIEST.
How Soviet Intelligence Promoted Christian Marxism
@Egil, take a look at Mundabor’s post, dude, you are part of the inspiration:
“The Church is the Bride of Christ. The Catholic pledges his allegiance to the Bride, because he acknowledges that She, and She only, is the spouse of the Bridegroom. Popes may come and go; they may be saints or sinners; they may even have no idea of sound Catholicism like the current one; they may even be positively evil people, like certainly many were in the darkest times of the, say, ninth to twelfth century, and like the current reigning one may well be himself – unless he is just a mediocre, unintelligent, vain Jesuit -. The Popes and Cardinals may be as bad as they like – and they will pay a price for it, make no mistake -; but this does not change one iota in two fundamental things: 1. what the Church is and 2. whether we should be part of it. “
Very informative article Martina …..perhaps we should send it to the Bishop of Rome. Our lady told us that Russia would spread her errors throughout the world, raising up wars and persecutions of the church………wonder what it will take for the Consecration of Russia to Her Immaculate Heart.
TheTraditional RCIA (Rorate Caaeli Inquisition Assembly) continually solicits false testimonies as a way to accumulate “evidence” that the vetus ordo is hated by the Pope whom the RCIA judges guilty of unjustly trying to limit or destroy it.
The Traditional RCIA seems anxious to prove as accurate what the RCIA thinks are unjust accusations against soi disamt traditionalists (SDTs)
Rather then read the ramblings of a man who spends day after day disparaging the Holy Father I would read this instead from the infallible council of Vatican I promulgated by His Holiness Blessed Pope Pius IX:
“If, then, any shall say that the Roman Pontiff has the office merely of inspection or direction, and not full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the universal Church, not only in things which belong to faith and morals, but also in those which relate to the discipline and government of the Church spread throughout the world; or assert that he possesses merely the principal part, and not all the fullness of this supreme power; or that this power which he enjoys is not ordinary and immediate, both over each and all the churches, and over each and all the pastors and the faithful: let him be anathema.”
Of course the Pope has all that power. We don’t deny it. But having the power doesn’t mean his use of it will be infallible…Vatican I clearly gave that narrow definition of infallibility. And since he does have all that power, it makes our duty to defend and protect the office and nobility of the papacy even greater…and to fight against said power if used to harm souls. All that power and JPII did virtually NOTHING as apostasy, homosexuality, pedophilia, modernism, and careerism ran wild during his pontificate. Just b/c someone’s office has power doesn’t mean we don’t have the right to call out the evil words or actions or lack of goodness coming from the person in it. God bless~
It isn’t only the Rorate Caeli blog which believes that the Pope is unjustly trying to limit the TLM. Quite a few other traditionalist sites have observed this as well. As to whether or not the Pope is trying to destroy it, that remains to be seen.
Also, where on Rorate Caeli has it been said that the TLM is hated by the Pope? I don’t recall seeing that, so I hope you will point out where it has been stated thus.
@ Gang’sBornaTTIANS,… did I forget anyone?
DELUSIONAL is the only word that comes to mind.
Mundabor’s post struct a little too close to home.
Now with respect to those nice ladies over at the LCWR….. 😉
Speaking of delusional and being out of touch in general by the usual suspects, I bring you this:
Now if BXVI criticizes Francis,…does that make it ok in the eyes of the NuChurch types…. for other to criticize the bishop of Rome.
Or are we all just “piling on”.
You really can’t,…. let me repeat that…. can’t make this stuff up.
As most surely know, all ecumenical councils up to Vatican II were called to expressly confront a crisis either in the interpretation of the Church’ s faith or to delineate the Church’s prerogatives with respect to the prevailing political milieu. Vatican I did both, expressly defining the certainty of God and the fact that the reason of man is capable of knowing with sureness that God does exist; defining, against the politics of the time that had even invaded the Church, that the Supreme Pontiff had authority not only in the realm of faith and morals but also in the governance and discipline of the entire Church, not only those parts that seemed to fall under his more immediate presence; and defining the charism of infallibity enjoyed by the Pontiff, which definition delimits and sets the bounds for an infallible, irreversible statement of the Supreme pontiff on faith and morals.
No true Catholic will deny that the Pope has supreme jurisdiction not only in faith and morals but will also acknowledge that his jurisdiction extends to the governance and discipline of the entire Universal Church. This supreme jurisdiction in the governance and discipline of the Church does not, however, enjoy the charism of infallibility in its exercise. If one reads the decrees of the first Vatican Council it is evident, after establishing the Pontiff’s jurisdiction in faith, morals, governance, and discipline, that the Council Fathers saw the need to define which of those unique acts of the Roman Pontiff partakes of the charism of infallibility. This is done in the section immediately following the one cited and extends by the infallible definition of the Council only to those things concerning faith and morals.
It is important not to conflate jurisdiction entirely with infallibility; the infallible decrees of the first Vatican council do not.
Thanks for the last link.
Oh I think Mundi’s post hit a little too close to home. For HIMSELF. Mundi will have to account for the soul of Egli and any other non-Catholic kept from the Church by his outrageous slandering of the Pope. It’s one thing to spew vile hatred toward his Holiness and it’s completely another when that spewing causes a protestant to remain a protestant. Of course, I can’t really blame Egli. Why would you trade one form of protestantism for Mundi’s version of protestantism?
You can’t ignore the teaching of the Popes just because they don’t rise to the level of infallibility. As Pope Pius XII taught in his encyclical Humani Generis,”Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent, since in writing such Letters the Popes do not exercise the supreme power of their Teaching Authority. For these matters are taught with the ordinary teaching authority, of which it is true to say: “He who heareth you, heareth me”
Maybe this type of an arrangement would be more agreeable to the likes of Mr. Ganganelli: http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2014/03/the-faith-and-church-crisis-and.html
“Thus was the situation with the pastor of a Linz city parish. When he came to the new parish a few years ago, he stepped in front of his congregation and said he was bringing a woman and a child. Asking if that suited the parishioners, because if not, he rejected the place. The “pious” people applauded then. Meanwhile, there are already three children. The priest lives together with his wife and children and is married civilly even daring to be highly official, after all, he has to provide for his family. For other priests it’s sufficient to live actually close to their “partner”.”
Hey, you got to wonder where the good pastor finds the time to tend to Our Lord’s flock….. since he is busy procreating his own.
Oh, but Mundabor is the problem. Right 😉
The Traditional Mass is the most precious target for Satan.
but it is important to bear in mind that in most Eastern Catholic Churches united with Rome, there a married priests and they have huge numbers of children without exception. There are also charisms of celibacy in the priesthood within the Eastern Rites united with Rome.
We would not want to seem to be saying that these pious men cannot feed their flock because they have wives and many children.
So now we are highlighting examples of dissent? I can do the same thing for the ultra traditionalists. Maybe this type of an arrangement would be more agreeable to the likes of Mr. S. Armaticus:
“Because there have been no popes since 1130, all of the canon laws promulgated from the 12th century onward are invalid and many are heretical.”——-
Oh, but His Holiness Pope Francis is the problem. Right.
One certainly can’t ignore the teaching of the Popes and of the Ordinary Magisterium. The magisterium, though, is not limited in time or to the expressions of one or a handful of Popes but is rather the constant, consistent, teaching of the popes from Peter, who knew Christ, throughout the ages. Since this is the ordinary magisterium we are speaking of, it can be fallible or infallible. To be infallible that teaching must be consistent with what has been constantly taught as the Truth from Peter to now. If a papal teaching strikes a discordant note with the past accumulated papal teaching then there is a probability it is fallible; if it is consistently discordant with that accumulated teaching then the probability is great that it is fallible.
This leads to why it is important to distinguish that papal teachings must partake of that consistency.
Pius XII quotes our Lord, “He who heareth you, heareth me”, and he understands this in a Catholic sense not in a protestant sense. A protestant sense of this passage would see this similarly to how protestants conceive of the protestant churches: one day, after about fifteen hundred years of apostasy or a hidden invisible church, out of the blue there came the voice of the Lord suddenly giving the correct meaning to everything and establishing that protestant church. Pius XII, ever the Catholic, knew that “He who heareth you, heareth me”, heareth Christ precisely because what had been handed down from Jesus and Peter, at least to the point in Church history inclusive of him, had been consistent with previous teachings. Teachings inconsistent with the papal patrimony (redundant) of the Church can’t make the grade.
Your quote also shows that Pius XII is speaking expressly of papal encyclicals which you are correct to point out do not engage the supreme authority of the pontiff, i.e., infallibility, but are an exercise of the ordinary teaching authority. These, again, if consistent with the magisterium as recognized in its fullness in time, certainly require our assent.
I would add that I haven’t noticed a lot in the way of encyclicals in the last year or so.
Very well done. There is nothing in what you wrote that I disagree with. Both Benedict and Francis have taught the “hermeneutic of continuity” and as long as people stay close to Peter, and not some self-appointed arbiter of the “papal patrimony”, they will be faithful to our Lord and His Holy Church.
Slippery – and definitely not what I was pointing to.
Kind of a pointless discussion now.
If you don’t see the point in continuing the discussion, I will honor your request and no longer engage the issue with you.
Papal encyclicals are not infallible unless specifically noted as such. If they contain teaching that goes against the Deposit of Faith which includes Tradition and a long history of Papal teachings then in no way is there a need to assent to them. There is no “hermenetic of continuity” with Vatican II and some of the teachings of the counciliar popes with the pre-Vatican II Church of almost 2000 years. Vatican II was a pastoral disaster which we are still sadly reaping the fruits from. The popes who continued it’s false teachings on ecumenism, collegiality, and “religious freedom” in their own teachings I have no obligation to assent to. God bless~
Well said, well put.
Papal encyclicals can be infallible even if not specifically designated as such if their contents embrace the Deposit of Faith and corroborate it, they simply add to the continually growing body of works that infallibly illuminate what the Truth of the Deposit of Faith is.
As such, they can be used to demonstrate the continual mind of the Church as to the infallibility of a proposition or teaching or of that proposition or teaching’s departure from the continually held mind of the Church – its Tradition.
Encyclicals are not, however, always infallible. Again, they must concern faith and morals and comport with the Deposit of Faith
I agree with you about the so-called “hermeneutic of continuity”. This is like trying to explain how 1 can be 2 and trying to find a method to do so. That method would be very esoteric and would wound against the simplicity of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
I read over on the FE forum of people thinking of going Orthodox. So let me get this straight. Traditional Catholics are upset that His Holiness might pursue a pastoral solution for the divorced and remarried. People are so upset they may go Orthodox….which has a long tradition of allowing divorce and remarriage. LOL!
I apologize, everyone, for the longwinded discourses I’ve made in trying to defend the traditional Catholic faith. It doesn’t take long to realize these aren’t appreciated when the hiatuses that ensue after these extend for hours. What’s being done on this blog is important and I thought it best that things be done in accord with the pre-Vatican II understandings of what is and isn’t infallible, how theological argumentation pre-Vatican II proceeds, what it is that can constitute a valid pre-Vatican II theological argument, etc . I was wrong. I apologize for my offenses against what now appears to be many people. I retract no statements I’ve made as these are all traditional teaching of the Church. Again, I’m sorry to have been the cause of so many interruptions in the free flow of conversation.
I’m sorry, Louie, I’ve stymied that free flow your forum provides. I thank you for being the occasion for the discourse of many good people. You have many people that regularly contribute much good to traditional Catholicism and who are more than capable of ferreting out and besting those who would subscribe to a catholicism that began with Vatican II and who, if they could, would disrupt and corrupt the faith of some. May this regular and loyal retinue continue to use its adroitness as it has so ably done.
Thank you all for bearing with my manner. It’s about the only way I know to write – I’m not blessed with the quick-witted, yet short and to the point skills most of you possess. My manner of writing is, however, much out of place in the comments on this blog and will conclude with this apology (I heard the many sighs of relief).
May God be with you, Louie et al, and Viva, Cristo Rey!
Just ignore the comments from the pretended Italian troll….
I am puzzled by your “apology” about your manner of writing. Let me tell you, I have worked as a teaching assistant in the US whilst pursuing my graduate studies, and I can tell you for a fact (no exaggeration here) that your literary skills are at least 100 times better than most undergraduate students I came across. The level of apathy and slopiness among students today is absolutely unbelievable (and not only in the US, in my own home country as well). The result of spiritual sloth which leads so many souls into a life of vice, impurity and eventual apostasy.
The Faith is not to be found in what The Living Magisterium (He who hears you hears me) teaches, nor is it to be found in an Ecumenical Council (The Church is the PIllar and Ground of Truth) and it certainly is not to be found in the decisions taken by a Pope (What you bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven)
No, the Faith is to be discovered by men who create a Blog to attack a Pope, a Council, and a Mass and I can show you that is a fact just by citing the Bible right here…um, nope
OK, then I can prove that is true by citing this Saint right ..um, nope…
OKm I can prove one does not have to hear the Church by citing Denziger right …uh, nopw..not there either.
Still, trust me. The Faith is to be found outside of the Catholic Church just like protestant tradition teaches.
1 Corinth 6
Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers,  Nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor RAILERS, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God.
Railers; repent while you still have time
I don’t think that you need to apologize for anything. Defending the Catholic faith as it was always understood before the Council is what this blog is about, and you’ve done an excellent job of it. There are some who wish to defend the indefensible, such as the horrid actions and words of our current pontiff. To them, no amount of clear and proper explanations will suffice because they don’t really want to hear it. It’s a scary thing for them to think that a Pope could hold to such unCatholic views.
Does anyone know how the Arian crisis was finally resolved? Maybe there are some pointers there as to how the current crisis can be resolved. But I don’t think that it can be resolved by good Catholics keeping silent about what the Pope and others in the hierarchy are doing wrong. I wish that there were a hundred or even a thousand more blogs like this one. The truth needs to be
out there for all to see.
Maybe this is not very well known, but the Arian heresy stuck around for a few hundred years, even if not to the extent that it was present at its peak in the 4th century. The Arian heresy was still present as late as the 7th century for example in Spain where it had been taken up by the barbarian Visigothic rulers of that territory. In Spain the heresy was not wiped out till around that time there began the invasion of the country by the Mohameddan hordes. I don’t think that the modernist heresy has any chance whatsoever of sticking around for nearly as long for the simple reason that modernism being “the synthesis of all heresies” it is far more destructive than the Arian heresy ever was, and with the current rate of apostasy by a mere hundred years or so the Church would surely be extinguished. So, Our Lord will surely bring relief to the Church before His Church is completely wiped out.
“And unless those days had been shortened, no flesh should be saved: but for the sake of the elect those days shall be shortened.”
Bornacatholic………Protestant so-called ‘tradition’ can only teach ‘error’ and ‘heresy’! Protestantism was a movement of heated dissent. Protestantism is a protest against the Catholic Church, which proves the existence of the Catholic Church before. If Peter had not consolidated and built up the Catholic Church there would be no Protestantism to oppose it. Protestantism was unheard of until 1,500 years after St. Peter’s death.
The Catholic Church is the oldest Christian Church, ‘she’, our holy Mother Church, is the original Christian Church, the One Church founded, constituted and sanctioned by Jesus Christ Himself!
The Catholic Church is not a kingdom of this world. It is the Kingdom of Christ in this world. And the Pope as Pope is not monarch of the Church, he is ‘only’ a Vicar of Christ!
THE ROMAN PONTIFF WHEN HE SPEAKS EX-CATHEDRA……IS POSSESSED OF THAT INFALLIBILITY WITH WHICH THE DIVINE REDEEMER WILLED THAT HIS CHURCH SHOULD BE ENDOWED FOR DEFINING DOCTRINE REGARDING ‘FAITH’ OR ‘MORALS.!~ AMEN!
A CATHOLIC is good when he lives up to Catholic principles, refusing to depart from them. A Protestant is good when he unconsciously acts on Catholic principles, departing from those which are purely Protestant.
The Gospel is not proper to Protestantism. It was NOT written by Protestants nor committed to their keeping. BUT for the Catholic Church…….Protestants would NEVER had the Gospel..
Our Lord has said, “I will build My Church” (Matt.16-18)……NOT ‘My Churches”. He had expressed His view of divisions when He said, “Every kingdom divided against itself shall be made desolate,” (Matt. 12-25), and in establishing His own Kingdom, the Church, He took good care to insist upon the authority necessary for the continued existence of any society. His prayer “that they may be one as Thou, Father, in Me, and I in Thee” (Jn. 17-21) and His prediction, “There shall be one fold and one shepherd,” (Jn. 10-16)…….leave no room for doubt as to His mind.
St. Polycarp who was an immediate successor of St. John the Apostle, wrote in his letter to the people of Smyrna in the year 110: “Wheresoever’s the bishop is found there likewise let the people be found, even as where Jesus may be, there is the Catholic Church.”
In the 4th century Pacian had declared that he possessed two names, “Christian” and “Catholic”. He did not wish to be mistaken for one of those who protested against the True Church, yet who still called themselves Christians. “If you want to know what I am……Christian is my name, Catholic is my surname.”
St. Augustine (4th century) wrote:…..”All heretics want to call themselves Catholics, but ask any one of them to direct you to a Catholic Church, and he will NOT direct you to his ‘own’ Church.”
HOW history is repeating itself! Those early heretical sects went through the same phases as the modern sects are experiencing today.
Jesus Christ the Head of His Mystical Body the Church, solemnly pledged that ‘the gates of Hell would never prevail against His Church” (Matt. 16-18), and He solemnly promised that after His Ascension into Heaven He would send His Church “another Paraclete…..the Spirit of Truth,’ to dwell with it forever (1 Tim. 3:15)……which the Protestants must admit was the true Church of Jesus Christ BEFORE Luther’s revolt. If the ‘true teachings’ became doctrinally corrupt as alleged by the ‘enemy’, it would mean that the gates of Hell had prevailed against it……..it would mean that Jesus Christ is a ‘liar’, that He had deceived His followers. Believing Christ to be the very essence of ‘truth’ and ‘integrity’, Catholics cannot in clear conscience believe that He could be guilty of such deception.
Another thing: Catholics cannot see how the division of Christianity into hundreds of rival camps and doctrinal variations can be called a ‘reformation’ of the Christian Church. In the ‘true’ Catholic mind, hundreds of conflicting interpretations of Christ’s teachings DO NOT ADD UP TO A TRUE INTERPRETATION OF CHRIST’S TEACHINGS!
THE CHURCH IS INDEFECTIBLE, THAT IS, SHE REMAINS AND WILL REMAIN THE INSTITUTION OF SALVATION, FOUNDED BY CHRIST, UNTIL THE END OF THE WORLD. CHRIST BUILT HIS CHURCH ON A ROCK IN ORDER TO GIVE HER A ‘SAFE FOUNDATION IN ALL STORMS…….UNTIL HE COME AGAIN. HER INFALLIBILITY IS THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF FALLING INTO ERROR!
THE ROMAN PONTIFF WHEN HE SPEAKS EX-CATHEDRA……IS POSSESSED OF THAT INFALLIBILITY WITH WHICH THE DIVINE REDEEMER WILLED THAT HIS CHURCH SHOULD BE ENDOWED FOR DEFINING DOCTRINE REGARDING ‘FAITH’ OR ‘MORALS.!~
THE CHURCH FOUNDED BY JESUS CHRIST IS HOLY…..NOT ONLY THOSE MEMBERS WHO ARE HOLY, BUT THE SINNERS ALSO BELONG TO THE CHURCH!
SCHISM, HERESY, OR APOSTASY ARE SUCH OF THEIR VERY NATURE THAT THEY SEVER A MAN FROM THE BODY OF THE CHURCH; BUT NOT EVERY SIN, EVEN THE MOST GRIEVOUS, IS OF SUCH A KIND.’
St. Irenaeus teaches that: “in the efficacy of the spirit of those have no part, who do not hasten to THE CHURCH; rather they, by their evil teaching and their evil deeds, rob themselves of life. For where THE CHURCH IS, there is also the Spirit of God, and where the Spirit of God is, there is ‘the Church and all grace’.
Origen formally declares: “Outside the Church nobody will be saved”! St. Cyprian: “Outside the Church there is no salvation”………
The Catholic Church is……the saving Ark of Noah and the House of Rahab……..Non-Catholic churches are the ‘house upon sand’…….they rise up and fall. The Catholic Church is the ‘house upon rock’…….IT WILL LAST FOREVER!
Our Lord said: “Everyone therefore who hears these my words and acts upon them, shall be likened to a wise man who built his house on rock. And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds bless and beat against that house, but it did not fall, because it was founded on the rock. And everyone who hears these my words and does NOT act upon them, shall be likened to a foolish man who built his house on sand. And the rain fell, and the floods came and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell, and was utterly ruined:…..St. Matthew 7:24-27
Well, all I can say is THANK GOD our Lord is mercifull. And I too suffered from the ravages of drug addiction.
Thankfully, me not being a Protestant, Calvinist, know that God with my repentance (and a good confession) will provide me grace to turn away from my sins of my youth.
Day by day I take the journey with this thorn in my side….. but I still take it, not alone but with God’s help and mercy and just punishments…..
Mundabor answers the popalators! Link here: http://mundabor.wordpress.com/2014/03/17/how-to-throw-back-not-so-pious-deflections/
Here is the money quote:
“Every time one of you criticises the Pope, or a cardinal, or a Bishop, or some other wrongdoer who has forgotten the very basics of Catholicism, there is always the risk of someone coming out with platitudes like “wouldn’t it be better if we dedicated our time to improving our own life, instead of constantly criticising the Pope etc?”
The answer to this is:
“Well then: stop criticising me for criticising the Pope! Wouldn’t it be better if you dedicated your time to improving your life, instead of criticising me?”
Now he can shut up (which he will do if he is halfway smart; which he generally isn’t, because only dumb people speak in platitudes) or he will go on, hoping to get out of the difficult situation:
“I am just saying that…”
Rinse, and repeat.
Mundabor’s got your name, and he’s got your number Private Becameaproddie. 🙂
In response to Mundabor’s public statement – “I am Catholic not because I like Francis – whom I abhor – or Vatican II – which I despise – ”
I quoted the following
1 Corinth 6
Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers,  Nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor RAILERS, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God.
Mundabor did not post the scripture that I quoted on the 16th at his blog and for good reason. That scripture teaches that railers will not inherit the kingdom and when he writes that he hates Pope Francis and an ecumenical Council, he is railing.
Those who rail against Holy Mother Church, Pope, Council, Mass must repent while they still have time.
If y’all think that expressing hatred of a Pope and/or an Ecumenical Council is in any way a part of Catholic Tradition please just provide an example from Catholic Tradition.O, and don’t think that trying to change the subject will work with me
Mundabor is just having fun now.
Strikes close to home since the informal motto of my alma mater is “Where fun goes to die”. But I digress.
@ Bornacatholic (not):
If you really were born a Catholic, you would recognize that Mundabor hates the sin, not the sinner. And in this case, the Pope is a wretched sinner just like the rest of us, with one small exception, which is that he is lacking in a proper catholic formation.
And while we are on the subject of criticizing the bishop of Rome, look who’s joined the club: http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2014/03/benedict-xvi-prays-and-formulates.html
Mundabor wrote that he hates Pope Francis and an Ecumenical Council.
“I am Catholic not because I like Francis – whom I abhor – or Vatican II – which I despise –
That is tradition; protestant tradition.
Such hatred is condemned in scripture.
He seems to be a hero of yours. If you like him, try to get him to repent. Railing is the road to Perdition
Here is one for the “What kind of twisted mind would even think of something like this” category.
RC has the scoop:http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/03/mario-palmaros-way-to-prepare-your.html
“NuChurch: Where charity goes to die”
Looks like someone had a fancy dress party over in LaLaLand:
Pass the sangria, bro!
O, ok. I see. There is no possible credible response to Mundabor publicly writing that he hates Pope Francis and an Ecumenical Council so you must try and switch topics with a feverish abandon.
Got it 🙂
Mundabor writes that he abhors Francis…not Pope Francis…and he lists what he does and says as proof. Again…hating the sin. Mundabor calls for his conversion and refuses to judge his intentions. FYI: my translation of 1 Cor 6:10 (Jerusalem Bible/EWTN version:+) notes the word “slanderer” not “railer”. Someone who slanders speaks a falsity against another person. If Pope Francis and Vatican II reflected truth, then yes…we would be guilty. But since we seek and follow only truth, and V2 and some of the Pope’s words do not…we have the duty to call out the lies and fight the darkness. I love Pope Francis…I forgive him, pray for him and ask that God bless him cont’d
but if he speaks falsehood and leads others astray it is my love of Christ, souls, the Church, the Chair of Peter and of even the Pope that I call out his error and admonish him. It still is the 3rd spiritual mercy. It is love. Without truth, love does not exist. Without truth, NOTHING exists…no mercy, no charity, no compassion…nothing, nada, nyet. I follow TRUTH “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life” says the Lord in Scripture. Love rejoices in the truth:+) I follow truth, surrender to Him, and ask Him to form and guide me in all things…making Him only my King and God. Yes, we need to be kind at times…but Our Lord was not always kind…but was ALWAYS truthful:+) God bless~
To realize how nonsensical that post was from Mundi, imagine a Jansenist or old catholic making the exact same statement but with some minor modifications. See if it sounds Catholic to you:
“I am Catholic not because I like Pius – whom I abhor – or Vatican I – which I despise – or Catholic priests – whom I consider very bad on average -, but because the Catholic Church is the Bride of Christ. It’s as simple as that.” LOL!
Within the context of exhorting Catholics ever deeper into the ecumenical program, Pope Francis says: “We hold the Jewish people in special regard because their covenant with God has never been revoked, for ‘the gifts and the call of God are irrevocable’ (Rom 11:29). The Church, which shares with Jews an important part of the Sacred Scriptures, looks upon the people of the covenant and their faith as one of the sacred roots of her own Christian identity (cf. Rom 11:16-18). As Christians, we cannot consider Judaism as a foreign religion; nor do we include the Jews among those called to turn from idols and to serve the true God (cf. 1 Thes 1:9). With them, we believe in the one God who acts in history, and with them we accept his revealed word.”
Ganganelli, care to defend this error, that it was taught by the Popes before Vatican II?
First, if the Pope teaches it..it is not an error. What do you take me for…a protestant?
Second, as far as I know, the Church has never taught that the Old Covenant was revoked. After all, Romans 11:20. What I was always taught and what is the perennial teaching of the magisterium of the Catholic Church is that the Old Covenant was superseded by the new.
By the way, I’m curious why this is coming up now. According to the VERY traditionalist website Catholic Family News, Blessed Pope John Paul II said this way back in 1980:
“The first dimension of this dialogue, that is, the meeting between the people of the Old Covenant, never revoked by God, and that of the New Covenant, is at the same time a dialogue within our Church, that is to say, between the first and second part of her Bible, Jews and Christians, as children of Abraham, are called to be a blessing to the world. By committing themselves together for peace and justice among all men and peoples.”
Not an error that Judaism is a foreign religion? The Council of Florence taught that Jews, heretics, and schismatics go to Hell unless converted to the Catholic religion. Not an error?!!! What a joke!
And BTW, about abhorring Popes, all good men should abhor Alexander VI, and some of the Papal successors, unless you would condone their evil deeds, like digging up a predecessor from the grave and excommunicating him with a kangaroo court, or being men of blood. Ganganelli, you really have no idea of the absurding of your words!
Take it up with Blessed, Soon to be Saint, John Paul II.
That’s all you can answer with. Well, the words of the Council of Florence are well worth reading again.
Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Decree Cantate Domino, 1441 (Denzinger 714):
The Roman Catholic Church “firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that those not living within the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart ‘into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels’ [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock; and that the unity of the ecclesiastical body is so strong that only to those remaining in it are the sacraments of the Church of benefit for salvation, and do fastings, almsgiving, and other functions of piety and exercises of Christian service produce eternal reward, and that no one, whatever almsgiving he has practiced, even if he has shed blood for the name of Christ, can be saved, unless he has remained in the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.”
Nothing of the sort from John Paul II or Francis for that matter. No, just the abominable interfaith gatherings of all sorts, from Kristalnacht to the Assisi sacrileges! All of which was condemned!
This is the essence of the nonsense that is traditionalism. If you can abhor Popes John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and Francis and if you can despise the Second Vatican Council why on earth do you think anyone will give two figs what the Council of Florence taught? Trying to pit one council against another is the sure road to apostasy.
BTW, it’s clear from your words, Ganganelli that you think Vatican II supercedes all other Councils. Otherwise, you wouldn’t be promoting the nonsense that Judaism isn’t a foreign religion. A religion which rejects Christ is, by definition, foreign. The Old Covenant refers to the Jews of the Old Testament, all the faithful ones believing in the true Messiah, Our Lord Jesus Christ. That Francis mixes up modern-day Judaism with the Old Covenant is plain wrong!
Ganganelli, you’re so caught up in papalotry that it’s sad. I am right. You’re basically saying newer teachings of Popes supercede older ones, such as Judaism not being a foreign religion!
This isn’t really hard. It’s simply a matter of logic. Either the Popes and the Councils teach the truths of Christ or they don’t. You don’t get to pick the teachings you like. We call that cafeteria Catholicism.
Vatican II was a pastoral council with no doctrinal nor dogmatic infallibility. THAT is how we can say it is wrong by a country mile…and how leadership that promoted the heresies contained therein are also wrong. Jesus Christ is the Logos, where we get the word logic. Vatican II contradicted (illogical) previous magisterial and Traditional (big T) teachings…especially in the areas of collegiality, ecumenism and “religious freedom.” Please, please study Louie’s guide to this. Learn about the different kinds of infallibility and teachings…what makes a doctrine, a dogma and specifically what made V2 unique and wide open to fallibility. The fruits of the council are horrifying…that should be proof enough. God bless~
As far as supposedly soon to be “st.” Pope John Paul II. First, it’s not a done deal yet. Our Lord may do many things in the next several weeks. Second, elevating JPII, John XXIII to sainthood contradicts the acts and words of countless other saints as noted in this SSPX article: http://sspx.org/en/news-events/news/dilemma-canonizing-pope-john-paul-ii-3298 Third, I don’t know how Our Lord will explain all of this or clean it up…I can’t see a century or two into the future. But I trust Him…and I trust that He will protect His Bride…probably in a way that we don’t ever see coming, or ever see in our short life spans. But in the meantime, I will continue to fight for goodness…for truth…for Traditional Catholicism…for souls…for Him:+) God bless~
looked at the ludicrous liturgy link, s.armaticus. Exhibit no. 1 as to why Gangli should quit the newchurch propaganda.
If anyone has a problem with mundabor go and engage on his site and stop taking up Louie’s combox.
and if anyone blogging here sincerely thinks the Holy Ghost is speaking and acting through Francis – may God forgive you, you know not what a thing about Truth and Faith.
@gangli, shame on you for putting a seeker in the middle of your ‘problem’ with mundabor or the One, True, Faith.
I think the current Bishop of Rome is an abhorrent example of a Bishop as well. That’s partly how I know I still have my Faith.
And if any of the frankylovits are not daily praying for his conversion and his bishops’ I have to ask why?
I pray everyday for His Holiness. I pray FOR him and that I may be more LIKE him. I pray that I may have a tenth of his wonderful devotion to Our Lady. That I would look upon Our Lord in the Eucharist the way he does. That I might be graced with his wonderful ability to reach out to the peripheries where religion is unknown and bring the love of Christ. Oh yes, everyday I pray that I may be more like Our Lord’s Holy Vicar; Successor Of St. Peter and Supreme Pontiff Of The Universal Church.
Pilate answered, “Am I a Jew?” St. John 18:35
“I Know the trial you have had, and how poor you are—-though you are rich—-and the slanderous accusations that have been made by people who profess to be Jews but are really members of the Synagogue of Satan.” Rev. 2:9
A ‘Jew’ is someone who is openly hostile to Christ and His Church……..and willingly persecutes those Jews who accept Him as the Messiah.
…….from “Peter, Lovest Thou Me?” by Abbe Daniel Le Roux………
……..In 1980, during his trip to Germany, JPII stated to the representatives of the Jewish community in Mainz: “In the declaration on the relations of the Church with Judaism of April this year, the bishops of West-Germany have broken new ground with their statement ‘whoever meets Jesus Christ, meets Judaism.’ I wish to make those words mine as well……….”
Our Lord came to accomplish and perfect the law, but at the same time, the former Covenant was denounced and revoked; it yielded its place to a new Covenant, more perfect and eternal, that the Son of God sealed with His Blood on the Cross on Good Friday. At that moment the veil of the temple was torn in two as an indication that the former Covenant was finished.
“The veil of the temple was torn, to signify the division between the two groups of people and the profanation of the synagogue. The old veil was torn to let the Church hand the new veil of faith.”……St. Ambrose.
And St. Hillary: “The veil of the temple was torn because, from then on, the people were split in two.” John Paul II always leaned to the ‘Judaisation” of the Catholic Church. The just of the Old Testament were saved because they believed in the coming of Our Lord Jesus Christ. That is why the Jews, who refused to adore the Son of God made man, separated themselves from the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob after His death on the Cross and His Resurrection. “He was in the world and the world was made by Him and the world knew Him not. He came unto His own and His own received Him not.” St. John 1:10-12.
How can John Paul II then have stated that Jews, Muslims and Christians are reconciled in Abraham, that the Jews themselves are a blessing for the world? Is our God not ‘Triune God’? The answer can only be found without doubt in the false idea of ecumenism, which emerged from the Second Vatican Council…….putting aside the truths of the faith. In fact, JPII encouraged the Jews, the Muslims and all other sects, to remain in error….Miserere!
Why did our ancestors fight against the Turks on October 7, 1571, at the Battle of Lepanto? Because they realized the full danger at stake, especially the danger to their faith, and so they fought against those who do not recognize the divinity of our Lord, nor the Church, nor the Holy Trinity, and so who do not have the same God.
St. Paul says that the people will lose the love of truth, and for that reason God will send them spirits of error by which they will be deceived (II Thess. 2:10). This is exactly what is happening in our days. We are seeing, a spiritual punishment from God, a blindness of spirit as well as a hardening of hearts, especially among the prelates of the Church and the leaders of human society.
St. Paul, contrary to this, admonished the Christians of all times not to bear the yoke with unbelievers: For what participation hath justice with injustice? Or what fellowship hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? Or what part hath the faithful with the unbeliever? (II Cor. 6:14;15)
During the V II Council the Freemason Yves Marsaudon wrote: “If there still exist some isolated isles in the line of the Inquisition, they will be forcibly drowned in the rising sea of ecumenism and liberalism, of which one of the most tangible results will be the lowering of spiritual barriers which still divide the world. With all our hearts we wish success to the ‘Revolution’ of John XXIII.”
Unless Jesus Christ can exercise His power, there is disorder and decadence…….May Saint Michael protect us from the snares of the devil!
Our Lady of Fatima, ora pro nobis!
Just finished re watching my favorite of movie of all time which shows how far one must really sometime go to defend the Papacy from protestants and protestant wannabes:
“Since the Court has determined to condemn me, God knoweth how, I will now discharge my mind concerning the indictment and the King’s title. The indictment is grounded in an act of Parliament which is directly repugnant to the law of God, and his Holy Church, the Supreme Government of which no temporal person may by any law presume to take upon him. This was granted by the mouth of our Savior, Christ himself, to Saint Peter and the Bishops of Rome whilst He lived and was personally present here on earth. It is, therefore, insufficient in law to charge any Christian to obey it.”
“I am commanded by the King to be brief, and since I am the King’s obedient subject, brief I will be. I die his Majesty’s good servant but God’s first.”
Gangli – you must be taking the piss when you say you pray to be like him. In other words, you pray to be a traitor to souls, the Faith, and have a hatred for traditional catholics that upwells in public and spews out for all the world to see.
say something real gangli if you are capable.
poor Gangli – you really don’t understand, do you. You are like those many millions utter de-sensitized to the falsehoods.
as Halina quoted: During the V II Council the Freemason Yves Marsaudon wrote: “If there still exist some isolated isles in the line of the Inquisition, they will be forcibly drowned in the rising sea of ecumenism and liberalism, of which one of the most tangible results will be the lowering of spiritual barriers which still divide the world. With all our hearts we wish success to the ‘Revolution’ of John XXIII.”
p.s. gangli – if you do not pray for his conversion, I presume you would not dream of praying for the men in Rome over October to be filled with the fear of God, and uphold the Law of Our King, Jesus Christ, who said, if you love Me, you will keep My commands.
“taking the piss”? That’s a British term. Are you British, saluto? If so, maybe living in such a protestantized culture has lessened your culpability in your slander of the Pope. I hope so, for your sake. May God have mercy on you.
one things for sure, it’s is getting easier to spot the protestant in the catholic crowd, simply take the one weeping on their knees for Holy Mother Church out of the crowd and the rest of the crowd is protestant – even the Pope, so far. Which is why we must pray for his conversion and keep calling foul foul. Be interested to know Gangli if you fast by caressing someone as Francis recently preached?
Indeed may God have mercy on me, for my sins. I have never slandered the pope – slander is when you publicly say something patently untrue about someone. detraction is when you publicly say something unflattering about someone that is true but that the public don’t know about. Don’t think there is a vice that addresses publicly addressing a public scandal that everyone knows. you’ll have to consult the latest cmtv magisterium to see if they’ve come up with one.
meanwhile, this creed-reciting-parrot will continue to offer up Roses to Our Lady and Our Lord, that those treacherous prelates have their road to damascus moment, before the Synod.
p.s. ‘treachery’ = violation of allegiance of faith.
Good for you Saluto. Pray for the prelates…that God’s will be done.
p.s.s. actually you do sound a lot like Francis, Gangli, like someone trying to induce others to treachery, trying to lobby against the Faith as the Facts that we know. Reminds me of the inducement to stupidity by the serpent on the tree of knowledge – ironic really. The tree of knowledge was the site of the most thick-headed decision in history.
God’s will is that they uphold His law and we know what His law is. We actually know a lot about God because He wants us to know. We have history, divine revelation, sacred tradition, sacred scripture, the Bride of Christ who has and will continue to survive unfaithful sons.
I can live with your opinion of me Saluto. I guess I’ll know at my general judgment. I’m hoping that the intercession of soon to be SAINT John Paul II and SAINT John XXIII will help this sinner through.
You never answered my question, GGli – do you fast by caressing as Francis suggests? When you go to confession, do you go with the express intention that you will sin again and keep on sinning. Do you believe that Christ pretends? Do you believe the Blessed Virgin sinned? Do believe that the Mass of All Ages is a superficial fashion? Do you believe that proselytism is solemn nonsense? do you think a Pope cussing over the faithful at St Peter’s square is just par for the course? Do you believe that muslims should be encouraged to stay bound under the yoke of satan in their false faith? Jews included? Would you feel completely holy putting a beach ball on the altar of sacrifice? Would you happily preside over a Mass that included lewd dancing?
theres 365 more questions I could ask.
I haven’t given a general opinion of you GG. You have a way of not addressing anything said and not answering anything asked. That’s quite a skill.
p.s.s. do you agree with Paul VI then, that the smoke of satan entered the Church under his reign? Would you encourage another Pope to remove the tabernacle off the altar of sacrifice and set up a pagan idol?
Truth is Christ. Salvation is His Church. Betraying either is an antichrist thing to do. Personally, I won’t pray that antichrist’s be blessed. St John tells us that if we bless one who does not keep the faith, we become complicit in his sins. So I pray for their conversion.
I think we’re testing the limit of Louie’s patience but I will answer your questions. No. No. In what way? No. It is for some. yes. slander…he misspoke and you know it. no. no. yes. no.
I don’t see Louie jumping up and down.
this one’s for you Gangli, and for all those tradaphobes, including the Bishop of Rome, feel free to sing it to the tune of ‘what a wonderful world’:
“Fomenter of coprophagia!”
“Specialist of the Logos!”
“Self-absorbed, Promethean neo-Pelagian!”
“Mr and Mrs Whiner!”
“Ideologue of the Logos!”
“Long-faced, mournful funeral Christian!”
“Sayer of prayers!”
“Querulous and disillusioned pessimist!”
“Pickled pepper-faced Christian!”
“Children! Afraid to dance! To cry! Afraid of everything!”
“Asker for certainty in all things!”
“Closed, sad, trapped Christian who is not a free Christian!”
“Creed-reciting, parrot Christian!”
“Watered-down faith, weak-hoped Christian!”
“Seminarians who grit their teeth and wait to finish,
follow rules and smile [who] reveal the hypocrisy of clericalism – one of the worst evils!”
“Smarmy, idolator priest!”
“Worshiper of the god Narcissus!”
“Religious who have a heart as sour as vinegar!”
“Promoter of the poison of immanence!”
“Those closed in the formality of a prayer that is cold, stingy [who]
might end up as Michal, in the sterility of her formality.”
“Older people nostalgic for structures and customs which are no longer life-giving in today’s world!”
“Young people addicted to fashion!”
“Self-absorbed, Promethean neo-Pelagian!” My favorite and so on the money.
Ah, so you do have a sympatico with Franki.
Of course, he’s the Holy Father.
The thing with Franki and those of a similar ilk is a tending to induce sin in others. How many babies would you guess got the green light to be mutilated by his comment on abortion? How many inherently disordered souls have tied the ‘knot’ under his reign because of his ‘whom am I to judge?’ In the first year of his reign, therefore, how many poor souls were induced to a life of mortal sin and how many years will it take for them to convert or even recognise the betrayal? Do we think Franki cares? Only God knows, but we know what the results were and are. I do not want to associate myself with that or the one promulgating it.
If you are so serene in your committement do you seek out sites like Louie’s where such a sympatico is seen as almost denying the Faith? I think those who worship the Pope have missed the Barque of Peter. Those Captains come and go, but the Church remains. It really is strange for you to evince such distance (I presume you’ve never met him) rapport with a man who could have done and said what he has over the passed year.
to be a good Catholic:
do not imitate Francis.
do not seek brownie points from the world (which we are not of)
remember that the spirit of VII is utterly adversarial to True Catholicism.
Hey we might now be getting beyond the superficial and to the heart of the matter. Saluto, I don’t know your situation so I can only speak for mine.
I went to the SSPX 20 years ago and from there I went sede. It was an eye-opener for me. And the biggest shocker was how “worldly” the vast majority of attendees were. It is a HUGE problem in trad communities that so many of the 2nd generation doesn’t stick around. Even though when I was going the young women were having 12, 13 even 14 babies per family they just don’t stay. They turn 18 and they bolt the house and the Church. And that is after getting week after week of SSPX/CMRI teaching.
People vote with their feet. If they don’t like the teaching, they either ignore it or they move on. This happens in both the novus ordo and in trad chapels. That being the case, I don’t think a single baby was aborted because of his comment on abortion. Homosexuals getting married because the Pope said “whom am I to judge”? Since when do gays listen to the Pope.
More to come.
So why do I think the Holy Ghost gave us Pope Francis? Because he is going to the peripheries as he calls them. Those who are unchurched, those who have fallen away, those who live lives of practical atheism. If he can get a portion of these back in the pews, the truth can be preached and lives can be changed. But you have to get butts in the seats first.
Since they put him on the cover of the Advocate. SInce shool kids all over the world now think the Pope advocates gay ‘marriage’. The head in the sand phenomenon continues.
Palermo, may he rest in peace, fought for the Faith – has put it simply and better than pretty much anyone what this papacy has meant and continues to mean.
from the letter:
“No, I am not protesting for myself.
However, I still have the problem of that seven-year-old son of mine and three older ones too. I don’t want to and can’t give them the response of the boatloads sinking near Lampedusa, the homosexual example of purity from Cardinal Schönborn, the half-castes and the praise of the Roma culture by Cardinal Scola, the disdain for doctrinal thrashings according to Pope Francis and the eulogizing of civil unions by Mogavero. To these children I cannot tell the fairy-tale called “Matteo Renzi.” Anyway, regarding Renzi, ten minutes done well by Crozza* will fix him.
Dear director, dear Riccardo, why would I ever write these things to you? Because last night I couldn’t sleep. And because I’d like to understand – and ask the readership of Bussola a question: What more has to happen in the Church for Catholics to stand up, once and for all, and shout their indignation from the rooftops? Attention: I am addressing individual Catholics, not associations, secret meetings, movements, sects which for years have been managing the brains of the faithful for the benefit of third parties, dictating the line the followers have to take. These groups seem to me to be placed under the care of those minus habens [of lesser intelligence] and headed from afar by more or less charismatic individuals, who are more or less trustworthy. No, no: here I am making an appeal to individual consciences, to their hearts, their faith and their virility. Before it is too late.”
Gagnli, the Holy Ghost did NOT give us Francis, the Cardinals did, (free will) and now this is the creature God must work with. This misconception about the conclave and the vote is another thing that people must become educated about. The HOLY GHOST DIDN”T GIVE US FRANCIS! repeat it. again and again.
take a gander at this, gangli: very educational:
and then follow it up with this:
just a suggestion.
They’re long but I will watch them at your suggestion and hopefully I’ll be pleasantly surprised. It is not courageous in this country to go on about the evils of homosexual sodomy. Having said that, if he condemns heterosexual sodomy with the same ferocity, I’ll give him credit as that would be truly courageous for this society where ubiquitous pornography is so easy to view.
I have to chuckle sometimes when I see the number of trad men who admit to watching pornography. Don’t they realize they’re watching contraceptive heterosexual sodomy? Where’s the outrage over THAT?
“I have to chuckle sometimes when I see the number of trad men who admit to watching pornography”.
I have to chuckle at your obvious bull****. Why the hell would lots of trads tell you their sins? You’re making that up, straight out of your butt, in order to discredit and shift the goal posts.
Having lived in 3 different trad Parish communities and been close with all the younger blokes there, I know for a fact that you’re talking crap. Sin is always a problem but you talk like you have some special knowledge that all these trad men are hypocrites who love watching porn.
And where’s the outrage? Just listen to Audio Sancto or any traditional Priest sermons, they spend a lot of time on the 6th and 9th. You’re full of it.
God bless you, Tom. A voice crying in the wilderness. BTW Gangli – I ain’t a trad-man I’m a trad-woman (‘Saluto’ has proved so confusing, maybe I should change it, anyone got any suggestions?).
p.s. gangli – why do you think sodomy and murder, and oppression of the poor and robbing people of their rightful wages, are the sins that ‘cry out to heaven for vengeance?’
Because all for are UTTERLY bereft of CHARITY. UTTERLY. And while the other three cry out to heaven for vengeance, it’s only Sodom and Gomorrah that were obliterated because that sin have wiped out any ground for charity.
if you have a problem with this, take it up with God, because I wouldn’t think you’d have any disputation with Francis.
Sorry Ma’am. Sodomy, both heterosexual and homosexual, are indeed sins crying out to heaven and should be opposed as strenuously as possible. You’ll get no argument on that from me.
I for one don’t come to this blog to read the endless verbiage and street corner huckstering of Ganganelli….
Take it some where else….you obvisouly believe you need to convert us from the Catholic Faith so that, like you, we can be more like Bergoglio….
You are not catholic and are not going to convert us to your false religion…
So move on elsewhere….
This post doesn’t seem to be going through as I tried to post this before. I’ve removed the links. Sorry if I misled you as nobody told me their sins. I’m rather introverted and would be loathe to have a conversation like that. But you can EASILY find this problem pop time and again in the various Catholic fora.
And what’s this talk of moving the goal posts? Do you not believe heterosexual sodomy happens with a MUCH greater frequency than does homosexual sodomy? AND sends many more souls to Hell.
Finally, Audio Sancto..really? Good for them but let’s look at the following and tell me, which one is not like the other?
google “French protest Gay marriage”
google “French protest pornography”
Catholic at Rome,
If Louie would like me to leave, I’ll be happy to do so.
then be a Catholic Gangli and take a stand – do you believe in the ONe. Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, or do you crawly bum lick whoever’s accepted the office of Pope without even deigning to wear the title, or the faith, or the burden? Or maybe at Catholic at Rome suggests you are simply a marxist troublemaker with no devotion beyond your own mirror. when does charity for poor souls become rightfully, I’m dusting off my sandals ’cause this folk is full of it?
One question – are you for real, Gangli? or are you seeking, asking, knocking in search of Our Lord in His Church? Because Catholic Charity (trust me on this, things are way more patient in the traditional Catholic Church than the new order church, where someone who evinces doctrine. love of Christ, His Cross and His Truth and Tradition is shown waaayyyyyyyyyyyy less patience and charity than a random ‘gngli’ if they had followed Christ’s courting to the True Way.
ok, just read your last comment gg, what ever you are real about it is nothing that concerns people who visit Louie’s site. For the record if GG returns it’s not for faith, truth, common seeking or anything to do with truth and charity = it’s probably because they are getting 50c an hour from some Catholicophobes.
There’s one stinging insult that has yet to come out of Bishop Bergoglio’s mouth towards Faithful Catholics because it would pop like popped thing if it did – that is fake-Catholics. It just wouldn’t wash. Not even in Esquire, or Time Magazine, or Il Mio Papa, or Rolling Stone, or the Adocate…some things are true no matter how deluded those who would induce to sin are.
I’m just a simple Catholic in a very fine OF parish that has had a lot of experience with Catholics of the traditionalist mindset. I’ve mentioned before that I have attended both SSPX parishes, CMRI parishes, and independent parishes. Seeing the terrible divisions, break-ups, SSPX vs SSPX-resistance, etc. have led me back to Peter. I feel if I stick with Peter and the practice of my faith then that’s the best I can do. Not much more I can say, really.
Gangli – I am just a simple Catholic who has seen all of the above over a couple of different continents, and IMO the ‘charitiable’ New Order Church is a club for the unthinking, or Faith rejecting new agers who seem completely self-satisfied in their new religion because it demands nothing of them, nothing, other than they feel chilled with themselves, yet in that chillness, i’m ok you’re ok, still its like, don’t mess with what floats m’boat or watch out. So, given that you are all cool with the new order and it’s slippy slidey marxist nude liturgy, what are you on this site? what do you get out of it? because you must believe that trad, libcat, rad, athiest, satanist or frankiest = everyone’s saved anyone, so what’s your thing? Proselytizing should be solemn nonsense for you, so what’s your logic in spinning your thing on this site? and if you really did attend SSPX and even bunked that and even hold that ‘peter’ as a concept is something greater than the Bride?!
did you know it’s lent? did you know that most people commenting here will be doing so feeling rather slight on strength out of Love for Our Lord. Did you know that Christ, God Incarnate, went through an agony and passion that no human being before or since could match, in order to life us out of our wretched commitment to sin?
Did you know that when Francis endorses protestants who loathe the cross, Francis is endorsing that detestation of the Cross and the very command that we take up our own Cross?
sandals, dust, brush off.
p.s. before you go putting all your eggs in a prot wicker soap basket – I got biffed off an island once by the protestant heirarchy for being too friendly with Catholics. Anyone who allows the prot wool of ‘we are all one’ to be pulled down over Catholic eyes is blind.
Mundabor merely published the hatred for the Pope, Council, and Mass that others are too craven to confess.
I did get a chuckle out of MMC’s attempted defense; leave it to a soi disant traditionalists to defend hatred 🙂
As to the great SSPX it has split repeatedly and is now having an internal fight between the supporters of Fellay and the supporters of Wiliamson.
We have seen the sspx -> sspv and so I anxiously await the announcement of the really true traddies in ssp2.5
don’t see any evident of MMC defending hatred. I do remember Our Lord admonishing us to, by comparison to how much we should Love Him, our ‘love’ for others should be as distant as hatred. In other words that first commandment, to Love the Lord with all one’s heart, mind and strength, makes all other commands weak but comparison. so when we show up to mass and no one seems to give a toss about Our Lord because after all we have each other, these people don’t get it. And another thing, the glee with which so many professed Catholics who can’t seem to wait for authentic Catholicism to sink beneath the dung of modernism is and should be, anathema.
I’ve only been visiting this site for a week or so, and there are obviously quite a few very good people here….but I truly have to question the overall veracity of said site when the person who runs it lets a clown like Ganganelli consistently post utter garbage that I THOUGHT was in opposition to what the site stood for in the first place. Discussion is fine and dandy….but when one person is obviously just on here to act like a clown he should be thrown off. This idiot would have been banned on Mundabor’s site within a day or two. I honestly don’t even understand why people engage him. If a person was commenting here defending someone who performs abortions he’d be kicked off in a second…..but a person defending someone who is leading souls to hell (infinitely worse than the abortionist) gets to spout his nonsense……I just don’t understand. Then again, I seriously doubt there are very many people who call themselves traditional Catholics who truly appreciate the utter horror that Vatican 2 is inflicting, and the reason is very simple….because they, like most people, think in worldly terms and very rarely, if ever, contemplate the indescribable agony that hell is going to be for the vast majority.
Ganganelli…… the demonic confusion, and division amongst Catholics is the ‘bitter fruit’ of the conciliar Church…..’the church of men’!……Miserere! We have become victims and ‘prey’ to the devil, because of the demonic disorientation, amongst the hierarchy ‘within’. Regardless, what you experienced, the truth is that………’the real Catholicicsm of the SSPX forces the conciliar Church to act like the Catholic Church.” Amen!
“Those who are inside can be really out; those who are outside, really in.”–St. Augustine
My Question to the ‘Shepherds’ since Vatican II is, can you say with a sincere heart, that you handed down what you received? Can you look at our Lord and say you truly as a Bishop in his church transmitted the faith as you received it?
……I have posted this comment before (not my words), it’s worth reading it again……..
“The Popes of the Second Vatican council were NOT at all powerless to stop the apostasy of the past 50 years. They led the charge against Catholic Truth and Tradition.
Pope Saint Pius X, did, and was able to keep even liberal bishops and cardinals under control. The V-2 popes chose instead to ALLOW the BRIDE OF CHRIST to be ravaged and beaten down and scores of souls to perish…..
They failed to fulfill their duties of state, to feed and protect the flock that God entrusted to them.
THEY LET COUNTLESS MILLIONS FALL INTO HELL……THEY LET COUNTRY AFTER COUNTRY UNCROWN CHRIST THE KING! THEY LET THE ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION TAKE THE PLACE OF THE HOLY SACRIFICE OF THE MASS ON OUR ALTARS. THEY OPENED THE FLOODGATES TO A TORRENT OF HERESIES, BLASPHEMIES AND
THEY THROW TRADITIONAL CATHOLICS A FEW CRUMBS HERE AND THERE, BUT CONTINUE WITH THE MAIN FEAST GOING TO ALL THE GLUTTONOUS VULTURES…..THE JEWS, MASONS, MARXISTS, PROTESTANTS, MODERNISTS…….WHO ONLY WANT TO DESTROY THE CHURCH AND OBLITERATE THE VERY NAME OF JESUS FROM THE WORLD OF MAN.
THESE POPES ARE NO MORE INNOCENT OF THESE CRIMES THAN THE BISHOPS. IN FACT THEY HAVE THE GREATER GUILT BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN GIVEN THE GREATER GRACE AND GREATER RESPONSIBILITY AND THEREFORE WILL BE HELD MUCH MORE ACCOUNTABLE THAN THE WORST OF THE BISHOPS……..
……THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS IS OUR COMPLIANCE WITH CHURCH TEACHING AS EXPOUNDED BY SCRIPTURE, TRADITION AND THE MAGISTERIUM…….
Let us pray for the Pope with all our hearts……..which the sedes sinfully and scandalously refuse to do, but we must not support him which would make us collaborators in the destruction of the faith and damnation of many souls”.
“Give me an army saying the Rosary and I will conquer the world.”……Blessed Pope Pius IX
Saluto……May God bless you abundantly!
Our Lady of Fatima, ora pro nobis!
@Rich – the ganglis etc. have come and gone on this site, but I have to say – might just be a coincidence – since the Church of Voris broke off from the Church of Christ – the fomenters of francisism seem to have quadrupled and seem to have found a second wind.
but, like St Paul we merely have to keep ‘running the race’; praying the rosary, supporting tradional apostolates, and keeping our heads out of the sand.
Christus vincit, Christus regnat, Christus imperat!
Immaculata, ora pro nobis.
What in heavens name is going on at this blog. Someone is stirring up mischief and mayhem ! Old grapin is T it again.
“…’the real Catholicicsm of the SSPX forces the conciliar Church to act like the Catholic Church.” Amen”
Yes, schism is beloved by the soi disant traditionalists; in fact, one of the well-known STDs, Pat Archbold, (Creative Minority), came out of the soft sedevacantist closet today and announced that schism is cool with him.
When will the insanity cease?
Dunno. But the last soft sedevacantist to leave the schismatic closet should please shut the door.
I meant SDTs soi disant traditionalists not STDs – although one can catch a spiritual disease from the SDTs 🙂
Pope Francis is exactly the type of Pope Holy Mother Church needs during this particular ecclesiastical epoch. I suspect many of the SDTs are envious of his ability to draw a crowd – bigger crowds for him then there were for Pope Benedict XVI and Pope soon-uo-beSaint John Paul II.(Both of whom were great Popes).
His radical love shows us Christ in action and the kinder he is to everyone the more he is hated by the SDTs.
Isn’t it strange that such gentle and loving Popes, like John Paul II and now, Francis, draw such vile hatred from the SDTs?
The SDTs with their hatred of Pope, Council, and Mass are starting to sound like a 1930s snake-handler from the Ozarks
The stark papolatry of Ganganelli is disturbing. One sees what the Church is up against. Ganganelli may be a troll, paid to divert threads and upset people. Knowing the filth in the Church (as described by Pope BXVI), we should not be surprised at the methods of operation used to disorient and distract Catholics.
Bornacatholic is certainly a Protestant, although he/she may believe he/she is a Catholic. Having been a Protestant, they are quite easy for me to spot.
Bornacatholic……….’When will the insanity cease?’
First of all it is a time that Catholics learn to think Catholic again. Man is what he thinks. The Shepherds pray the Catholic Profession of Faith (the Creed), but the Faith lives in them only on an unconscious level……as if they were half asleep. In their conscious life, they act as if they were pagans. They have eyes but see not……’millions of lost souls’…….they have ears but hear not…….’confusion, division’. These Catholics today form a majority! That is the reason why Catholicism has so little impact. Eternal truths such as God, Christ, One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church is no longer in the air!
….from ‘Cross and Crown’ by Fr. Mader
“The truth is diminishing among the children of men” Ps. 11:2
Only by prayers, penance there can be a true conversion…….turning away from creatures and back to God. What we need today is a Noah, a Jeremiah, a John the Baptist, a Vincent Ferrer, a St. Francis……a faithful Vicar of Christ to summon All Catholics to penance…….and the pagan world will follow.
Like the prophet who, after the murder of GOD on Golgotha, ran through the streets of Jerusalem night and day, shouting, “Voice of East, Voice of the West, Voice of the four winds, Voice against Jerusalem and against the Temple, Voice against the whole people. Woe! Woe! Penance! Penance! Penance!
Christians must again realize that theirs is the religion of THE CRUCIFIED!
He who has ears to hear, let him hear! Not everyone hears the sermon on penance. ONLY those to whom God gives the grace. Penance must begin with the righteous. In the decisive times such as we are now in, it is a matter above all of good people being converted. NOT Freemasons, NOT the Socialists, NOT the Jews, NOT the Communists. Not them BUT US. And to do that, the Shepherds, the faithful must begin by setting an example for others of a more serious Catholicism, less conformed to the ways of the world. Whatever the world (or Bishop of Rome and his followers….my emphasis) may say to the contrary, we must do penance……..that way is to mount the Cross of Christ…….becoming poor like Christ, to do good and to pray for her enemies. Then she (the Church) will experience a resurrection! The road to triumph for the Church leads by way of Golgotha, to the poor, humble, crucified Saviour Jesus Christ.
Queen Church is mother as no other queen has ever been. She lives only in order to love. Whether she sacrifices, dispenses sacraments, preaches, commands, feeds the hungry or cares for the suffering, she always does the same thing: She loves!
Catholicism is love! It wants to reign, not in order to tyrannize, but in order to serve the peoples. The house of the mother is no prison, in which the children wear handcuffs and fetters. Catholics are neither slaves nor prisoners. On the contrary, no one is freer than they. Of course the Church is the sovereign, absolute, unlimited, divine authority. We live in God’s will. But we live in God’s will like the birds of the air and the fish in the water. IF Catholicism were a prison, then one could also say that the bird and the fish are in prison, because the realm of air as well as that of water have their limits, at which they can go ‘thus far and no further.’ Nowhere does one breath more freely than in the realm of Catholic justice and love, because nowhere else does one leave to each his own and respect the rights of the stranger. In the realm of a Queen who is Mother, there is freedom and there is peace. The church must be Queen and Mother. God loves nothing more on this earth than the freedom of His Church!
Why doesn’t Christianity today have any energy? Why is there no drive for greatness in us? Why are we almost always nothing but passengers and so seldom engineers or firemen on the locomotive? Why was Liberalism in the past, why is Socialism today called the locomotive of history? Why shouldn’t it be Catholicism again? Because we lack the great ideas that conquer the world. Or, better said, they lack us. The idea of Christ the King would be such a world-conquering and world-renewing slogan. That is what we must bring to the masses. That is what we have to give to the youth as its banner. In this way we could move mountains. Mexico showed us how an entire people marching under this banner could become heroes, confessors and martyrs.
Under this flag we shall also march into the coming decisive battle: Viva Cristo Rey! Long live Christ the King!
Bornacatholic………without a doubt………soon to be saint John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI, and of course Bishop of Rome Francis (saints in the making)……..are the best Popes that the Jews, the infidels, the Protestants, the Communists and the Freemasons ever had!
Saint Michael the Archangel, protect us from the snares of Satan!
heh heh heh , “fomenters of francisism”—
my dear Saluto.
My Pastor, Bishop, and Pope would be not be surprised to hear a sede describe me as a protestant; rather, they’d tell me to take that as a compliment considering the source for if such a source called me Catholic, then I might begin to worry :0
Holy Mother Church is about to raise a great Pope to the altars- Pope John Paul II. I wonder how many soft sedes in here will become official sedevacantists when that happens.
The spiritual pornography at these sites is a wonder to behold
I’m sorry to hear that you had a difficult time when you were an adherent of the SSPX. But was everyone who attended the SSPX chapel really as bad as you make them out to be? Everyone? My experience with the SSPX is that yes, there are a few SV’s and some who don’t practice the Faith as they should, but there are also many who are devout and take their Faith seriously. The situation with the SSPX is not sustainable, given that they are on their own and not under the guidance of any diocese. But….they are still Catholic and want to stay that way, even though there are real problems with maintaining the position that they do. I would hope that you pray for those at the SSPX chapel that you attended. If you pray for them, you might have more sympathy and less resentment.
Also, you mentioned earlier today that sodomy is a sin that cries out for venegence, and should be strenuously opposed. And yet Pope Francis does not share your view. His view is….”Who am I to judge?” For Pope Francis, it would seem, the only real sin is to be uncharitable and to not take care of the poor, or to be a traditionalist. For the Pope, it’s all about peace and luv, as if there is no other attribute to our Divine Lord but luv. And that’s the main problem in the Church today, IMO. An over-emphasis on love and mercy, without the acknowledgement that sin does exist, and not just the sin of being uncharitable. When is the last time that you heard a homily at the Novus Ordo that you attend on the sin of artificial contraception, or the sin of sodomy or fornication, or cohabitation?
The sspx is a schism but leave it to the SDTs to embrace and support a schism.
The crazy clerics of the SSPX – suspended a divinis upon their ordination- dispense invalid sacraments of Confession and Marriage – can not take the Oath against Modernism because they teach that the Catholic Church is teaching error.
The SSPX is a schism that teaches many heresies as it completely repudiates the Infallible Teaching of Vatican One.
Those who support the sspx – like the female poet, Long Skirts, are raising their children to believe that the Catholic Church teaches error and that at least two Popes – John Paul II and Francis – are heretics; that is, they are in agreement with the evangelical snake-handlers and Southern Baptists of the 1930s.
Such is the considered wisdom of the SDTs – raising generations of youth to hate Pope, Council, Mass – yes, that is Tradition, protestant tradition.
So, obey the Protestants in Fiddlebacks, the SSPX clergy,for they are the Magisterium for you; a Schismatic Magisterium fit and proper for your private judgment protestant faith
bornacatholic, I’m sorry to see that you have such hatred for the SSPX. What have they done to you that would incite such an attitude?
Speaking of Voris, that poor guy is going to die a slow death if he doesn’t wake up. To alienate a large portion of the (probably) small number of people who listened to him to begin with…..I don’t get it. His Vortex yesterday was a complete train wreck. He has seriously missed the boat.
The funny thing would be if, 5 years from now, a guy like Dolan who Voris has no problem abusing, were to become pope. I wonder how he would be able to deal with that (if his credibility hasn’t been totally destroyed by then anyway).
Denise. I am sorry you hate the Catholic Church. What has it done to you to make you say such things?
Denise. Why would you love a schism and hate the Church Jesus established? It makes no sense and it endangers your soul. I know there are a lot of you SDTs who love the sspx schism and obey it but that just goes to prove that the SDTs have no idea what Tradition is
That’s not an answer, bornacatholic. Are you aware that adherents of the SSPX make up a very small percentage overall of Catholics? While those Catholics who do not follow Church teachings are a much larger percentage. Why concern yourself with a tiny group of Catholics?
You don’t have to be an SSPX member to know that JP2 and Francis were/are heretics…..its pretty much common knowledge amongst anyone who has even a moderate knowledge of Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus. Do you really have to be a theologian to recognize the heretical words of both men? Why is it even a discussion as to whether they are heretics?
Denise. that is not an answer to what I wrote. It is a distraction from what I wrote
O, I forgot to add that the last part of what I posted is, obviously, not correct as one can never refuse to obey the Pope
Even if the Poe were a devil you would still have to obey him. There is no Catholic Tradition (just Protestant Tradition) of deciding when you will or will not obey the Pope for that just means that you are the authority in the church, not the Pope
Denise. Schismatics are not members of the Catholic Church as you claim they are.
If you can’t get that elemental truth right you should prolly hold back on your judging of others.
bornacatholic – I would hope that you ask yourself about why you have such animosity towards traditionalists. I won’t respond to you again, since you aren’t interested in rational discourse. You have allowed your anger to get the best of you, and as such it has clouded your judgment. A traditional priest once said that extreme anger is usualy a sign that something from someone’s past hasn’t been worked on. You will no doubt accuse traditionalists of the same thing, but no, on this blog I don’t see extreme anger from trads. They are quite balanced for the most part. Criticizing the Pope and others in the hierarchy and showing how they have strayed from the Faith does not constitute schism or hatred. Good day to you. I hope that you find peace and try to realize that trads are not the enemy.
Rich. When Pope John Paul ii is canonised – and canonisations are infallible – will that prove to you that the Catholic Church has failed and that, thus, the words of Jesus are not worthy of trust?
Rich. When Pope John Paul ii is canonised – and canonisations are infallible – will that prove to you that the Catholic Church has failed and that, thus, the words of Jesus are not worthy of trust?
Rich, Do you know that the Baltimore Catechism taught that men like you are unbelievers?
Q. 1170. Name the different classes of unbelievers and tell what they are.
A. The different classes of unbelievers are:
Atheists, who deny there is a God;
Deists, who admit there is a God, but deny that He revealed a religion;
Agnostics, who will neither admit nor deny the existence of God;
Infidels, who have never been baptized, and who, through want of faith, refuse to be baptized;
Heretics, who have been baptized Christians, but do not believe all the articles of faith;
Schismatics, who have been baptized and believe all the articles of faith, but do not submit to the authority of the Pope;
Apostates, who have rejected the true religion, in which they formerly believed, to join a false religion;
Rationalists and Materialists, who believe only in material things.
Venerable Pope Pius IX († 1878) recognised the danger that a future pope would be a heretic and “teach contrary to the Catholic Faith”, and he instructed, “do not follow him.”
“If a future pope teaches anything contrary to the Catholic Faith, do not follow him.” (Letter to Bishop Brizen)
What is the canonization process now and who changed it?
Denise You have yet to respond to anything I wrote so your continuing non-responsiveness was both as predictable as it is unlamented.
Pope Benedict XV admonished you SDTs NOT to label your selves – but that is just one more aspect of Tradition y’alll ignore because it does not fit with your ideological hatred of Catholicism.
And your repeated psychological projections are quite telling and quite in keeping with your penchant t for judging the motives/interior dispositions of others
I am having a blast putting actual Tradition in front of you and it is the STDs who are the ones doing the hating
The Doctor of the Church, St. Robert Bellarmine, S.J. († 1621), wrote a treatise on the Papacy which was used as a basis for the definition of the limits of papal infallibility which was made at Vatican I. He wrote as follows:
“Just as it is lawful to resist the pope that attacks the body, it is also lawful to resist the one who attacks souls or who disturbs civil order, or, above all, who attempts to destroy the Church. I say that it is lawful to resist him by not doing what he orders and preventing his will from being executed.” (De Romano Pontifice, Lib. II, Ch. 29)
Yes, these ‘crazy clerics’ of SSPX are nothing less, but crazy for His Truth!
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre said there were many in Rome who hated the society with a “diabolical hatred” whilst false religions/sects who are removed from Catholicism are tolerated far greater.
As we are witnessing…….every day this situation is allowed to continue, the worse it is for Holy Mother Church.
“When lies have been accepted for some time, the truth always astounds with an air of novelty.”
St. Clement of Alexandria.
“To recoil before an enemy, or to keep silence when from all sides such clamors are raised against truth,
is the part of a man either devoid of character or who entertains doubt as to the truth of what he professes to believe. In both cases such mode of behaving is base and is insulting to God, and both are incompatible with the salvation of mankind.”
Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae
“They knew only too well the intimate bond that unites faith with worship, the law of belief with the law of prayer, and so, under the pretext of restoring the order of the liturgy to its primitive form, they corrupted it in many respects to adapt it to the errors of the Innovators.”
Pope Leo XIII, Apostolicae Curae
On November 27, 1902 and May 10, 1904, Our Lord and Our Lady announced the conspiracy to invent the “New Mass”:
“I give you a WARNING. The disciples who are not of My Gospel are now working hard to remake according to their ideas and under the influence of the enemy of souls a MASS that contains words that are ODIOUS in My sight. When the fatal hour arrives when the faith of my priests is put to the test, it will be (these texts) that will be celebrated in this SECOND period … The FIRST period is (the one) of my priesthood which exists since Me. The SECOND is (the one) of the persecution when the ENEMIES of the Faith and of Holy Religion (will impose their formulas) in the book of the second celebration … These infamous spirits are those who crucified Me and are awaiting the kingdom of THE NEW MESSIAH.”
Bornacatholic…….take a long walk, down the ‘memory’ lane……..Truth and error cannot have the same rights!
Rich, that’s good advice from Pius lX – to not follow a Pope if he teaches anything contrary to the Catholic Faith. Evidently, he believed that it was possible for a future Pope to teach something contrary to the Faith. That’s very telling.
Rich. 🙂 Excellent. Just dig-up a 19th century letter to try and justify your heretical schism
What need of you to hear the Church (he who hears you hears me) when you can read snippets of 19th century letters for that is clearly what Jesus was teaching, right?
The Catholic Church is to be found in letters etc; it most certainly is not the Magisterium, is it?
Stick with the Protestants in Fiddlebacks, Rich, they’ve got your back – pushing you down the path to perdition
Rich. Well, you found an easy mark in Denise 🙂
As a faithful follower of a schism, she can be counted on to support any claim that a Pope can teach heresy for that is Tradition (Protestant Tradition, sure..)
And the neat things is that that is what the sspx is teaching its youth – what a recipe for Catholic Tradition according to the SDTs – Popes and Ecumenical Councils teach error.
Who needs Satan when y’all exist
Well I gotta run, schismatic heretics, but it was fun for awhile.
Keep the UnFaith alive in the SSPX Schism. That is our only Hope.
The Church existed back then too….lets not act stupid. The pope said it, and like you said….if the pope says it we have to obey.
So if atheists can be saved if they follow their conscience, what HARM is there for Catholics who in good conscience criticize a charismatic Pentecostal with a penchant for puppet liturgies?
Rich. O, I get it. You will obey a Pope only insofar as he is a dead Pope. I am sure that makes sense in eternal Rome or wherever made-up ideological icon it is you worship.
armaticus. You deny the Pope is Catholic. That is about par for the course for an SDT.
OK, I just wanted to make a quick check-in for a few laughs.
Thanks…Y’all never disappoint 🙂
Born: I wasn’t thinking about a pope. But now that you mention it…..
BTW, by using terms like “Y’all”, you are just reinforcing stereotypes.
Correction is in order. This was not… let me repeat…. not a “fancy dress” party.
Link here: http://wdtprs.com/blog/2014/03/three-days-of-darkness-concludes-gaia-appeased-rumbles-approvingly/
In reality, “they were Kung Fu figthing”.
The red shoes bring out the humbleness in us all.
Shhhhh. nobody tell ++Mahoney 🙂
Wow…Born a Catholic…you need help. I will pray for you…seriously. 1) I have no problem with hate…for I am called to hate evil “fear of the Lord is the hatred of evil” says Proverbs:+) 2) Please provide the magisterial proof that Catholics must obey the Pope when he is asking them to do evil. Good luck with that. 3) The SSPX are NOT in schism…they are “canonically irregular”…per the CDF. Please do your research.
Louie- may I ask that people like Born and others have their few posts and then be banned. Telling people the same thing over and over and them refusing to read/listen while getting off attacking people ruins the blog. Just a request:+) God bless~
Perhaps we could, as MMC suggested, prevent these bizarre troll commenters from finding a home. They don’t add anything to the discussion. Many of us here have our quirks but we are trying to treat the situation seriously. It’s frustrating to have to wade through the endless attacks on sincere commenters to find the real comments. I imagine it’s hard to find a trustworthy ‘sidekick’ to do the job.
Perhaps in the meantime we should just quit responding. Hey, how about a secret code word, such as ‘soi dissant’, or something, that will signal the rest of us to just ignore the comment.
In case I’m mistaken, this blog is called “Harvesting the fruit of Vatican II”. Seems kind of disingenuous to call for the removal of posters supportive of that council in favor of those who “despise” it.
Bornacatholic, you’re clueless about Catholic teaching.
The Council of Florence taught an error that was rectified by a pope centuries later.
Vatican II was declared a “pastoral” council by both presiding popes. Paul VI declared that it would “define no doctrine”- that means, doctor, that Vatican II defines no doctrine! It means it produced nothing new that did not exist before in Catholic teaching. It means that the vague, ambiguous language – language that according to the very authors and to modern-day liberals was made intentionally vague – is not binding on any Catholic. It could not be binding for, by definition, there is no doctrine there. It could not be binding because the popes themselves said it is not. It could not be binding because even now the Vatican will not say what it exactly means. To quote Louie Verrechio: “Concerns about the weight of the conciliar decrees arose even as the Council met, and the Secretary of the Council, Abp. Pericle Felici, answered, saying, ‘The sacred Council defines as binding on the Church only those things in matters of faith and morals which it shall openly declare to be binding.’ The Council made no such declarations. None.”
Any teaching not protected by the charism of infallibility is possibly in error – by definition (that’s what infallibility means). Beyond that, Vatican II does not even contain “teachings” (other than repeating existing doctrine) – such require precise language (as a matter of basic logic among other things).
Regarding popes teaching error, you should perhaps explain why your opinion is the opposite of virtually every pontiff who’s spoken on the matter:
Pope Innocent III († 1216): “The pope should not flatter himself about his power, nor should he rashly glory in his honour and high estate, because the less he is judged by man, the more he is judged by God. Still the less can the Roman Pontiff glory, because he can be judged by men, or rather, can be shown to be already judged, if for example he should wither away into heresy, because ‘he who does not believe is already judged.’ (John 3:18) In such a case it should be said of him: ‘If salt should lose its savour, it is good for nothing but to be cast out and trampled under foot by men.'” (Sermo 4)
POPE ADRIAN VI (1522-1523) “If by the Roman Church you mean its head or pontiff, it is beyond question that he can error even in matters touching the faith. He does this when he teaches heresy by his own judgment or decretal. In truth, many Roman pontiffs were heretics. The last of them was Pope John XXII (1316-1334).” (Quaest. in IV Sententiam).
POPE ADRIAN II: “We read that the Roman Pontiff has always possessed authority to pass judgment on the heads of all the Churches ( i.e., the patriarchs and bishops ), but nowhere do we read that he has been the subject of judgment by others. It is true that Honorius was posthumously anathematized by the Eastern churches, but it must be borne in mind that he had been accused of heresy, the only offense which renders lawful the resistance of subordinates to their superiors, and their rejection of the latter’s pernicious teachings.” (Allocution III, Lect. In Conc. VIII, act. VII)
POPE PAUL IV: “In assessing Our duty and the situation now prevailing, We have been weighed upon by the thought that a matter of this kind [i.e. error in respect of the Faith] is so grave and so dangerous that the Roman Pontiff, who is the representative upon earth of God and our God and Lord Jesus Christ, who holds the fulness of power over peoples and kingdoms, who may judge all and be judged by none in this world, may nonetheless be contradicted if he be found to have deviated from the Faith. Remembering also that, where danger is greater, it must more fully and more diligently be counteracted, We have been concerned lest false prophets or others, even if they have only secular jurisdiction, should wretchedly ensnare the souls of the simple, and drag with them into perdition, destruction and damnation countless peoples committed to their care and rule, either in spiritual or in temporal matters; and We have been concerned also lest it may befall Us to see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by the prophet Daniel, in the holy place. In view of this, Our desire has been to fulfil our Pastoral duty, insofar as, with the help of God, We are able, so as to arrest the foxes who are occupying themselves in the destruction of the vineyard of the Lord and to keep the wolves from the sheepfolds, lest We seem to be dumb watchdogs that cannot bark and lest We perish with the wicked husbandman and be compared with the hireling”(Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio ).
Venerable Pope Pius IX: “If a future pope teaches anything contrary to the Catholic Faith, do not follow him.” (Letter to Bishop Brizen)
Looks like A Catholic Thinker is still using that bogus “quote” from Pope Adrian VI. Kind tells you all you need to know, right? Since he was willing to use a bogus quote, I am wondering about the rest of his “quotes”. I am now in search of this “Letter to Bishop Brizen”. So far, I have not been able to find the source of this. As a matter of fact, searching http://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/ , I can’t even find that a Bishop Brizen existed. “A Catholic Thinker”, please produce your source for this supposed letter.
@Rich – this was noted on another site – if dolan became Pope tomorrow would CMTV suddenly only have a greeting card approach to him, even if he remained the same Bishop of ‘Bravo’. The free papal pass they called it.
Thanks for the chuckle back, Linda. There are definitely some fomentors of francisism trying to proselytize their deplorable cult of coprophagia at the moment. shame. people of genuine faith show up here, but I suppose satan’s little helpers have to have something to pass the time.
I guess one things for sure, when you start getting attacked and hounded by satan’s little helpers you know you are in the right place and keeping the True Faith, because let’s face, satan, doesn’t bother with those happy with the broad way to perdition. so if anything, I for one will take the presence of demons as a morale boost during this Lent.
Folks: PLEASE stop feeding the animals!
Let’s try to get down to some basics, Ganganelli and Bornacatholic.
Simple question: does the Catholic faith have objective, authoritative content that can be known and is accessible by all in the Church, or does it consist solely of whatever the present pope [or perhaps a set of recent several popes] teaches, rejects, upholds, condemns, likes, dislikes, etc.?
Does the faith have objective content that all – including the Supreme Pontiff – are accountable to and stand in judgment under, or does the faith simply coincide with the teaching and thinking of the present pope?
MMC ” Wow…Born a Catholic…you need help. I will pray for you…seriously.”
I’d rater you send me money.
O, and yes the Protestants in Fiddlebacks (SSPX) are in schism per the Prefect of the Sacred Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith
Catholic Thinker. You are wildly wrong on Florence teaching error – but maybe are nota catholic thinker but you are really a member of the eastern schismatics who call themselves orthodox; they specialise in citing canons from that Council that were never approved.
Rodj. Judging a Pope is verboten in Catholicism. If’n’ya can’t grasp that elemental truth about Catholicism you must be a sspx devotee for they specialise in teaching heresy to their followers
Nice to see you’re back, Bornacatholic. Please give me a clear answer to my question, and let’s start a systemic study of the position that you’re eager to tout and espouse here.
Bornacatholic, oops, it looks like I just missed your post. Nice to see you’re back. So I gather your answer is the second of my two options, is that correct? Please correct me if I’m wrong. So the faith consists of whatever the current pope says it does.
So where do you have official, authoritative teaching that says that, namely the faith’s content consists solely of what the present pope says and does, and that all sorts of things can therefore change, since if different popes may say contrary things about the same subject, and no pope, past or present can be ‘judged’ as you claim, then the only logical alternative left is that Church teaching can change as different popes develop different ideas on a given subject?
And, by the way, if I have faithful, believing, fully regularized and recognized traditional NON-SSPX priests who firmly hold a position contrary to yours – namely that the remote rule of faith always prevails over the proximate rule of faith in any case of contemporary ambiguity or conflict – are they also just a bunch of heresy preachers who don’t know what they’re doing?
Are you the same person who was recently banned from Pat Archibold’s blog?
If so, you seem more interested in insulting traditional Catholics than substantive debate. There’s a certain corpulent caustic calumnating Catholic blogger who may better appreciate your presence.
Dear Rodj. The subtext of your argument is anchored in the private judgment that typifies Protestantism and it is redolent of the old heresy of the Jansenists and the Anglicans who thought that Tradition was to be found in their personal assessments of old texts rather than that taught in Ecumenical Councils and as taught by Living Magisterium The Catholic Church of whom Jesus said – He who hears you, hears me and which is the Pillar and Ground of Truth.
I can’t remember where in Scripture or Tradition it is taught that you are the authority’ please remind me.
Now, I do not doubt for a nano-second that you have privately judged the Popes since Pius XII to be guilty of heresy and I am just as positive that your putative expertise amounts to but one strike of flint compared to their multiple doctorates in Theology and Philosophy that are as the sun compared to your, um, expertise
As for you presuming to undertake a systematic study of anything, much less the Faith of the one true religion, I’d rather let a drunk drain fluid from my optic nerve using the pop top from a rusty can of Billy Beer than I would submit to anything a private judgment presumes to systematically study.
Rodj. How many people actually fall for that crap of yours?
Surely not any sane man would
Bob. Yep that’s me. Poor Pat is not used to men pointing-out that he has no right to demand a Bishop under whose Jurisdiction he isn’t, owes him an explanation for anything.
I did note that he bravely deleted all of my comments but left his personal opinions about them up
Dear Bob. As a Christian Catholic, I am interested in substantive action not rhetorical dissembling that is but a weak charade trying to justify perfidy
OK gotta jet…thanks soft sedes and annealed heretics. It was fun as usual….
Bornacatholic cannot answer Rodj’s question because he doesn’t know much about Catholicism. On the “view my complete profile” section of bornacatholic’s blog, he says….
“Larry is a man who greatly admires the radical and humble Christianity of Our Holy Father.”
Kind of makes one wonder about what bornacatholic’s (Larry’s) definition of “humble” is.
I think that Larry (bornacatholic) is the same fellow who is called “I am not Spartacus.” Here’s his other blog:
Denise. I don’t know much about history, don’t know much biology, don’t know much about the French I took, don’t know much about… ah, nope.. you must be thinking about another song
Denise. Clever girl. Did you figure-out that I used to have a different S/N because, um, I referenced it in my current Blog?
You schismatics are so clever…
O, Denise. Don’t orget to scroll down at I am not Spartacus and read proof that Mons Lefebvre started a petit ecclesia; that is French for schism 🙂
The refusal to engage in reasoned discussion while engaging in artful deflection and prancing around hurling invective at people you don’t even know pretty much establishes that you have no serious interest in the Catholic faith nor in having a serious discussion here with anybody.
How about finding another website where your ‘talents’ might be more appreciated? If you ever decide you want to conduct yourself with some decorum and have a serious discussion with me, let me know.
Born a Catholic: I’m sorry I can’t help with the cash issue:+) But I can help with your mind, heart and soul by praying a sincere and devout prayer for you. The Catholic Church is the deposit of faith given to us by Christ to the Apostles. No priest, bishop or even pope has the power to change it…for it is truth. It is that deposit of faith, handed down for 2000 years that we and every faithful traditional Catholic follows. May the Lord bless you as you attempt to seek and find Him…following objective truth via your intellect via your free will…reason informed by faith:+) I will pray for you and hope you find truth and peace one day soon. God bless~
Rodj, well said. For a start no one is ‘bornacatholic’ – so a new name might help if you don’t want to tip people off immediately.
Lord have mercy on seekers who don’t know they are seekers.
Borncatholic is all over the place and likely needs to take his medication.
That’s okay though, there are plenty of good doctors in Florida with plenty of drug’s still. How telling how he takes a jab and then pulls the “I gotta run…” with a last “see ya later soft sedes…”…. Pathetic.
That “soft sede” comes comes straight from CMTV, incidentally, I just got banned from on their “Mic’ed Up” chat board. Seems a user named. Magesterium Rules” who regularly attacks everyone not like them, finally got a response from me. I instantly got banned from any defense on my part….. I’m starting to think there is a cabal of neocatholic agitators. I bet Mark Shea is their leader.
“Ganganelli March 17, 2014 9:23 pm
This isn’t really hard. It’s simply a matter of logic. Either the Popes and the Councils teach the truths of Christ or they don’t. You don’t get to pick the teachings you like. We call that cafeteria Catholicism.”
## So what is one to do when modern Popes deny what previous Popes have taught ? Either the former, or the latter, is wrong, or both are – unless one denies that principle of contradiction. I believe some philosophers do – but until recent times, the CC has not.
Catholicism these days is a kind of mind-rape – one is expected to believe contradictories. Gregory XVI condemns what Dignitatis Humanae affirms; JP2 took part in a pan-religious gathering & is on the verge of canonisation, while Cardinal Gibbons was rebuked by Leo XIII for joining in prayer with Protestants at the Chicago World Fair of 1893. These are just two contradictions that the NuChurch torments Catholics with.
The NuChurch is now so rotten & so desperately corrupt that an enemy of the Faith like Paul VI, who betrayed millions of Christians – not just Catholics – to the Communists is seriously being considered for beatification. A man less fit to be regarded as holy or as a model Catholic bishop, is hard to imagine. The wickedness of the Church is all the worse because it now encourages, blesses, & all but requires, actions and beliefs that it used to condemn as errors and punish severely. It cannot with any decency or consistency rebuke mere priests for “Eucharistic hospitality”, then turn around, and allow the practice: either its former position was justified by the reasons given for that position – or, its present position is the right one, and those principles, though the Institutional Church never said so, were bunkum. One of its positions is flawed & wrong – or maybe both are. It cannot engage its authority to the degree that it does in forbidding or allowing a thing – then turn around and say the contrary. If marrying in a Protestant Church was an offence so grave as to deserve so severe a penalty as excommunication – that practice cannot suddenly become worthy of encouragement by Pope Paul VI: it is a great sin against the unity of the Church of Christ: or it is a rather minor failing, or even a thoroughly admirable practice. It is not possible to commend as worthy of reasoning beings the mass of inconsistent, irrational, incoherent, contradictory, relativistic rubbish that is the religion of the NuChurch. If the modern Popes aren’t at least materially heretical and materially schismatic, the previous prescriptions of the Church regarding heresy & schism have no meaning. But if they have meaning, then these men are as described. That is not the verdict of intemperate & judgemental Traditionalists, but the verdict of the Sacred Tradition of the Church. It is Apostolic – their accursed and damnable innovations, impieties & errors, are of their own making.
“Bornacatholic March 18, 2014 12:25 pm
Even if the Poe were a devil you would still have to obey him. There is no Catholic Tradition (just Protestant Tradition) of deciding when you will or will not obey the Pope for that just means that you are the authority in the church, not the Pope”
## No, absolutely not. No way, ever. If the Pope were a devil I would reject every word he said, as a duty to Christ, the Lord of the Church.
If Popes *are* devils, they forfeit all claim to obedience – they have a right to obedience only because they are set by Divine Providence to rule the Flock of God in the service of Christ. If they use their Christ-given Divine authority & power to destroy the Flock & the Faith, they are using what is Christ’s against Christ – which amounts to cutting off the branch on which they sit.
If a Pope is wicked or scandalous, he may damn himself, but he has no authority at all to drag down the rest of the Church with him; we have no obligation to be damned. We have no obligation to join Popes in whatever sins they may commit, just as they have none whatever to join in ours.
The Church is not centred on the Pope, nor should it be. He is not its Lord, Master or King, or Founder, but just another Catholic called to an unenviable and humanly impossible task. The Pope is – or is called – “Servant of the Servants of God”, & is subject to God as we are; if not more so. But he has no dominion over the Church, & is in no sense an absolute ruler. Popes need to be prayed for – they do not need flattery & adulation & personality-cults.
“Ganganelli March 18, 2014 10:18 pm
Looks like A Catholic Thinker is still using that bogus “quote” from Pope Adrian VI. Kind tells you all you need to know, right? Since he was willing to use a bogus quote, I am wondering about the rest of his “quotes”. I am now in search of this “Letter to Bishop Brizen”. So far, I have not been able to find the source of this. As a matter of fact, searching http://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/ , I can’t even find that a Bishop Brizen existed. “A Catholic Thinker”, please produce your source for this supposed letter.”
## It looks dodgy to me – not the quotation, but the supposed name of the bishop. Could “to Bishop Brizen” be a blunder for “to the Bishop of Brixen” ? One can’t expect all Catholics to have heard of all German dioceses – and Blessed Pius IX did write to a bishop of that see.
As for the quotation from Adrian VI, how is it bogus ? Because he wrote the words in question before he was elected ? That would be a fair argument, if it could be shown that he changed his mind. But did he ? If he did not, and if the quotation in question was contained in an edition of the relevant work published after his election, it seems fair to ascribe that quotation from Adrian Dedel to that author under his later name of Adrian VI – just as the works of Joseph Ratzinger written before 2005 are commonly ascribed to Benedict XVI, that being the later name of that individual.
“Bornacatholic March 19, 2014 10:15 am
Rodj. Judging a Pope is verboten in Catholicism. If’n’ya can’t grasp that elemental truth about Catholicism you must be a sspx devotee for they specialise in teaching heresy to their followers”
## Close, but not quite accurate. What is forbidden, or rather, is said to be impossible, is judging the incumbent of the First See judicialiter – that is, in the capacity of a judge. No one is doing that. What plenty of us are doing, and are fully allowed to do, canonically, theologically, doctrinally & morally & Biblically, is criticise Popes for their short-comings as pastors & Catholics. That we have no canonical authority over the Pope, does not mean that we are not permitted to say that by Catholic standards – the only standards that give the Papacy any purpose,meaning, authority or value in the first place – recent Popes have acted in a way that can only be called unorthodox or scandalous at worst, and grievously confusing at best. We are not obliged to have our minds reduced to incoherent mush by trying, in vain, to reconcile recent scandals by Popes & other high clergy with the doctrine & practice they were brought up to revere as sacred, inviolable, binding in conscience, or infallible. To point out that they are relying on our obedience as Catholics to lead us from Catholicism, to a bastardised, paganised, Protestantised, relativistic & incoherent travesty of it, is self-defence in a legitimate cause. They are in no way entitled to manipulate our instinctive reverence for their persons and position, or our horror of being out of communion with them, or our unwillingness to be disobedient to their commands, in order to take us from the Faith into errors & evils condemned by Sacred Tradition. Brain- washing is wrong, even if Popes are the ones who attempt it. Our ultimate obedience is not to any creature whatever, not even Popes, but to Christ, Who is their & our Creator, Judge, Redeemer & Saviour.
No Popes or Cardinals since 1130 – John The Baptist http://www.johnthebaptist.us/…/rjmi/tr37_no_popes_cardinals_since_1130.pdf
1 No Popes or Cardinals since 1130 By Richard Joseph Michael Ibranyi There have been no popes or cardinals since 1130 AD. All of the so-called popes and so-
There have been no popes or cardinals since 1130 AD. All of the so-called popes and socalled cardinals from Innocent II (1130-1143) until today were and are apostate antipopes and apostate anticardinals for supporting or allowing the following crimes or criminals. Supporting the crimes or criminals means they favored or promoted the crimes or criminals. Allowing the crimes and criminals means they either did not sufficiently condemn the crimes, or did not sufficiently denounce or punish the criminals, or were in religious communion with the criminals.
1. All of the apostate antipopes and anticardinals supported or allowed the desecration of Catholic places with images against the Catholic faith and morals. And most of the desecrations remain to this day. For this crime alone all of them are idolaters and formal heretics and thus banned from holding offices even if they did not hold any other heresy or idolatry. From the information I have, twenty-one places were desecrated from the 11th to the 12th century; the first desecrated place in Rome was St. Paul Outside the Walls in 1170; and the first time St. Peter’s Basilica was desecrated was on June 26, 1445, by its idolatrous and immoral doors, with many more desecrations following shortly after. (See RJMI book The Desecration of Catholic Places.) 2. Some of the apostate antipopes and anticardinals supported or allowed the heresy of scholasticism, which is the glorification of philosophy. It glorifies philosophy in any one of the three following ways: 1) by using the philosophical method of questioning and inquiring, as did the notorious heretic Peter Lombard in his heretical Books of Sentences, which was published in 1150; 2) by glorifying pagan philosophers and their pagan philosophies; or 3) by using philosophical terminology. The notorious heretic Thomas Aquinas’ Summa uses all three of these scholastic methods. Scholasticism, which took root in the 11th century, corrupted not only theology but also canon law. 3. All of the apostate antipopes and anticardinals supported or allowed the glorification of the false gods and false religions of mythology at least by supporting or allowing Catholic places to be desecrated with the images of idols, false gods, false religions, and pagans. Many of them also glorified the false gods and false religions of mythology by their words and deeds. 4. All of the apostate antipopes and anticardinals glorified immorality at least by supporting or allowing Catholic places to be desecrated with immoral images. Many of them also supported or allowed the glorification of immorality by their words and deeds. 5. All of the apostate antipopes and anticardinals were guilty of the heresies of non-judgmentalism or non-punishmentalism. They either did not sufficiently condemn sin or did not sufficiently denounce or punish sinners and thus the crimes and criminals remained in so-called good standing and hence continued to corrupt Catholic teaching instruments, Catholic places, and
Catholics. And thus they enabled the Great Apostasy to make steady progress and succeed. 6. Many of the apostate antipopes and anticardinals held other heresies. The four main crimes of the Great Apostasy, which began in the 11th century and made steady progress, are 1) the glorification of philosophy (aka scholasticism); 2) the glorification of the false gods and false religions of mythology; 3) the glorification of immorality; and 4) non-judgmentalism and non-punishmentalism, which was necessary for the success of the Great Apostasy. And these crimes led to many other heresies and other crimes. The primary blame falls upon the men who had the authority and power to punish the criminals and eradicate the crimes but did not because they were guilty of either the same crimes or sins of omission. “Unto whomsoever much is given, of him much shall be required: and to whom they have committed much, of him they will demand the more.” (Lk. 12:48) “If any one sin and hear the voice of one swearing and is a witness either because he himself hath seen or is privy to it: if he do not utter it, he shall bear his iniquity.” (Lev. 5:1)
SOME OTHER HERESIES HELD BY SOME OF THE APOSTATE ANTIPOPES
continued at http://www.johnthebaptist.us/jbw_english/documents/articles/rjmi/tr37_no_popes_cardinals_since_1130.pdf