In a recent interview (linked below), Cardinal Raymond Burke addressed the man-crisis in the Church; ever so careful not to go too far in speaking the truth…
VIDEO TRANSCRIPT:
In my last video, I mentioned a lengthy interview of Cardinal Raymond Burke on the topic of manly men, or the lack thereof. I’ve linked it below so you can read it for yourself.
The problem with the interview concerns not so much what is said, but what is not said – or better stated – what is deliberately avoided.
To begin the discussion, Cardinal Burke was asked to describe the state of men in the Catholic Church today. He responded:
“I think there has been a great confusion with regard to the specific vocation of men in marriage and of men in general in the Church during the past 50 years or so.”
He continued:
“It’s due to a number of factors, but the radical feminism which has assaulted the Church and society since the 1960s has left men very marginalized.”
Fair enough. Radical feminism has indeed claimed no small number of victories over the last fifty or so years, but if you’re waiting for Cardinal Burke to identify those “factors” that allowed the feminist assault on the Catholic Church to succeed, and to persist, you can forget about it.
Now, ask yourself:
Could it possibly be that Cardinal Burke has never managed to connect the dots between the 1960’s – which he himself pegs as that moment in time when the man crisis began – and the single most impactful event of the entire century; an event that just so happened to take place in that very same decade?
I’m speaking, of course, about Vatican Council II…
This is the same council, by the way, that refused to offer even one meaningful (much less manful) condemnation of the many falsehoods, errors, and outright attacks leveled against Our Blessed Lord, His Holy Catholic Church, and His Blessed Mother, in favor of soft, ambiguous and flowery prose that includes nearly fifty calls for dialogue.
Reading the interview, if you didn’t know any better, you’d walk away convinced that the Almighty Council had nothing whatsoever to do with the current Catholic man crisis, or crisis in the Church in general.
Incidentally, it’s worth noting that churchmen of old – since they actually shepherded like men – weren’t afraid to acknowledge that it is the Church – pastored by clerics who have what St. Pius X described as “full and perfect powers for ruling, teaching and judging … and the right and authority for promoting the end of the society” that guides the direction of said society; not vice versa.
By contrast, Cardinal Burke laments the current situation, saying:
“Sadly, the Church has not effectively reacted to these destructive cultural forces; instead the Church has become too influenced by radical feminism.”
It sure sounds to me as if he’s playing the victim card, which is odd, isn’t it? He speaks as if he hasn’t a clue that the windows of the Church were opened to the world in 1962, but let’s be honest – we know that he knows better.
Later in the interview, Cardinal Burke makes some observations that make it clear that the root of the problem is staring him right in the face – he sees it – and yet he can’t bring himself to address it .
He says:
“The crisis between man and woman has been made much worse by a complete collapse of catechesis in the Church … Aspects of the Church’s life that emphasized the man‑like character of devotion and sacrifice have been deemphasized.”
No kidding? Everyone with half a brain can see this. What we really need to know from our father, Cardinal Burke, is who, and when, and how these things came to be deemphasized.
Tiptoeing right up to the very edge of the truth, he says:
“After Vatican II, that great call to love by confronting sin was lost.”
Go figure: The Church gives us Vatican Council II – with all of its weak, dialogical and inviting language – and boom! The wheels come off the man cart. What an amazing coincidence, eh?
Look, if it’s not clear enough already, the problem with Cardinal Burke waxing on about how men need to be men, is that he isn’t man enough to confront the fire that has been burning in the Catholic Church, the House of God, his family’s house, for more than 50 years now!
Sure, Cardinal Burke offers traditional sound bites here and there that temporarily energize us, but that’s not enough.
Last week, he called for Catholics to commit to praying the Rosary, and based on the reaction of some you would think he single-handedly conquered ISIS. He’s a Prince of the Catholic Church for crying out loud!
How much lower can our expectations go?
Enough already! It’s time for Cardinal Burke and every other sober minded prelate in the Church today – if in fact there are any – to man up and speak up; loud and clear.
And please, don’t tell me that Cardinal Burke doesn’t recognize the problem any better than he’s willing to say. He most certainly does. He continues::
“There has been, and continues to be, serious liturgical abuses that turn men off … In many places the Mass became very priest‑centered … Men are drawn to the mystery of Christ’s sacrifice.”
But just as it might appear as if he’s actually going to stand up in defense of his children, he says:
“The rampant liturgical experimentation after Vatican II, much of which was not sanctioned by Vatican II, stripped the Rite of the Mass of much of its careful articulation of the Sacred Mysteries that had been developed over centuries.”
Notice a couple of things here: First, Cardinal Burke is ever so careful not to go too far in speaking the truth. In fact, he makes it a point to pay his respects to the company line out of Rome.
That is, the line that must be held by all who wish to enjoy “full communion;” namely, the utterly laughable suggestion that the Council is blameless with respect to our present day difficulties – be they liturgical, doctrinal or otherwise.
At the same time, however, he also makes it very plain that he sees at least one aspect of the problem that he is addressing. He lets it be known that the Rite of Mass, such as it is “ordinarily” celebrated in our day is “stripped” – that’s his word – it has been stripped.
Of what?
He says, “Stripped of the careful articulation” that is the hallmark of the pre-conciliar rite.
Pay very close attention, my friends: He’s talking about the Roman Missal for the Novus Ordo Missae. He’s tipping his hand here. He knows that the problem isn’t just about abuses or deviations from the official text, but rather the problem lies within the rite itself.
And yet, he is content to join others in perpetrating the greatest lie ever told; namely, that the stripped down rite known as the Novus Ordo Missae is as much the one Roman Rite as the Mass of Ages.
He knows better. And he also knows very well that this lie is destroying his family. If he were ignorant of this truth, we could perhaps give him a pass for being stupid, but I’m afraid he doesn’t deserve it.
He even goes on to say:
“It is also clear that many men will respond to the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite, the rite celebrated before the Vatican II Council reforms.”
But then he very quickly qualifies his remarks by saying:
“This is not because the Extraordinary Form is more valid than the Novus Ordo … The Ordinary Form, if it’s celebrated very reverently with good music, can have the same strong positive effect on men.”
First, validity isn’t the question, so don’t be distracted by this comment; rather, focus on the glaring contradiction in Cardinal Burke’s words.
At this, one is compelled to ask, which is it Eminence? What do you really believe?
Do you believe that Catholic men have been negatively impacted by the Novus Ordo, “stripped” as it is of the “careful articulation of the Sacred Mysteries” that is the hallmark of the traditional Mass?
Or, do you believe that both rites have – and I quote – “the same strong positive effect on men?”
He said both. So which is it?
It’s rather obvious what is going on here. Cardinal Raymond Burke, for all of his praiseworthy sound bites, is unwilling to lead the family entrusted to him like a real man.
He is perhaps even more culpable than others. He sees and understands the nature of the problem, perhaps not entirely, but certainly far better than most, and far more than he’s willing to say.
And yet, he isn’t willing to stand up in defense of the truth by plainly pointing these problems out; condemning unequivocally the dangers that are threatening his entire family.
Perhaps he simply isn’t willing to invite the persecution that most certainly awaits him if he does. I don’t really know why he feels compelled to tiptoe through these tulips, but I do know this:
Until he’s willing to do otherwise, he has no business doling out advice on Catholic manliness.
Well, Cardinal Burke is, after all, CARDINAL Burke. You don’t get the scarlet unless you’re a politician. I’ve learned not to put any false hope in any member of the hierarchy. They got there by towing the line on VCII. It’s too late for many of them to walk back.
It’s never to late to repent. It would take an act of otherworldly courage, however. Why cling to your position as Grand Pubar of the Knights of Malta? If he spoke and was exiled to an ever more distant orbit of the One True Church he may one day, after the end of this papacy, return to be Pope! And if not that, to the Etetnal Kingdom.
Make that Grand Poobah. And I don’t mean that in the sense that Cardinal Burke has an excessive ego, simply that he has been assigned a lofty title with relatively little influence within the Church. St pope Pius X, pray for Cardinal Burke.
At best, Cardinal Burke can be described as “lukewarm”. We all know what Our Lord said about the lukewarm (“I will vomit thee out of my mouth”–VERY strong words!). I sometimes wonder if Cardinal Burke and others like him are playing the role of “false hope”. Something for suffering Catholics to hold on to as they wait and hope for a True Shepherd to courageously lead the flock into safe pastures. For his own sake, I pray that he will turn up the heat in his heart, in his words and in his actions…for the love of Our Lord, His Church and the poor souls on earth who have no leader. We don’t need lukewarm Princes of the Church. We need real men on fire who are not fearful pawns of NewChurch! Cardinal Burke, in my opinion, is a “flash in the pan”.
As the Apostle Paul states, “Stand fast and hold to tradition”. I can’t see any wiggle room coming from St. Paul.
Yes. And even if he were stripped of the dubious honour he has in the Knights, there is the internet. Unless he were laicized by the pope he could say Mass and speak out to everyone – without fear. Even if he were exiled and had his priestly faculties taken away, he could still speak out.
I think fear of scandal stops many like Burke from speaking up. He and Bishop Schneider perhaps are waiting for history (and a future council) to correct the errors we suffer under.
And another thought. What the hell would he lose if he spoke out?
In the Newchurch there is no longer a need for male leadership. Perhaps I’ve missed the point here, but, having accepted the false precepts of Vatican II, men today are no longer called to be militant. They are expected to dialogue, back-slap and embrace the new ecumenism of all the false religions. Even the Pope has told at least one atheist not to bother to convert. Let us all just join hands and dance around the campfire while singing Kumbahya to celebrate our humanism.
Wow. Another “Epiphany moment” for me.
“….. it is the Church – pastored by clerics who have what St. Pius X described as “full and perfect powers for ruling, teaching and judging … and the right and authority for promoting the end of the society” that guides the direction of said society; not vice versa.”
Of course, that is the way God has planned it! Thank you again for the lesson, Mr. V.
Fantastic, as usual.
I recommend an article titled ” The Devirilization of the Liturgy in the Novus Ordo Mass” by Fr. Richard G. Cipolla, Ph.D., D. Phil – which tries to explain the link between men and the Mass. It can be found at
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2013/06/the-devirilization-of-liturgy-in-novus.html
Michael F Poulin
From the Catholic Encyclopedia under the entry VIRTUE :
“… etymology the word virtue (Latin virtus) signifies manliness or courage. …(“The term virtue is from the word that signifies man; a man’s chief quality is fortitude”; Cicero, “Tuscul.”, I, xi, 18).
Fortitude
As temperance and its annexed virtues remove from the will hindrances to rational good arising from sensuous pleasure, so fortitude removes from the will those obstacles arising from the difficulties of doing what reason requires. Hence fortitude, which implies a certain moral strength and courage, is the virtue by which one meets and sustains dangers and difficulties, even death itself, and in never through fear of these deterred from the pursuit of good which reason dictates. The virtues annexed to fortitude are:
Patience, which disposes us to bear present evils with equanimity; for as the brave man is one who represses those fears which make him shrink from meeting dangers which reason dictates he should encounter, so also the patient man is one who endures present evils in such a way as not to be inordinately cast down by them.
Munificence, which disposes one to incur great expenses for the suitable doing of a great work. It differs from mere liberality, as it has reference not to ordinary expenses and donations, but to those that are great. Hence the munificent man is one who gives with royal generosity, who does things not on a cheap but magnificent scale, always, however, in accordance with right reason.
Magnanimity, which implies a reaching out of the soul to great things, is the virtue which regulates man with regard to honours. The magnanimous man aims at great works in every line of virtue, making it his purpose to do things worthy of great honour. Nor is magnanimity incompatible with true humility. “Magnanimity”, says St. Thomas, “makes a man deem himself worthy of great honours in consideration of the Divine gifts he possesses; whilst humility makes him think little of himself in consideration of his own short-comings”.
Perseverance, the virtue which disposes to continuance in the accomplishment of good works in spite of the difficulties attendant upon them. As a moral virtue it is not to be taken precisely for what is designated as final perseverance, that special gift of the predestined by which one is found in the state of grace at the moment of death. It is used here to designate that virtue which disposes one to continuance in any virtuous work whatsoever. …”
Archbishop Lefebvre:
“A non-aggressive agreement has been made between the Church and masonry. It was covered up by calling it aggiornamento, reaching out to the world, ecumenism. From the time of the Council, the Church has accepted to not be the only true religion, the only way to eternal salvation. She recognizes the other religions as sister religions. She recognizes the right granted to the nature of the human person to be free to choose its religion and that consequently, a Catholic state or government is no longer acceptable.
Accepting this New Principle, all the doctrine of the Church must change, as well as its cult, its priesthood, its institutions, because everything in the Church until the Council had demonstrated that she alone possessed the Way, the Truth and the Life in Our Lord Jesus Christ, Whom she kept in person in the Holy Eucharist, and Who is present thanks to the continuation of His sacrifice. Thus a total overturning of Tradition and of the teaching of the Church has occurred since the Council and through the Council.
All those who cooperate in the application of this overturning accept and adhere to this new “Conciliar Church”, as His Excellency Mgr. Benelli called it in the letter that he sent me in the name of the Holy Father last June 25, and they enter into the schism. The adoption of the liberal theses by a council could only have taken place in a pastoral council that was not infallible and cannot be explained except through a secret and meticulous preparation, that the historians will end up discovering to the great astonishment of the Catholics who confuse the eternal Roman Catholic Church with human Rome, susceptible of being invaded by enemies covered in scarlet.”
There has to logically be more than this. How could so many men in charge of the Church have so evenly stopped at a certain point-not crossing a certain line. Has any cardinal or bishop said anything negative, for example, about the recent pope video? That’s so in the face of all of them-almost like a challenge. Something’s up. After reading Randy Engel’s article I wonder if -perhaps everyone in higher up positions that crosses a certain line is being threatened with more than just their own lives. I can’t imagine every one of them being evil. But, hey, maybe they are.
Radical feminism didn’t just pop out of nowhere – its roots lie in naturalism, utopianism, socialism and Marxism, and communism. The goals of the Marxist feminists, such as the National Organization for Women, a communist front group, is to destroy monogamy, weaken family bonds between parent and child, especially by collective education for the purpose of indoctrination, promoting promiscuity, eroticism, prostitution and homosexuality. Useful idiot leftists swallow this poison and openly promote it in all of our institutions, courts, schools, including the Church. But the real goal is not feminism itself, the real goal of all this is to de-stabilize and , more importantly, de-moralize the country so that is completely incapable of defending itself against absolutist statism, and comes to embrace totalitarianism. These are the “errors of Russia” that have now overtaken the world.
There can be no justification for not crying out against the extreme objective evil being flagrantly and systematically and incessantly done and promoted by the pope and his administrators and the majority of bishops, priests, religious, and laity with power or influence in the administration of the visible Church and its apparent agencies. “Diabolical disorientation” aptly describes the deadly indifference or deference to the dictatorship of depravity. Lord, have mercy! Christ, have mercy! Lord, have mercy! One shudders with shame to think of the ruination of souls being energetically worked at by Francis and the leaders of the visible institutions of the Church, with the aid of the organs of power of the world’s government, including the monolithic so-called “Media”.
Also, I think “they” forgot to turn off their great big pro-life day BLIZZARD snow blower in the sky here in the diocese of Baltimore. I was actually looking forward to the beautiful snowflakes, but now I even see THEM with new eyes.
Throughout the whole crisis in the Church the silence on the part of the priests, Bishops, and Cardinals is horrible. Diabolically silenced, gagged, blindfolded and struck they have not defended the Faith.
Here again is Archbishop Lefebvre who was preserved from this disorientation:
“Rome, for me, has become a great mystery. What is happening in Rome? It is surely Rome that constitutes the most serious problem. To say such a thing is neither calumny nor detraction, for if the crisis in the Church has spread to every country in the world, it is only sensible to seek a common cause at its Seat. There is something distinctly abnormal and sinister about Rome today, the workings of grace are being obstructed in Rome, there are men in Rome who are under the ascendancy of Satan. How else could the Church be strangled, as it were, and troubled to such an extent? Though we may not readily understand the problem, one can feel it, sense the atmosphere of today’s Rome. I am still frequently in Rome, and I have occasion to chat from time to time to priests of the different sacred congregations, the men who carry out the day-to-day affairs of the Curia. These men confide to me in private that Rome has become stifling, that a veritable terror reigns in the bureaus and the corridors of the Vatican, with always somebody listening, spying, ready to report, to criticize. Even the cardinals are not immune to the terror, to the veritable diabolical influence, which permeates every facet of Vatican life.
What has caused such a deterioration? Who are these sinister people? Are they hidden personalities, or are they clerics in important positions? Nobody seems to know, but what is absolutely certain is that this spirit permeates not only the Seat of the Catholic Church, but every one of us no matter how far we are from Rome.”
Maybe the Third Secret of Fatima (reconstructed) will answer the question:
The Third Secret of Fatima Reconstructed:
You saw the ruin of the world. In order to prevent this, God wished to establish the Communion of Reparation on the First Saturdays. If the Holy Father had done so, many souls would have been saved. Because he did not, the devil will infiltrate the Church. There will be a Council in which Cardinal will oppose Cardinal and Bishop will oppose Bishop. The priests who revere me will be persecuted.
The Mass will be altered along with the teaching of the Church. Satan will sweep a third of the clergy into his service. The Beast will overcome Pastors and the flock will be abandoned and scattered. The Wolves will drag many souls to Hell. A diabolic wave will cover the world. Altars will be stripped and churches will be sacked. In Portugal, the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved, by a faithful remnant.
A great war will chastise the world. Russia will overrun Europe. The Pope will be killed and the faithful martyred. Fire will fall from the sky. Millions will lose their lives from one hour to the next. The suffering will be worse than the Deluge. The survivors will envy the dead. When all seems lost, I will raise up a Holy Father who is dear to me, and the world will be made new.
Some of the duties of a bishop to preserve, protect, and defend the Faith and the faithful as recorded in the Didascalia Apostolorum:
[ii. 19.] Hear, then, ye bishops, and hear, ye laymen, how the Lord saith:?? I will judge between ram and ram, and between ewe and ewe; [Ezk 34.17 (cf. 22)] that is, between bishop and bishop, and between layman and layman:? whether layman loves layman, [ii. 20 ] and whether again the layman loves the bishop and honours and fears him as father and lord, and (as) God after God Almighty; for to the bishop it was said through the apostles:? Everyone that heareth you, heareth me; and everyone that rejecteth you rejecteth me, and him that sent me:? [Lk 10.16] and again, whether the bishop loves the laity as his children, and cherishes and keeps them warm with loving care, as eggs from which [[62]] young birds are to come; or broods over them and cherishes them as young birds, for the rearing up of winged fowl. Teach, then, and admonish all; and them that deserve rebuke, rebuke and afflict:? but unto conversion and not unto destruction; and admonish unto repentance and correct them, so that thou make their ways straight and fair, and order well the conduct of their life in the world.
That which is whole preserve:? [Ezk 34.16] that is, him that is established in the faith guard watchfully; and shepherd the whole people in peace. (p. 25)? And that which is weak strengthen:? [Ezk 34.4] that is, him that is tempted confirm with admonition.? And that which is sick heal:? [Ezk 34.4] that is, him that is sick with doubting of his faith, heal with doctrine. And that which is broken bind up:? [Ezk 34.4, 16] that is, him that is stricken or buffeted or broken by his sins, and halts from the right way, bind up; that is, with the exhortation of admonition cure him, and lighten him of his transgressions, and comfort him and show him that there is hope for him; and bind him up and heal him and bring him into the Church. And that which is gone astray bring back:? [Ezk 34.4, 16] that is, him that was left in sins and was put forth for reproof, leave not without, but teach and admonish him, and bring him back and receive him into thy flock, that is, into the people of the Church.? And that which is lost seek out:? [Ezk 34.4, 16] that is, him who by reason of the multitude of his transgressions has despaired and abandoned himself to destruction, suffer not to perish altogether, lest through utter neglect and indifference he fall asleep, and under the weight of his sleep forget his life, and hold aloof and depart from his flock, that is from the Church, and come to perdition. For when he shall be without the fold and removed from the flock, wolves [[63]] will devour him while he is astray, and he will perish utterly. But do thou seek him out, and admonish and teach him, and bring him back; and visit him, and encourage him to be wakeful, and let him know that there is hope for him. And cut away this from men’s thought, that they should say or imagine that which has already been rehearsed:? Our crimes and our sins are upon us, and in them we are wasted away:? how then can we live?? [Ezk 33.10] For they ought not to say or to imagine these things; and they are not to think that their hope is cut off by reason of the multitude of their sins; but they are to know that the mercies of God are many, for that with an oath and with gracious intent He has promised forgiveness to them that sin…
It’s an impossibility for any prelate to speak out against what’s REALLY at the root of the Church problems without at least indirectly condemning Pope John Paul II “The Great” considering that he was easily the most responsible of all of the post-conciliar Popes for carrying out and allowing all the errors of VII to be spread throughout the Church during his 26 years and since it’s publicly known that both Card. Burke and Bishop Athanasius are two of his greatest fans I suspect they will continue to be “ever so careful not to go too far in speaking the truth” paying their respects to the “company line coming out of Rome.”
Yes, johnjobilbe. I cringed whenever I heard Cardinal Burke speak of Pope “Saint” John Paul II.”
Your ending is on point.
“Until he’s willing to do otherwise, he has no business doling out advice on Catholic manliness.”
He is speaking about the lack of “manhood” in the Church, for crying out loud!
How ironic that he is not acting as a man is supposed to act, by (as you said) “condemning unequivocally the dangers that are threatening his entire family.”
Man up!
https://akacatholic.com/the-catholic-manly-men-movement/
Novena to Our Lady of Good Success begins tomorrow. Her feast day is Feb. 2.
http://www.ourladyofgoodsuccess.com/frames-3-4-2005/novena.html
In your prayers with this novena please pray for a miracle through the intercession of Our Lady of Good Success and Venerable Mother Mariana for Michelle Gleason (a mother of four young children) who is pregnant and suffering from an aggressive form of cancer.
https://akacatholic.com/help-needed-in-seeking-a-miracle/
I will go further and say that even though God Himself should seem to say within your heart that you are not one of His flock, still place your confidence in Him; rather say to Him in all humility: “Thou hast good reason indeed, O Lord, to condemn me for my sins, but I have greater reason in Thy mercy to hope for pardon. Have pity then, O Lord, on a humble sinner condemned by his own sinfulness, but redeemed by Thy Blood. I commit myself entirely to Thy hands, O my Redeemer; all my hopes are in Thee, trusting that in Thine infinite compassion, Thou will save me to the glory of Thy name. Do with me as Thou wilt, for Thou alone art my Lord. Even though, My Lord, Thou shouldst destroy me, ever will I hope in Thee.”
Spiritual Combat
Fr Lawrence Scupoli
Rushintuit, your Third Secret of Fatima reconstruction makes so much sense. May I add one speculation? The revealed Third Secret speaks of a Pope and associates being killed by arrows, a puzzling detail. But recently in rereading the Book of Genesis, I came across the mention (21:20) that Ishmael, the patriarch, in a way, of Islam, became an archer. Are we being given a symbolic message of just who will kill the Pope?
Yes, Servant of Our Lady. I see what you were saying.
It’s like our inebriated father has attacked Our Holy Mother and locked her up away from her children-as he continues to buy the beer for the underage kids to keep them in their drunken state. Then, that one Uncle Burke that we all counted on because he dressed the part and talked the talk-surely he’d stand up to Dad. But he too has let us down due to his own human weaknesses and lack of manliness. Now we broken hearted stand in our place, among the chaos, for our Mother’s sake-never betraying Her in all Her Truth and Beauty-yet, still dreaming of a stong man who will valiantly stand up to Dad and create instant order and protect This House. When will that day come?
Until then we toughen up and stand strong thanking Our Lord for such a beautiful Mother. We always remember what she has taught us and never drink a drop of Dad’s poisonous lies.
Agree- we don’t need more nice guys like Cdl Burke. We need warriors. We need more men (like Louie) who will publicly rebuke this anti-Christian pope in no uncertain terms. We need a saint who will knock some holy sense into these pansies. None of the hierarchy has it in them – too attached to their positions of power and worldly honors and their soft speeches and their false social gospel – so we can’t look to any of them for leadership.
I think everyone is being a bit hard on Cardinal Burke. He’s a man with a bulls-eye on his back who’s already been demoted once. Another false step and he’ll find himself serving as spiritual director at a convent in Michigan. Personally, I prefer that he remain slightly oblique in his criticisms and live to fight another day. If Pope Frank were to step off the curb and be run down by a bus, who do you want to succeed him…Wuerl, Dolan, Kasper, Marx??
Cortez, it makes more sense, logically, that these men are living out the lie they have been taught from seminary on up. They do evil, but I’m convinced they are not evil. Human psychology cannot reach out for evil – it is always presented to the will as a good (through bad teaching or directly as a temptation by Satan).
The intellect informs the will. These poor priests and bishops know no other reality than what they have been taught. Once you convince yourself that what you ‘know’ is good, your will acts accordingly.
Now I’m not saying this gets them off the hook. We know there is a standard against which we act – in the case of priests and bishops (and all Catholics) that standard is Tradition and Revelation. If what they ‘know’ goes against everything in the past it MUST be wrong. If they act using this error what they do is evil.
In Cardinal Burke’s case he does know about the standard for Catholics, but everything he’s been taught throughout his priestly life tells him to act in a sissified way – dialogue, gentleness, love not law and on and on.
Poor man, he’s really trapped! We’re not going to get out of this alive…save your own soul and offer all for the sins of omission by priests and bishops – that the Holy Ghost will enlighten them and give them courage.
Beautiful! One of my very favourite saints, St. Francis de Sales read that wonderful book daily – we’re told he carried it in his pocket. We have no need of novelties when we have such treasures at our fingertips.
He was a Bishop too – and what an example!!!!
E.G.Lewis,
so what? Cardinal Burke has reached the highest office in his ecclesial career. He shouldn’t give a damn about being demoted. He doesn’t have to concern himself with an earthly family like St. Thomas More. Salvation of souls must be his primary goal.
Unless Cardinal Burke believes he has a chance of being elected Pope, he should embrace martyrdom and consider himself blessed to be persecuted by this Pope.
And if he believes he has a chance of being elected Pope, then his soft stance may be a result of earthly ambitions.
It’s a frightful thing to be a bishop.
Claiming the effectiveness of the NO Mass is based on it being reverently celebrated is like saying the effectiveness of any sacrament depends on the moral character of the priest.
It borders on the heresy of the donatists
Or it is “soft donatism.”
As for form, it is either effective or it is not.
Burke should have fear of the Lord, not fear of a heretical pope. Serving as a spiritual director at a convent in Michigan isn’t so bad when compared with facing Our Lord who asks “What have you done?” Perhaps that convent in Michigan needs Burke as a spiritual director–at least he will accomplish something!
Rushintuit, excellent reconstruction of yours.
Where did you find this (in its form prior to your reconstruction)?
It sounds familiar.
Great analogy.
Almost too painful to read your words, Cortez.
As we all remember to “never drink a drop of Dad’s poisonous lies,” (as you said), we then realize that we have each been “poisoned” to some extent or another. We must “de-tox” or come “out of the matrix” (as I have heard it said), and become “sober” again (learn our true Catholic faith).
And we can’t count on “Uncle” (Cardinal) Burke to help us because he doesn’t recognize (or refuses to recognize) that he, too, has been poisoned.
Then we remember that we have Our Mother, that She has always been by our side, or else how would we have known that we were ever poisoned in the first place, had She not first intervened?
——-
Our Lady of Good Success, pray for us. Did you start your novena today?
Where is your beautiful, but sad, quote from, maryiloveher?
In reading “Open Letter to Confused Catholics” now by Archbishop Lefebvre, I am learning how much he suffered for the truth, for Our Lord!
What painful insights he had.
Blimey. As always, the Novus Ordite pew-punter gets to ‘pontificate’ upon the lack of Catholicity in their ‘princes’.
–
Burke’s rhetoric has no bearing on Catholic Truth. His deliberate obfuscating of Roman Rites with Novus Ordo Protestantism is avoiding the truth. The Novus Ordo dissolved Catholicity. It wants no part of Catholicity. Validity most certainly IS part of the question. To say it is not is to pretend that Montini was able to overturn Trent – indeed is to pretend that a heresiarch and novelty can become Catholicity by denying Tradition. The contradiction lies in Protestants and heresiarchs riding on the wake of Catholicism whilst living a contradiction to it that puts Luther and Calvin to shame.
–
“Ask yourself…have folks still communing with the feminized, apostate Novus Ordo whore never managed to connect the dots between the 1960s…the moment in time with the Crisis of Truth, began in the Church and society as a whole and the single most critical event of VII…the same council that refused to offer one meaningful, let alone manful, falsehood against our Blessed Lord…” Radical Feminism, radical any-antichristism, is what Burke’s Novus Ordo promotes. For a disciple of antichristism to lament it isn’t anything new. For a disciple of antichristism to renounce it and convert is rare.
–
What people still can’t bring themselves to ‘see’, is that we have no pope; a Counterfeit has usurped the Sees in a manner worthy of the ‘art of war’ – conquered without knowing it – not even Henry 8 was that smooth.
–
http://www.traditionalmass.org/articles/article.php?id=33&catname=5
Servant of Our Lady
Yes, Archbishop Lefebvre was always poignant! The quote about Rome was from his address given in Ottawa,Canada, November 1975.
I was away from the Church from my late 20’s, through all of my 30’s, and into my very early 40’s….and there was never a day that passed that I didnt know I was wrong. Lets not make excuses for old men who are VASTLY more intelligent then the majority of all humanity. Burke isnt a poor man….he is either evil or obstinate. He surely isnt stupid and if he is ignorant then he is most assuredly willfully ignorant.
Oh please….Burke is being hard on Catholics, not the other way around. I called him useless on this site before he was even “demoted” and I was right. Who cares if burke isnt around to succeed bergoglio? What good was “conservative” benedict?
You act as if what his official status in this world is actually matters. He should be pious even if it means he has to live in a cave. He’s lucky if he has 10 years left….why does he need to “live to fight another day” at this point?
I have to say, I’m disappointed in this rant, for that is exactly how it comes across. While I can understand the sentiments and agree most strongly on laying it on the line, it’s just too easy to throw stones, unfortunately. Cardinal Burke doesn’t deserve this sneering contempt , none of us are walking in his shoes. This good man needs our prayers and support, as he has stood up in the faces of many challenges. Have you considered how hard it can be, a man of his age, essentially alone on many respects. We don’t know what he is being subjected to. I read so much about priests being thrown out for their faithfulness. We need to pray for them, and we as Catholics must stand united with them. We can not pick at faithful priests, bishops, archbishops, cardinals in this way, we as Catholics need to coalesce and have their backs… And help them to stand in defense of the faith. Please do not allow ourselves to become embittered by what faces us. Look to our Lord and try and take His example.
I dont like to rock the boat here out of respect for Louie, so I refrain from saying certain things. I personally believe the main issue between people like you and I, and the majority of the posters here, is coming to a head fairly soon. I personally believe that bergoglio and whoever succeeds him (probably in the next 2-3 years) is going to totally force the issue as to whether we have a valid pope or not.
How is Burke faithful? How is anyone who doesnt denounce the egregious v2 council faithful? Burke is older than most of us who post here….how much time should he be given to start doing the right thing? Why shouldnt he be called out for his failure to defend the Church? Oh yeah, thats right, he the least worst of the cardinals.
I had several things I could have said here in relation to this… but let me offer something constructive and sincere and positive…
We _do_ have an amazing example of _both_ a real _man_, and a real _prelate_ (!), who lived amongst us until late last century. An amazing example and role model for all men, and … for all bishops and cardinals today.. ++Burke included. If anybody here has never (yet) read his biography or watched the film on his life… do so. As for the man himself… Santo Subito.
http://marcellefebvre.info/
Rich, I gave up making not rocking the boat a number one priority a wee ways back. People don’t even feel the boat rocking anymore so long as there is ‘interest’.
–
I agree. Although I reckon the concelebration of Novus Ordoism and its ‘princes’ with the ‘princes’ of Luther et al in 2017 will be a ‘man-card’ day. If not, the Novus Ordo ‘man’ is totally Jennered.
To0 bad the Archbishop would not publicly commit to the truthful Catholic conclusion of sedevacantism on the grounds that folks wouldn’t be able to handle the truth.
Absolutely. Faithful to belial is unfaith. The messy nonsense that is premised as Catholic by the N.O. usurpers is outrageous.
PS. “In August of 1987, Archbishop Lefebvre wrote a private letter to those whom he intended to consecrate bishops, telling them that “the Chair of Peter and the positions of authority in Rome are occupied by antichrists.”
–
http://inveritateblog.com/2015/07/29/christ-or-belial/
What will Burke and his buddies have to say about this?!!!
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/search/label/The%20Wages%20of%20Ecumenism
When will Martin Luther be Saint Martin Luther??? It’s only a matter of time.
There’s nothing truthful about the sedevacantist position. The election of a Pope is an act of administration. The dogmatic pronouncements of Paul IV have to be taken as such. The section on Papal elections does not. Can you handle the truth?
What a statement. Such a statement dismisses Catholic doctrine, denies the plain teachings of true Popes and calls Christ a liar. I don’t think you meant to do so?
Would anyone cleaving to the a New Order really care? Enough to convert from the New Order to the Catholic Faith?
I appreciate what you are saying, Rich, but we can never know the heart of another – Cardinal Burke does what he thinks is best. And he is doing a lot from his limited platform. He travels the world giving conferences, and saying Holy Mass – these are well publicized, and very well attended. They also give witness and courage to other priests to do the same.
Should he do more? Should he do what WE think would be better? Is he evil? Is he stupid? Is he culpable? Is he obstinate in his ignorance?
It’s these questions that we must not ask, never mind attempt to answer.
Like you, I was away from the faith for decades and when I was given the grace to repent and re-join the One True Church I knew right away something was wrong.
But let’s never forget IT WAS PURE UNMERITED GRACE that brought you and me back. We don’t know what temptations Cardinal Burke has, and we don’t know what graces, or how many graces Le Bon Dieu has given him.
This website is beginning to lead me into despair. I’m not sure any bishop or member of the clergy meets approval here. If the entire hierarchy is rotten, then we are surely lost. Most Catholics do not have access to priests and bishops other than the ones they have. Are they then just alone in the cosmos?
It’s easy to dismiss the Pope and the past 3 or 4 Popes as bad and therefore not Popes, what is the result of that? That the church is dead, as there are no longer anyone in Rome worthy to elect a “true Pope”, that is as you say calling “Christ a liar”. When Our Lord was crucified, St Peter denied Him 3 times, the Apostles gave Him up for dead never to return. When Jesus rose did he say to his Apostles “get lost” I’ll find some others worthy to build my Church, of course not, is that not what sedevacantists are trying to say? Are we in the “Holy Saturday” of the Church, do we give up on Rome or do we get down on our knees and pray for the Church.
“It’s these questions that we must not ask, never mind attempt to answer.”
Yes, Barbara. We must remember this point that you have made.
Although we are commanded to judge actions by Our Lord, we must never judge hearts. We know enough to stay away from these prelates’ “modernist” teachings because by “their tenets, their manner of speech, and their action” we know that they are “the most pernicious of all the adversaries of the Church.”
(Pope St. Pius X in Pascendi 1907)
“We should do so …. leaving out of account the internal disposition of the soul, of which God alone is the Judge…” (Pascendi)
Unworthy —-
Today is the feast of the Conversion of St. Paul.
Is there not a better day to begin what you have said to do?
It this also the second day of our novena to Our Lady of Good Success ……
So much hope!
briggs—
Do not despair.
“Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terrible as an army set in array?”
Second day of our novena to Our Lady of Good Success.
Feast of the conversion of St. Paul.
Pray and persevere!
I have to agree with Marym, we do have to study and stand up for our Faith, but We have to be careful of personal condemnation of our Churchmen. Even St Pius X had a very difficult time making a decision against the modernist in France, as he knew how much the Priests could suffer from that decision. He had all of the graces from the true Mass to help him stand firm, how much harder is it today to do the same with the few graces from the new Mass?
It’s time we do our part, pray for the Pope, Cardinals, Bishops, and Priests, I believe that we should get in the habit of praying to their Guardian Angles, as they have great power to give strength and influence their charges.
You say “He should be pious even if it means he has to live in a cave.” Wow. Can we apply this same high standard to ourselves?
I hear you say “well, yes, but he’s a bishop so he should be a lot better than I.” But that’s not quite the point: are you as holy as God wants you to be in your state in life? Are you never fearful about speaking out when you are confronted with a less-than-faithful priest? Do you always respond to every grace? Do you feel qualified to judge Cardinal Burke?
Seems to me there are criteria for those who point out the errors of others. One of them is ‘competence’ to judge. I might suggest that only another bishop is able to judge Burke. Would only another bishop know the pressures, temptations, constraints etc. that effect decisions? The fact that we have very few faithful bishops is not the point.
I’m playing devil’s advocate here but I think some of us go way overboard judging motives instead of keeping it to what we can observe.
Your pointless beating of the same old drum is getting very old. It matters not a whit whether Francis is the legitimate pope or not. That decision is NOT for us. There will come a time when a pope or council pronounces on this – doing it now, as private Catholics is a total waste of time.
Why can’t you understand that the man sitting in the Chair of Peter is actually sitting there? How do we get him off? Do we rush him and haul him out into the street?
This is REALITY. Francis sits in that chair until he dies, or decides to retire. That is it. Banging on and on about his legitimacy takes time and breath away from the REAL issue: how do we save our souls, and help others save theirs – WHILE THIS SITUATION PERSISTS?
Do you think God is ignorant of what’s going on in the papacy? Why doesn’t He sweep Francis away? Read the Book of Job over and over. Didn’t God say to Job when he complained: “Where were you when I created the world?”
God has a plan and you, salvemur, are not in on it. We have to work with what we’ve got. Sedevacantism wastes precious time on something that we are powerless to fix.
Barbara, I have always admired your comments here. So I think perhaps I am misunderstanding you. Should we adopt Francis’ “Who am I to judge?” mentality? Our Lord’s Church is bleeding to death and the suffering Catholic faithful are offered bandaids by the good and faithful Bishops. Are we wrong to expect more? Are we wrong to demand more? Are we wrong to try to wake up the Bishops to lead a counterrevolution against the enemy within? I don’t think we are judging motives. We are judging lack of courageous action. I am not qualified to judge Cardinal Burke or others like him. But all of us here are qualified to know that we need strong leadership from all the Princes of the Church. That is why we a called The Church Militant. Let us pray for that leadership, but let us not be afraid to bring all these matters to light–just as Louie does.
Here’s Archbishop Lefebvre from a 1987 address made in Germany. It’s kind of hard to find online.
West Germany lecture February 1987.
“I think one must judge the men of present-day Rome and those who are influenced by them, for instance, the bishops, in the way that Pope Pius the IX and St. Pius X considered the liberals and modernists.
…Pope Pius IX used to condemn the liberal Catholics. He even use this terrible expression, “the liberal Catholics are the worst enemies of the Church”. What more could you say? However, he did not say, all liberal Catholics are excommunicated, or outside the church and must be refused communion. No, he considered these men as the worst enemies of the church and yet he did not excommunicate them. St. Pius X in his encyclical “Pascendi Dominici Gregis” passed a very severe judgment upon modernism when he called it, “the meeting place of all heresies”. I don’t know if there could be a more severe condemnation passed up on any movement than that. But he did not say henceforth all modernist would be excommunicated, out of the church, or that they should be refused communion. He condemned some of them.
Hence, I think, that like these two popes we must judge the liberals and modernists severely, but we must not necessarily consider them as being outside of the church… Let us judge these men and their errors in the way the Popes themselves have judged them. The Pope is a modernist to be sure, as are also Cardinal Ratzinger and many men around them, but let us judge them as Pope Pius IX and St. Pius X judged them. That is why, by the way, we continue to pray for the Pope and ask God to grant him the graces he needs to fulfill his task.”
“After Vatican II, that great call to love by confronting sin was lost… Men are drawn to the mystery of Christ’s sacrifice…The rampant liturgical experimentation after Vatican II, much of which was not sanctioned by Vatican II, stripped the Rite of the Mass of much of its careful articulation of the Sacred Mysteries that had been developed over centuries [this is a “liturgical reform” fabrication–the articulation of the Sacred Mysteries was complete w/Sts. Peter, Paul & John (and the other three evangelists (if not w/Jesus Christ)– St. Paul’s 1st Letter to the Corinthians (C11) was written only 20 years after Jesus death (53-54 AD). ))]… It is also clear that many men will respond to the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite, the rite celebrated before the Vatican II Council reforms… The Ordinary Form, if it’s celebrated very reverently with good music, can have the same strong positive effect on men.”
In looking at your quotes it struck me that once a conception of sin has been stripped away, there is no necessity of a Savior/Messiah or blood sacrifice–so it doesn’t matter which “valid” form of the mass one attends. Which could lead to such vacuous remarks as “good music” and “priestly reverence” will have a “strong, positive effect on men”. What about the Body & Blood of Jesus Christ the spotless lamb sacrificed for our sins?
I have been surprised this Christmas by self-called traditional Catholics’ discussion of Jesus Christ/the mass that don’t even mention the sacrifice but only that God comes down upon the altar and is “truly present”. This Latin mass society head in his “requirements for fruitful participation” in the Latin Mass states: “That Jesus Christ is Divine, and comes down upon the Altar at the Consecration; that there is such a thing as sin, and that sin makes you less worthy [(sic) that’s why we say three (3) times “Lord I am NOT worthy”] of receiving Holy Communion” [What is the connection between sin, the mass, Jesus Christ and us?]
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2016/01/reply-to-mgr-pope-are-traditional.html
Here is Burke: “Until men understand that there is Sin”
Here is the other blogger that struck me: “We Catholics worship the Immortal One who, for our sake, became a man and Who, despite suffering Death, conquered death, rose again and now reigns forever as King of Heaven and Earth.”
http://thatthebonesyouhavecrushedmaythrill.blogspot.com/2016/01/note-to-any-rock-stars-who-read.html
“For our sake became a man” – WHY? To suffer and die for our sins!!!!!!!!
P.S. “Aspects of the Church’s life that emphasized the man like character of devotion and sacrifice” The Blessed Virgin Mary IS a woman. Simeon’s prophecy: “And through your own soul a SWORD shall pierce” – can’t say that sacrifice and devotion have a “man-like character”. Also, it’s insulting to characterize Luther’s perversion of Jesus Christ’s sacrament as “feminine”. Call it effeminate/perverse, a lie (fabrication), a thing that appeals to those dead in sin, harlots/fornicators who profess God w/their mouths, but not w/their deeds (to those who exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator.), but don’t call it “feminine”. It sure never appealed to me, but set my teeth on edge for its disrespect of Jesus Christ. And w/only 20% now attending can’t say it appeals to other Catholics either (male or female).
Become one of a million Catholics praying the Rosary on the 1st of each month to…… During this Holy Year of Mercy, let us join Cardinal Burke in a spiritual crusade to storm Heaven with prayers to dispel confusion http://www.catholicaction.org/take_heaven_by_storm
“Families should have at least ONE meal together each week where the whole family is together.” http://www.newemangelization.com/uncategorized/cardinal-raymond-leo-burke-on-the-catholic-man-crisis-and-what-to-do-about-it/
Praying the rosary once a month?!! A family meal once a week (why not kill two birds w/one stone & attend the Sunday N.O. meal)? Who is kidding (confusing) who here?
“Everyone understands that women have and can be abused by men. Men who abuse women are not true men, but false men who have violated their own manly character by being abusive to women…Men are not going to Confession today because there has been a denial of Sin. There was a period after Vatican II where many were promoting the idea that there weren’t any serious sins. Of course, this is lethal for men, especially young men. Young men may begin to engage in the sexual sin of masturbation. Men have told me that when they were teenagers, they confessed the sin of masturbation in the confessional and priests would say, “Oh, that’s nothing you should be confessing. Everybody does that.” That’s wrong. These are sinful acts. They need to be confessed along with other types of sins, whether the sins are foul language, lying, stealing, or whatever it might be. The denial of sin was a breakdown in the sense of what is demanded of men as men of Christ. Confronting sin is central to being able to love one another. How does a man love? He loves by obeying the Ten Commandments. After Vatican II, that great call to love by confronting sin was lost, leading to the most horrible abuses of individuals, abusing themselves or others…”
http://www.newemangelization.com/uncategorized/cardinal-raymond-leo-burke-on-the-catholic-man-crisis-and-what-to-do-about-it/
Words fail.
Cardinal Burke was ordained in 1975 by Paul VI. If he didn’t believe in the N.O. mass (unless he became a priest for another reason), why would he be ordained? He seems to have been on the fast track all his priesthood. Just because he facilitates one or two EF “oratories” for those who are “attached” to the EF or says the occasional EF mass, doesn’t mean he believes the Church as a whole should go back to it (he may have been assigned this task by his superiors).
Burke also was encouraging the EF (like Benedict) to bring about a hybrid mass: “What is still for us difficult to understand, and remains unsolved by the Cardinal, is his wish to reconcile the two rituals of the Mass. For this, he is advocating for the papal “Reform of the Reform”, and for the rejection of the “hermeneutic of [ritual] discontinuity” between the Novus Ordo and the Tridentine Mass.”
http://archives.sspx.org/news/2011_archive/cardinal_burke_gloria-tv_interview/cardinal_burke_gloria-tv_interview.htm
What would that hybrid be like? Most people abhor the offertory of the New Mass most of all – Burke would restore the prayers at the foot of the altar and the last Gospel (he also believes it’s good for the people to stare at the priest offering the mass to see his “devotion”):
“But he also made a fascinating comment on the ordinary form. He said that the ordinary form, in which the priest typically faces the people, can encourage a deeper appreciation of the “transparent devotion” with which priests should celebrate either form….Of course, Cardinal Burke also says he’d like to see the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar and the Last Gospel brought back, whereas I regard them as external to the Mass proper, historical accretions that were wisely deleted in the reform. More howls from some quarters, I know, but I treasure the ordinary form’s clarity about the parts of the Mass, its restrained emphasis on essentials—a feature of that noble simplicity which has always been more characteristic of the Latin rite than of the various Eastern rites.
https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/otc.cfm?id=985
In this 2011 paper on hermeneutic of continuity (which speaking of anniversaries mentions that it was 1/25/59 that J23 decided to revise 1917 Code of Canon Law) and the “New Evangelization” which is to remake the Catholic church, Burke mentions no pope before J23. To give an idea what was going on in the Church while he was in the seminary:
“I am reminded of a comment by the late and most wise Mother Mary Francis of the Poor Clare Colettine Monastery in Roswell, New Mexico. Writing, already in 1967, about the approach to the renewal of the religious form of consecrated life, after the Council, Mother Mary Francis observed: It is simply a fact that we can have too many workshops and discussions on such subjects as the formation of novices and juniors, the psychological aspects of religious life, and mental hygiene, which reduce to mere long-ringing condemnations of the past. One, of course, would be too many. We could be using this time and this energy actually forming our communities, in studying and promoting a sound psychology of religious life, and in practicing and encouraging mental hygiene. We are all surely aware that mistakes have been made in the past. We may even be willing to admit we have made a few ourselves. Let us go on from there, not hold a seminar there. Let us by all means get expert guidance in the areas just mentioned and many others, the while not letting the fact elude us that the Holy Spirit remains the Expert, the Counsellor. There may certainly be valid reasons for calmly mentioning some past errors for mutual education. A charitable sharing of blunders can be a genuine service to one another, since we all stumble often enough even when forewarned of booby-traps. However, to talk from a stump of censure will never avail anything positive.” (page 10)
https://www.shu.edu/theology/upload/2011-03-30-New-Evangelization-and-Canon-Law-Gerety-Lecture-by-Cardinal-Burke.pdf
At 56 min of program I was recently watching, priest is asked what did Bishop Sheen think of VC2 and he states that Sheen was put through a re-education program. He talks about the unimaginable stress on other priests also of having to go against everything they had ever been taught or be disobedient.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3_1uQs3ACk
For him to have gone along and rise so high, he must see something in it. I would say that about all the priests in the N.O. From what others, like Michael Rose, have said, you either had to lie to get in the seminary (that you would absolve use of contraception, accept women priests, etc.) or you are lying to the “faithful” Catholics now. I would say the same about Athanasius Schneider and all the heroes of the right.
There is only one thing more radical than “radical feminism” and that is the teaching of the Catholic Church prior to VC2 on the role of husband and wife and the role of women as help meet to men. I wonder how many readers here, men or women, would abide by the teaching. Women must stay at home and tend to children and home except in case of economic NECESSITY, NO artificial birth control; husband is head of household (note how “authority” isn’t used once by Burke) and the provider; he must love his wife as Christ loved the Church; wife must obey husband and not undermine him. So many times when I read the interviews of these Cardinals, it seems they are just regurgitating back the view/bias of the interviewer as best they can w/out as LV states denying Church teaching (which currently happens to be VC2 apostasy).
Burke states: “We have to be very clear with men about purity, chastity, modesty and even the way men dress and present themselves. Men’s behaviors and dress matter, for it affects how they relate to the world and it affects the culture. Men need to dress and act like men in a way that is respectful to themselves, to women and to children.” But what does it mean? Here is a dress code from a traditional chapel: “Men and boys should be wearing neat trousers, a coat, jacket or a dress sweater and tie. Jeans, shorts, open shirts, sneakers and other such casual dress are inappropriate and do not meet the standards for assisting at Holy Mass.” Burke goes on and on about pornography, but what does he say about female attire? How many women do you know that dress like this every day (let alone when attending the holy sacrifice of the mass)? “Women and girls must wear a modest dress and cover their heads with either a hat or chapel veil. Short skirts or dresses that are above the knees, revealing blouses (such as low cut, sleeveless or see-through), slacks or shorts of any length do not meet the norms of Christian modesty.” When is the last time you’ve heard any VC2 cleric state that women would be held accountable for any man they led into mortal sin by their dress? As you say praiseworthy sound bites and platitudes but no concrete practical teaching on how to practice the Catholic faith. This New Evangelization has been going on for 50 years (according to Burke’s paper) and its design is to deCatholicize the faithful and Burke is right in the middle of it.
Barbara
I think a main point of contention is denouncing Francis as we ALL do on a daily basis. I believe with all my heart that he is not a pope….and therefore I have no problem with how I address him. However, to ridicule and denounce a TRUE pope on matters of Faith is surely a mortal offense as we are called to strict obedience to the Vicar of Christ in this regard. This is a very important issue and not one that we can just sweep under the rug. If this guy (and his immediate predecessors) is a valid pope then we sede’s are in a load of trouble….and you trad’s who bash him are right next to us. If he is a valid pope the only people who are safe (in terms of obedience to the pope) are the liberal, modernist, Catholics who dont have a clue as to what is going on. Yeah, they’ll obviously burn….but not for lack of treating the pope as he should be treated.
Unfortunately, what we are witnessing and suffering is the pandemic Pestilence of Effeminacy within the ranks of the Shepherds of the Church. When the estrogen overload kicked in the manly courage and fortitude clicked off. The good Cardinal is/has been better than most. I would not sell him short at this point. Perhaps PF’s planned co-celebration of the Liturgy at the upcoming Anniversary of the Reformation will finally be the over the top outrageous tipping point that sparks an authentic “Reformation” in the Church and the OTF.
Gotta believe the Blessed Mother will not take kindly to such blatant mockery of Her Son, His Sacrifice and His Church.
Bergoglio has been continuously over the top through most of the time he has been called “pope”. I opined some time ago that it would likely take mr francis to declare something as outrageous as “Christ is not actually God” before people finally come to their senses regarding what he actually is. I still stand by that. In the world of vatican 2, celebrating the birth of the great breaking away from the Catholic Church is really not that big a deal. I mean seriously, most Catholics nowadays attend mass where they pray in communion with an arch heretic….why would welcoming the lutherans into the fold come as a surprise?
Dear brigs, despair is the result of only hearing one side of the story, and is a great temptation of the Demon. I think you are feeling discouragement (rather than despair) because we forget the other side of the coin.
It might help you to read Saint Matthew, Chapter Eight about the storm at sea and Christ’s calming of it – verse 22 etc. Chrystostom says the tempest was a type of the future trials of the Church. For the ship in the waves is the Church, and the soul in temptations by which she is made keener and profits.
There are remedies for the terrible sadness we feel at what is happening to our Church: 1) a good conscience, 2) resignation to the will of God, and 3) CONFIDENCE IN GOD’S POWER AND PROVIDENCE. For on this a believer rests secure, and as it were sleeps in all adversities. (this from The Commentary of Cornelius A Lapide)
The Apostles asked Christ: “Does it not trouble you that we are perishing? Are you just going to sleep without a care, and let us be drowned with you?” And Jesus’ words are exactly what you and I need to hear: “Why are you fearful, O ye of little faith?”
All that we are suffering now is MEANS, which must bring us to our END. Strange as it may seem we are to be glad we are in this tempest. The end of this trial, when it comes, will show forth the power and the glory of God. The means we use to get us to that end are patience, gentleness with those who are perpetrating this evil, prayer for their conversion, and most importantly complete trust in GOD.
One step at a time! For many families even one meal is something new, and a Rosary once a month will please Our Lady greatly when it is a springboard to more.
As I read it, this is a special effort during the year of Mercy (i.e. for 12 months) – so they are going to say the Rosary 12 times (during the whole year!). And they call that “storming heaven” with prayers.
My understanding was that one was supposed to meditate on the mysteries of Jesus Christ’s life during the Rosary – is one only supposed to do that once a month?
Regarding: a meal once a week. My understanding is the duty of a Catholic wife and mother is to provide family meals three times a day. 80% of families in the U.S. eat together 4-7 days a week–why would Burke be counseling Catholic families to eat together at least ONCE a week (like it was some great hardship– same w/the rosary like it’s some great hardship–what is natural and gives meaning to our lives)?
http://www.gallup.com/poll/166628/families-routinely-dine-together-home.aspx
Peeps coming to a Catholic sense all depends on keeping their hand out of the Novus Ordo cookie jar. Few will do so, no matter Truth, Grace and the Blood of Christ.