A few days ago, Cardinal Burke was interviewed for the umpteenth time since making public the now infamous Dubia and subsequently promising to issue a “formal act of correction” should Francis fail to provide an answer.
In other words, the roller coaster ride continues…
Last October, Cardinal Burke, while speaking at a conference (for the umpteenth time since making public the now infamous Dubia…), painstakingly described for his audience what an apostate looks like.
If there were such a thing as an ecclesial criminal sketch artist, Burke’s account could have been used to create the rendering on the right.
Seriously, His Eminence made it perfectly plain (without actually saying so; i.e., in the manner of spineless men) that he believes… no, make that he knows that Jorge Bergoglio is an apostate.
Even so, in his most recent interview just three short months and God only knows how many more lost souls later, Burke made it perfectly plain (again, without actually saying so) that, at least as things stand today, he has no intention of making good on that “formal act of correction” after all.
It’s a long interview; one wherein the interviewer, a guy named Chris Altieri, reveals himself to be just as spineless as his guest, and the cardinal uses hundreds of words that often come nowhere near answering his flaccid questions.
If you still want to read the entire thing for yourself, feel free. Here, we’ll take a look at some of the relatively noteworthy quotes.
Cardinal Burke admits that the Dubia (doubts) is as relevant as ever, saying:
It remains as critical as ever to respond to the serious doubts, which have been raised in people’s minds by Amoris laetitia, to make clear the constant teaching and practice of the Church…
Get that? Burke said that Amoris Laetitia has raised serious doubts in people’s minds.
Yes, I know, this much is entirely obvious, but what immediately follows demonstrates Burke’s utter fecklessness so vividly that it’s almost difficult to believe.
Altieri followed up by posing a question (in the form of a mini-speech) suggesting the opposite of what Burke had just stated; opining that Amoris Laetitia isn’t really the reason why so many people have serious doubts about such things as sacramental marriage, Confession and Holy Communion.
After so pontificating, Altieri eventually asks, “So, where is the confusion coming from?”
If Cardinal Burke was in possession of even a shred of conviction (to say nothing of manliness) he would have firmly corrected his presumptuous little interlocutor; reminding him of the answer that he provided literally just a minute earlier – Amoris Laetitia has raised the doubts under discussion.
Instead, Cardinal Burke replied:
There has always been a certain element in the Church, which has rebelled against the Church’s teaching … with regard to irregular matrimonial unions, cohabitation outside of marriage; it is all an effect, really, of secular society, in which there has been in our time a relentless attack upon the sanctity of marriage.
So… now he is intimating that neither Amoris Laetitia nor the author of that disastrous text – a man that Burke was at pains to paint as an apostate just three months ago – are to be blamed for the present crisis; rather, it’s the fault of a “certain element in the Church” and “secular society.”
This is exactly how “men without chests” operate, to quote C.S. Lewis (or as I would prefer to say, men without… oh, never mind.)
You see, Burke fully realizes that a grave danger is threatening to destroy his family, and, furthermore, he has no doubt about who is driving that threat.
And yet, knowing himself better than we do as one who lacks the backbone necessary to address the matter, he unburdens himself of the duty to protect his own by shifting the blame to anonymous, largely un-confrontable, bogymen; in this case, “certain elements in the Church” and “secular society.”
According to Cardinal Burke, we now have but one choice:
The only thing we can do in terms of Amoris laetitia is to read it in the perspective of the constant teaching and practice of the Church, and that means that there cannot be what some have called a revolution in the Catholic Church.
He went on to define what he means by “revolution” as follows:
The Church now accepting that people who are divorced and whose marriages have not been declared null are able to enter into a so-called “second marriage”; revolution, too, in terms of the Church’s constant teaching that the conjugal act rightly takes place only within marriage, in other words, cohabitation outside of marriage is always and everywhere evil.
“The Church” now accepting… This is another anonymous bogyman put in place by His Fecklessness in order to avoid the harsh reality that it is Francis who is driving the revolution.
What is different with Amoris laetitia [as compared to Familiaris consortio] that creates the concern and the confusion – or is it not necessarily with Amoris laetitia, but with its implementation?
Cardinal Burke replied:
Well, on the one hand it is an interpretative problem. On the other hand, it certainly is a problem of application.
You get the gist of this laughable exchange.
One of the biggest failings of prelates like Cardinal Burke and Bishop Schneider (apart from lacking a passion for fiercely protecting their own as all good fathers must) is that they are approaching the problem of Amoris Laetitia (and thus its author) exactly backwards.
They tend to focus largely on the so-called pastoral guidelines it inspired; claiming that they will lead to doctrinal errors, when in point of fact, the blasphemies and heresies contained in the text of Amoris Laetitia itself is what came first, thus giving rise to the abandonment of the bi-millennial practice of the Church.
The reason why men like Cardinal Burke cannot muster up the gumption to condemn error is simple; they are men-of-the-council – the same that summarily rejected the duty to condemn in favor of dialogue. We’ll come back this momentarily.
Over the course of the roughly half-hour interview, Altieri didn’t bother to ask Cardinal Burke about the “formal act of correction.” He did, however, give him ample opportunity to comment on it.
There are people who have been heard and who have found their way to significant public airing of their opinions on this question, who have attempted, anyway, to make the Holy Father himself either a willing or an unwilling participant in this. I would like you to have the chance to speak to that.
Yes, “people” have attempted to make Francis (I assume that is who he intends to refer as “Holy Father,’ though I object to the implication on all counts) a willing participant in the aforementioned revolution.
I might add that Francis is one of those people, and furthermore, his attempts have been crystal clear and rather successful!
Even so, neither Altieri nor Burke thought to mention the guidelines established by the bishops of Buenos Aires, much less the letter of Francis stating “there are no other interpretations” of Amoris Laetitia and their inclusion, at his direction, in the AAS.
Peas in a pusillanimous pod, these two.
Burke left the faithful with the following advice:
Therefore, I would simply urge fellow Catholics – even as I am trying to do myself – to respond to the situation by fidelity to what the Church has always taught and practiced – and that is not a mystery to us: it is contained in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, for instance – and remaining faithful in that way we will also remain one with Peter; because one Pope does not teach differently from another Pope.
This man is living in Fantasyland, or more precisely, Conciliarland; a place where the “hermeneutic of continuity” is considered a remedy to objective heresy, and the only thing that is condemned is condemnation itself; unless, of course, one dares to promote and defend authentic Catholic tradition.
In his first interview with his mini-me, Altieri, back in April 2017, Cardinal Burke said:
A lot of those people of profound thought [like Josef Ratzinger], who were very enthused about the II Vatican Ecumenical Council, and enthused about its documents, when they saw what happened after the council, that is, this “spirit” of the II Vatican Council superseded the teaching of the Council itself, so that the Council became susceptible to all kinds of abuse, both doctrinal and liturgical, and disciplinary …
That’s the kind of spirit that intervened, and we are still dealing with it. The pontificate of Pope John Paul II brought us a long way.
This tells us everything we need to know about Raymond Cardinal Burke:
He is a dedicated supporter of Vatican Council II and its very own make-believe “Saint,” John Paul the Great Ecumenist.
As such, barring conversion, he will never manage to confront the Bergoglian menace in any meaningful way, and it is for this very same reason that he will never contribute to spreading the authentic message of Fatima.
I’ve already explained to you why he can’t “correct” the Pope without damaging his SSPX buddies. I was in an email exchange with a friend of Burke and I specifically mentioned that if the D&R can not receive communion under ANY circumstances, then neither can all those Catholics who “married” invalidly before an SSPX priest. The friend of Burke did a lot of yammering but in the end had to admit that the couple “married” invalidly before an SSPX priest is objectively living in mortal sin by having sexual relations without the benefit of marriage.
Cardinal Burke certainly “had a chest” when he said it is better to attend a bad N.O. “mass” (I thought they were all bad!) than to attend Mass at an SSPX chapel/church. Bishop Fellay revealed that he had no chest when he did not respond strongly and definitively to defend his priests and those who sit in the pews. So where is the manliness in all of this? Maybe someone out there knows. I’d like to know too.
Ganganelli–Apparently, we were responding at the same time. Burke has buddies in the SSPX? With friends like that, who needs enemies.
The reason Burke won’t name him who shall not be named is simple.
It’s the same epidemic that infects politicians and the mainstream media.
It’s because the moment you admit openly and name that which is the problem, is the moment you realize you have to take the initiative and bear the burden of responsibility for it.
An alcoholic or drug addict cannot fix their problem until they take the first step of ADMITTING THEY HAVE A PROBLEM.
Politicians cannot stem the crimes occurring in their nation by the influx of immigrants and refugees until they admit several things, beginning with one that is called ISLAM. And also that the refugee crisis is occuring because they BOMBED AND RAISED UP TERRORISTS to attack the people in the very nations they wanted to control and overthrow a government for their own personal benefit.
It’s the same reason that media pundits and reporters muse and dance around and only make vague referrals to the problem, due to a doctrine of political correctness, or because they don’t want to admit even the possibility of several disturbing facts.
– That it was not Islamic Terrorists behind 9/11, but those within the US Government itself along with other Israeli and Saudi agents and those within the financial world who themselves committed the atrocity in order to have their new ‘Pearl Harbor’ excuse as detailed in Northwoods to embark on a long-term ambitious campaign of reshaping the world order and imposing the police survelliance state.
– It was not Russia, but the Democrat Party alongside corrupt allies in the FBI and other departments who were trying to control, fix and rig the last U.S. Election, and have even murdered people to cover it up, and have no problem antagonizing other nuclear powers and nations with pointless antagonizing sanctions in order to keep the charade going.
– It was not Russia, but the U.S. and Soros Revolutionary groups who instigated the Maidan in the Ukraine, and supported a Neo-Nazi coup of the Ukranian government in order to attempt to expand NATO and cut Russia off from the Black Sea, and further loot the Ukranian people under IMF loans. A government who would later shoot down a civilian airliner using BUK missile systems given to the Ukraine years ago, for which the breakaway provinces had no access to, in roder to try and frame them and blame Russia by extension.
One could go on with such “conspiracies” alone. But here’s the point. The moment you admit something, then the real task begins.
If there is a family wherein a father is beating his wife and abusing his children, the other extended family members can do one of two things.
a) Ignore the problem and pretend and dance around and act as if it is only hypothetical. Meaning the ‘dialogue’ can go on and on and on without ever having to take any concrete action.
b) Finally admit the problem is in fact happening. Which means dealign with the errant father. Calling the police, perhaps having to take on the burden of taking the wife and children away from the home and looking after them for what could be a very long time making them dependent on you which means effort, money and more to the point, an emotionally trying time, which may involve police, lawyers, lawsuits etc.
Option B is too hard, so option A sticks around for a long time without ever solving anything and in fact only making things worse until outside intervention finally has to occur, which will suck for everybody, and usually might require dead bodies until someone finally does something.
The same thing happens here.
TALK TALK TALK TALK TALK TALK TALK TALK TALK.
IMPOTENT DIALOGUE TRYING TO STAY AS FAR FROM THE CONCRETE TRUTH AS POSSIBLE.
We are TALKING OURSELVES TO DEATH AND INTO HELL.
The AGE of social media and comments sections and information! How IRONIC!
All this Data, and never any truth! All this Science, All these committees and meetings and media etc. etc. etc.
And these jackasses have the termity to question the integrity of the ancients and the Bible.
They can’t even get history and evidence and facts in the present right!
We can’t and won’t admit what’s right in front of our faces! Forget the more complex issues!
THE PRIMARY ONE AT FAULT HERE IS FRANCIS!
AMORIS LETITIA CONTAINS BLATANT HERESY!
THE ONE WHO MADE IT WAS INFORMED NUMEROUS TIMES THAT IT IS HERETICAL!
THEREFORE THE ONE WHO MADE IT IS BLATANTLY SUSPECT OF OBSTINATE FORMAL HERESY!
AND THAT ONE IS WHO THE WORLD BELEIVES IS THE VISIBLE POPE!
At least admit that before we get on with the more complicated task of who is or isn’t when or where the Pope and what to do about it!
GET TO STEP 1 and ADMIT THE NAME THE PROBLEM!
Given his history here, I wouldn’t take Ganganelli credibly on anything.
Burke, the traditionalists hero
Since we now know that Archbishop Lefebvre did exactly the right thing by breaking away from the dreadful Vatican II rabble, why are you maundering on about the SSXP? There is a huge and growing demand for the True Tridentine Mass across the globe – and why? Because TRUE Catholics follow the Faith, and the Holy Mass, founded by Our Lord Jesus Christ – not the shabby imitation NO monstrosity foisted on us by the fraudulent vote at Vat II by the Freemasons – courtesy of the equally Masonic “popes” John XXIII and Paul VI [who is also due to be canonized by the Apostate Francis.]
Sorry SSPX! Oops.
I rarely want to stand up and cheer, but your post did it! Thank you for saying what most of us realists and practicing Catholics know – and saying it SO well. I’ve copied this and I will USE it – along with Louie’s superb article for the sake of some of my friends’ souls. God bless you.
Wrong again Johnno boy. It doesn’t take guts to call out His Holiness the Supreme Vicar of Christ on Earth. Every Trumpbot who calls himself Catholic does that.
If you had real guts, you’d admit that the 1983 Code of Canon Law allows communion to unrepentant schismatics and heretics.
But you don’t want to do that do you? Because then you’d have to admit that JPII was a heretic and that would make you a sedevecantist.
Johnno, sedes have been saying this for years but no one listens.
Yes Ganganelli, you have found the reason why the resist trads will never get anywhere. They cannot identify the problem either. Either Bergolio is Pope and therefore one must assent to his teachings or Bergolio is not Pope and may be ignored. But resistance to a Pope on matters of faith and morals is not a Catholic option.
Perhaps, I am misunderstanding this. I thought a pope could not be resisted when he spoke on matters of faith and morals ONLY when he spoke “ex cathedra”.
P.S. The last time a Pope spoke ex cathedra was in 1950 when Pope Pius XII declared the Assumption of Our Lady to be an article of faith. Therefore, a pope’s statements regarding faith or morals may be merely a matter of opinion and, when erroneous, may (must!!) be resisted. Every time Bergoglio opens his mouth, his opinions betray that he is not the Vicar of Christ and is, therefore, an imposter.
The closest SSPX chapel to me is three and a half hours away by interstate. This makes it financially impossible for my family to attend that particular Mass. My family and I currently attend the TLM offered by a Novus Ordo diocesan priest on most Sundays. Other Sundays, we attend a Catholic Ruthenian Eastern rite Divine Liturgy. This, on top of homeschooling our son and teaching him the Faith using the Baltimore Catechism is how we avoid the spiritual plague in the Latin/Roman rite.
That said, I am really on the fence as to making the jump to the Sede side. I have read and understand the arguments in favor (NovusOrdoWatch.org). However, if the Sede position is correct, then WHY did Archbishop Lefevbre excommunicate some of his own priests from the SSPX for advocating this position?
I am sure many here will give me a generous answer and response!
Why do you assume that Sedevacantism is wrong and ABL is right?
Except it appears that Johnno thinks Francis is the only problem (not Vatican II and all the conciliar “popes”).
Comically, many here will continually bash the v2 church (which they should of course) BUT also consider their bogus v2 tribunals, that hand out fake “annulments” like candy on Halloween, to be legit. If you have no use for v2 then how can you have use for their tribunals?
In other words…if you get a vatican 2 “annulment” (which is a joke) and get re-married, you are without doubt (as far as Im concerned) an adulterer.
Al, this is the time of diabolical disorientation when even the elect will be deceived. That includes all of us. We are all confused as to what is going on. Those who say they are not confused are lying or idiots. I chose sede because of all that I read, I never saw any magesterial papal teachings that told the faithful to resist their Pope. In fact, its all the contrary. So if I am going to resist the NO V2 modernists, the first thing I have to do is un-recognize them as legitimate authority. Magesterial papal teaching supports this when it commands we flee from heretics and Cum Ex Apostolatus plus the 1917 Code of Canon Law are quite clear that heretics lose their office automatically. Once Bergolio et al are without authority, resistance becomes possible and even effective.
You are correct Rich, we need to have nothing to do with the NO V2 sect. Knowingly or unknowingly, they are enemies of Christ and His Church.
My2¢, statements on a plane or off the cuff are of course capable of erroneous information. But an encyclical is not some spontaneous statement. It is magesterial teaching. Even so, there may be an error or disputed fact. What there cannot be is a contradiction of previous teaching. Nor can their be a denial of any article of the faith. The Holy Ghost protects the Pope AND the Church from defectibility. Resisters want us to believe in a defectible Church, which is in of itself, a heresy.
Amen to that. I got done jumping through the hoops of being a “traditional Catholic resister” close to 5 years ago now. Its a fool’s errand.
If you investigate the expelled SSPX priests, you will find that the issue was also about which Mass to say, the 1962 or the pre ’55 Mass. Sedevacantism was also an issue but not the sole reason.
Actually, some of these priests weren’t even sedevacantist at the time they were expelled.
I realized Cardinal Burke was never going to issue a formal correction about six months ago. I don’t know why he continues to make noises as if he will. It just seems almost cruel now, although I’m sure he is not at all a cruel man. Yet it’s incomprehensible how he can know what he knows and what he’s promised, and not do it. Do these “fathers” care about us at all, even a little.
I am past the point of writing letters and protesting in any other ways. I admit, they wore me down. The only campaign I would like to lead is to get a petition going to demand the Cardinals give up wearing red in their costumes. It is meaningless, and a poke in the eye to see them wear it. Any other color but red will do.
Make NO assumptions that he is not cruel. A friend spoke to the woman who wrote to him about allowing a transgendered man who requested permission to start a religious Order of women in his Diocese when he was ArchBishop Burke of Madison ,Wisconsin. She said he did not respond so she wrote to the Papal Nuncio. Of course her letter went back to Burke and this time she said he alerted every parish making her a persona non grata for complaining to the Papal Nuncio. When she spoke out , he said she never wrote to him first. That was cruel.
This is also cruel
Bishops have made a habit of cruelty to everyone except their own pedophile priests.
The laity , good priests and abuse victims have all been treated cruelly .
Read the Fr Cipolla Case by Mrs Engel.
Don’t forget his racial worship of Jews, his participation in their anti-Christ seder meals, and Burke’s membership on the board of the Association of Hebrew Catholics. (also photo of Joel Green at the very bottom of the entry)
Except 2Vermont, if you’ve ever read anything I’ve written here, you’d bloody well know precisely what I think about Vatican II and the concilliar popes.
Take a guess.
Commenting on my own comment here from Evangeline’s mention of cruelty I woke up and started thinking of all the cruelties we have undergone…..
It was cruel to change the Mass and create poor quality entertainment out of it.
It was cruel to strip our churches of the beautiful altars and statues.
It is cruel to hide Jesus in a back room off the altar.
It was cruel to water down the CCD and catechism classes so much in the last several generations.
It was cruel to put up structures that look like gymnasiums instead of churches .
It was cruel to cover up for pederast priests and then sell out parish churches to pay for the sex abuse settlement monies.
It was cruel to take Fed monies and destroy our Parochial schools.
It was cruel to hold back on the Third Secret of Fatima and then release a partial blurb without Our Lady’s explanation which She always gave to the children.
The prelates have committed much cruelty on their flocks.
They preach Mercy for the gender disordered , while we grasp for a final straw of Truth from a pitiful few .
Fool me once shame on you . Fool me millions of times and shame shame on me.
Guess what Gagbag.
I fully admit JPII held heretical beliefs and positions. Thus at least making him a material heretic.
What’ve you got?
Any more fake quotations from Protestant sources about how the Pope is God incarnate on Earth? Which in case anyone is unfamiliar with Gag’s history of posting here… is something he actually believed!
Hey Gag, tell us allagain about how usury is no longer a sin. You know… because some Pope changed it or something… and that therefore means popes can change anything… that was always a good one.
Nope. That is a lie and not what the Church actually teaches.
Take your sarcasm elsewhere. I was making a comment based upon what you wrote in this one entry. And clearly I haven’t been on this blog that long to know what you “really” believe.
Johnno…he asked about the heresy found in the 1983 Code of Canon Law which codified Vatican II. Do you agree that JPII not only held heretical beliefs but promulgated these beliefs in this canon law?
Just reminding ourselves of the ways we have been robbed over the last 100 years can support our fortitude for the fight ahead.
Sweep–Your comment above is painful beyond words. I wish someone would write a book about all these cruelties, including cruelties to good priests who were sacrificed when they stood up to the Purple Mafia. Perhaps, you could author such a book. I hope this isn’t “off topic”, but do you or anyone else know what really happened to Father Corapi. I met him personally and he made it very clear that “they” were out to get him and Mother Angelica. The rest is history. God help us all!
I don’t know about Fr. Corapi, but I do know that the Catholic Church of the 20th century persecuted Catholics knowingly. Examples:
1) The Cristeros
2) Europeans betrayed during WWI (needs research)
3) Germans and Jews betrayed during WWII
4) Russian Catholics betrayed by Cardinal Montini ( PPVI)
5) Hungarian Catholics betrayed during the 50’s
6) Catholics worldwide betrayed by clerical sex-abuse
7) Just this week the betrayal by the Vatican of Chinese Catholics.
8) Catholics behind the “Iron Curtain” betrayed by Vatican real politic.
9) All Catholics betrayed by Vatican II and the loss of the TLM
I am firmly committed to the thesis that Pope Pius X and Fr. Wernz (Superior General of the Jesuits), who died the same day, August 20, 1914, were poisoned, by the same freemasons who murdered the heir apparant to the Austro-Hungarian throne, Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife Sophie.
These freemasons then took over the papacy through a manipulation of conclave rules, to make the proceedings secret, and the papacies from Benedict XV on were filled with betrayals of Catholics.
Yes, the story of the 20century has not been told. I hope to be able to tell part of it by writing about events in 1914, that led to all of those betrayals.
Franz Ferdinand and Sophie were murdered June 28th, 1914. That was just two months before the murder of Pius X.
From the article on Asian News regarding the confusion and dismay of Chinese Catholics being told to give up the underground Church and it’s loyal bishops to the Chinese government, the following was said in the last paragraph:
7. I am disappointed, totally disappointed. The new Judas has sold his Lord again. The demon is happy! This makes no sense! He(Francis I)destroyed the Catholic Church in China.
This is why a book must written on the betrayal of the Catholic Church of Catholics, to stop the betrayals. If Francis I can work with communist and military governments, we loyal Catholics should be able to find governments of Catholic countries willing to overthrow him.
Fr Corapi sued the medical establishment after a heart operation or procedure as I understand it. He came into quite a bit of money some time before his departure from the public eye.
I may be mistaken about the state, but I was told he had quite a nice estate in Montana. We do not know if financial independence could have played a part in his actions.
2 Cents , see my reply about Fr Corapi below Mary’s excellent posts.
Mary on a personal note, a credible source of mine was dining at a Catholic benefit dinner linked to her job about 20 years ago. she called me and told me about this Seminary Rector she sat next to. He admitted they were taking Communist Chinese seminarians . She asked him if he did not see a problem since they were avowed communists. His reply was that he was sure they would change their ideology after living in the United States.
Really? That is why we have CPUSA . Communist Party USA, because they all change their ideology? There’s change alright, and has been happening in the schools ,universities and colleges backed by the NEA.
John Dewey aka The Father of American Education was a Marxist Freemason.
Wonder where all the Trump Haters are coming from? Go to this website
That’s a good question …….Can a Catholic be a Communist?
But isn’t this what Borgoglio stands for?
“For democracy. For equality. For socialism. For a sustainable future and a world that puts people before profits. Join the Communist Party USA today.”
Now ask yourself if Pope Francis is a Catholic Communist or is that an oxymoron?
Actually I think Altieri’s question on “Where is the confusion coming from?” could have been better worded as “How did we GET TO this crisis of endorsing communion for adulterers?” This is how I think the gist of the question was meant to be IMO. THIS is the most necessary question that has been begging an explanation other than the obvious answer that “the Church teaches and has always taught that adulterers cannot receive Holy communion.”
This would have been a great opportunity for Cardinal Burke to admit that this debacle is rooted in all the modernist documents and letters since the late 1800s that were clearly in the process of shifting the Church’s immemorial teachings on the hierarchy of purposes of marriage by redefining marriage and its primary purpose of procreation and education of children for God’s glory in favor of the false teaching on the unity of the couple being the primary purpose of the sex act in marriage.
The conjugal act, throughout modern times, has been slowly reduced to nothing less than a contract for sex in return for whatever the couple deems as a noble purpose in their consciences and having very little to with God and His laws on marriage such as NO divorce, NO contracepting and love of purity and love of God and His laws on marriage.
Many of these modernist noble purposes don’t include children or at least a limited number and when they do include children it is rarely as the primary purpose of marriage or for the lofty reason of God’s glory but for their own often times mindless shallow needs and desires.
The feigned noble purpose for the defense of these adulterers in Amoris Latitiae is unity of the couple while they ignore the hypocricy of the adulterers ‘could care less’ about the unity due to the lawful spouse? After all we all have been swimming in the new definition of marriage through NFP that we must as ‘responsible contraceptors’ while using sex for other purposes than procreation, ourselves must be merciful and sympathetic to these adulterers who cannot possibly be expected to give up the conjugal act because then it would be jeopardizing the NEW FALSE ‘be all and end all’ of NFP’s primary purpose of unity of the couple which the great majority of so called Catholics beleive.
The hypocricy for these fornicators is the feigning ‘of the all of a sudden’ noble purpose of unity of the couple for their sake and the sake of the children after they have abandoned their real and just spouse. The adultery and those that support them believe that they are able to freely use sex for the noble purpose of unity and unity alone to safeguard the illegal family and their comforts while at the same time being able down play divorce and contraception. After all this new false inversion of the hierarchy of purposes now places procreation at the service of and subordinate to their new false primary purpose of unity and thus forfeiting on the lofty primary purpose of bringing souls into the world to reflect Christ and His fidelity to His one Bride the Church and its laws on marriage such fidelity, chastity and ‘until death do us part’ which are laws that were instituted by Christ at the service of and because of the grand and lofty mission of bringing souls, which is of the highest value to God, into the world in order to increase the citizenship in Heaven for God’s glory . This new false definition of marriage is clearly rooted in a man centered narcissism and this mentality can not but help but consider children as a commodity in their economy of exchange for sex.
Let me put it another way why it is absolutely essential that we see why the manipulation of the hierarchy of purposes of marriage are paramount in this debacle that we see before us in Amoris Latitiae.
The allowing for the fornication of adulterous couples, in their conscience, by the Pope, is rooted now in close to a century of the promotion of NFP, which has clearly, at its core, the false belief that procreation can be separated in act, word, and deed from the sex act by promoting the planning to have exclusive recourse to the infertile period in order to avoid having children, because once contraception is ignored so can adultery and divorce be ignored.
Now that modernism has been extremely sussessful at redefining marriage we are coming closer to see forms of laws for a type of contractual prostitution, exchange of sex between two consenting adults for a perceived good according to their conscience ( ie sodomy and adultery.)The sin of divorce and contraception have been in the dustbin for decades. Let us face it.
When unity is made the goal, even under the pretense or misguided belief it is for God’s glory while one is falsely free to contracept or live in adultery and that marriage is no longer for the creation of the soul of a new human being but rather sex is to be used as a tool according to my conscience of perceived noble purposes. This is how divorce and contraception no longer matter because the laws that protect marriage are supposed to be rooted in God’s laws on purity and justice towards children, women and men who follow God’s laws on marriage. Laws that do not respect the natural laws and Divine laws on marriage are nothing more than contractual laws that protect the exchange sex for anything that two narcisistic consenting adults deem noble. When they no longer deem them noble or they cannot meet their own expectations they are free to divorce. After all divorce and contraception are not a sin for them because they do not follow God’s laws to begin with.
Gotta love those Communists ! Borgoglio does!
He said he knows a lot of good ones.
Chinese Communists cloned Monkeys . Are humans next ?
Yeah, that Dodd woman, I forget her first name, a friend of Bishop Sheen, she had testified to the fact that thousands of communists had entered seminaries in the 1930’s. If my thesis concerning the papacy is correct then that timing would be consistent. Pope Pius XI was a good Catholic man, surrounded by traitors. It’s likely he was invalidly elected but he did the best he could under challenging circumstances. It was under him that the Cristeros in Mexico were betrayed, but Pius XI was betrayed first by his advisors. And it wasn’t just Mexican Catholics who were betrayed, the Spanish, probably Germans and Jews could also be included.
Absolutely right. How can people still be so out of it as to not recognize the divinely inspired truth of Archbishop Lefebvre’s actions to save the true church from the establishment of a new sect? If nothing else, Bergoglio (he is not pope and, therefore, none of his actions, including canonizations, are valid) has proven the errors of Vatican II and those who promoted it’s faulty, faux doctrines. Like it or not Benedict is still our pope. Thank you, saint-in-waiting Archbishop Lefebvre! How many times was Athanasius excommunicated before his canonization? He was right; almost everyone else–including saints–were wrong.
It is, indeed, correct that the last ex cathedra statement was Pius XII in 1950.
Bishop Sheen sure was clear on this! You cannot be Catholic and communist.
Bella Dodd was a Communist in the l930’s and 40’s. She was a teacher at Hunter College NY. By the grace of God, she was converted by Bishop Sheen. Having been involved in Communist activities for many years, she helped recruit bright, young Communist men into the priesthood for the purpose of infiltrating and destroying the Catholic Church. She testified before Congress regarding her activities and declared that thousands of these seminarians were now firmly entrenched in the higher echelons of the Catholic Church. She wrote a book called “School of Darkness”. With deep regret for her actions, she promised to serve Our Lord all the days of her life. Should we doubt that Communism is still very much active in the Modern church?
“If nothing else, Bergoglio (he is not pope and, therefore, none of his actions, including canonizations, are valid) has proven the errors of Vatican II and those who promoted it’s faulty, faux doctrines. Like it or not Benedict is still our pope. ”
Isn’t Benedict included in those who “promoted Vatican II’s faulty faux doctrines”? If so, why is Bergoglio not pope and Benedict is?
When you say all those Catholics who married invalidly before an SSPX priest are you referring to ALL or those who were once divorced? If you mean ALL (as in including those first-time marrieds), why would Burke consider their marriages “invalid”? Unless you meant “illicit”?
Above question was for Ganganelli. I need to remember to mention poster name here because it is difficult to follow structure of thread at times.
2Vermont, while this is very problematic for bennyvacantists like “tradprofessor” the Church has taught, and yes even before Vatican II, that for a marriage to be “valid” Catholics MUST have their marriage witnessed by a bishop or priest with faculties.
Now, Benedict XVI declared that all SSPX priests are suspended “a divinis” and lack the necessary faculties to witness marriage. Therefore, all those traditionalists who had their “marriage” witnessed by an SSPX priest are actually cohabiting or living in sin because they are having sexual relations without the benefit of marriage.
Hope this helps.
Sorry 2Vermont, I put the response to you below in the main section of the comments.
Actually, according to Pius X, unless Lefebvre showed some signs of repentance before dying, we must assume Lefebvre is burning in Hell as he died an ex-communicate.
Also, St. Athanasius did NOT die an ex-communicate and was in peace and communion with the Supreme Vicar of Christ on Earth when he passed.
Well, I learned something new tonight. I researched this. According to the Council of Trent:
“Those who shall attempt to contract marriage otherwise than in the presence of the parish priest or of another priest authorized by the parish priest or by the ordinary and in the presence of two or three witnesses, the holy council renders absolutely incapable of thus contracting marriage and declares such contracts invalid and null, as by the present decree it invalidates and annuls them. ”
Of course in order to indict SSPX marriages with this, one would have to assume that the Novus Ordo church actually has legitimate authority and that the “priests” in the Novus Ordo “parishes” are in fact priests and Catholic.
Yep. It’s why in some ways I have more respect for sedevacantists than bennyvacantists like “tradprofessor” and, it appears, our gracious host Louie.
2 Cents, just and FYI………Dodd did not recruit “bright young men who were Communists ” into the seminaries.
Dodd recruited Communist Party males BUT Dr Alice Von Hildebrand sent me a note they were ALL homosexuals and that they were the only ones who would take on the assignment. Dodd met with her and Dietrich in their home on LI after she converted through ArchBishop Sheen. ………..Why oh why did he not let her reveal the names and the names of the Communist Party Cardinals in the Vatican whom she said were her bosses in her 1939 notarized document?
Did Archbishop Sheen have so much faith he thought they would be converted?
I wish he had enough Faith to warn the Faithful. The assignment was to rise as high as they could in the Church and then reveal themselves by going against the tenants of the Faith.
What position do you hold Gaganelli?
Yes Ganganelli, as a sede myself, the only thing I find that you and I disagree on is who is or isnt Pope. Resisters advocate some sort of distorted papacy which the laity are allowed to sift and question. It seems that the R&R crowd not only rejects Vatican 2 in theory, but in reality its Vatican 1 that they reject in practice.
I accept Pope Francis and his predecessors. Ironically, because I accept PF and Amoris Laetitia, I believe that those “married” invalidly by the SSPX are most likely not guilty of mortal sin because they are living their Catholic faith the best they can with the knowledge they have. St. Alphonsus taught that only formal sin offends God. I agree with him.
Precisely Tom. Although I will say, as a former SSPXer and sede myself, you might want to consider that it is God Himself who gave us these popes. I mean there is really not a dime’s worth of difference between any of the conciliar Popes. Now, I could understand believing the last Pope died in 1958. That strains credulity but it is possible. But what if we have a Paul VI/JPII/Francis type Pope 50 years from now?
OK, thank you.
I’m thinking pink might be appropriate…..
I was at one of Fr Corapi’s last public appearances in Buffalo NY. At that conference he noted that the 10 poorest cities in America were ALL run by Democrats.
Soon after a smear campaign began, accusations were made – no evidence was presented, and his order basically gave him the boot. He always maintained he could not get a fair shake from “the investigators.” I remember that many bishops refused to have him speak in their diocese. My guess is people in high places wanted him silenced and envious people wanted to bring him down – and he threw in the towel out of disgust.
Here’s what a chest looks like:
Except for this fact: Archbishop Lefebvre appealed against the excommunication (thereby invalidating it until the final ruling); however, the appeal was never heard… meaning the excommunication was never confirmed.
So he died a true soldier to Christ and his Holy Church, and may he rest in peace.
To Ganganelli: But if an occupant of the papal throne declares that “Christ made himself the devil” (Francis I on 4 April 2017), does he not tell us himself that he cannot be the true vicar of Christ?
Gang, I can believe that God allows such men to corrupt the Church, but I cannot believe that they are part of the Church. I believe in an indefectible Church. The sede position comes closest to explaining this conundrum. I do admit it does not explain the issue of authority, which troubles me greatly. But if Francis or Benedict is your Pope, then you should not take it upon yourself to bash him and disobey him and make pronouncements contradicting his magesterial teachings. That much should be clear to anyone who calls themselves Catholic.
But according to the NO V2 sect, there are salvific elements outside the Church so the excommunicated archbishop still had a chance.
Thanks, sweep. I did not know they were all hx. I never did read her book “School of Darkness”. I’m sure it reads like a book of prophecy in light of current events.
Yes Johnno, we know what you believe. You believe in a defectible Church that can teach you errors and falsehoods that will lead you to hell. Therefore you must resist the authority that Christ gave you because you know better.
TomA, my post above (the one that brought Johnno’s ire) was actually commenting on your post. It appeared you were saying that he was saying the same thing as the sedes. I was merely making mention that he does not appear to be doing that at all.
2vermont, I was actually agreeing with ine thing Johnno said. He said that before fixing anything, one must accurately define the problem. That is the problem with the RR crowd. They wont identify the problem because they keep insisting that a heretic can be Pope. The magesterial teachings of the Church for centuries is that heretics hold no office in the Catholic Church. The Church also teaches that we can only observe and judge externals. We do not need to know the motives or degrees of culpability in wayward prelates. We only need to know if they teach heresy or not. Since the 1960s, those who purport to be the Catholic Church teach a faith that was not handed down to them. They teach a new gospel and we are commanded to avoid them like the plague.
Agreed Tom. R&R fail to diagnose the problem correctly.
Read the Apocalypse, prayerfully and thoughtfully.
The Church of Rome is in dire straights.
The Mystical body of Christ is protected by the Woman.
Pray the Rosary and She will conquer for Her Son.
That is what Our Mother asked us to do.
What arrogance! We must “assume” nothing – ever. Since we have no idea of what did or didn’t happen between Almighty God and Archbishop Lefebvre when he breathed his last no-one has the right to make that statement.
Gods Servant, of course we can never presume to know the internal state of any soul. The Church only judges the external forum. We all know the external facts of the Archbishops “exommunication” from the Novus Ordo V2 sect. If you are a Novus Ordoite, resister, or sede will determine whether you believe the Archbishop died excommunicate or not. Of course, we will never know until we too breath our last.
Ganganelli – Let’s get this straight……….. You’re saying that the POST Vatican II Canon Law of 1983 allowing Holy Communion for unrepentant Schismatics and heretics is valid and that Francis hasn’t deviated from Canon Law? Yes? Wow!
You’re accepting that the altered Canon Law almost 20 years after Vatican II is VALID? And all Bergoglio has done is shove the heresy to the forefront? I thought I’d heard it all, but quoting ANYTHING after Vatican II as bone fide Canon Law is a waste of space. No-one, least of all the Masonic Paul V1, had any right to change one comma or full stop of established and binding Church Teaching – let alone change it beyond belief. Now the super heretics are about to canonize that man to give their own heresies and apostasy credibility! God protect us from diabolical disorientation.
My 2 cents – you are 100% correct. We can safely disregard any and all of his personal musings as simple opinions.
An encyclical – or letter expressing a private opinion is NOT magisterial in any way, shape or form [if you understand the exact meaning of the word]. It is merely a written opinion rather than a spoken one! Francis can’t just decide what is magisterium and what isn’t – there is a succinct definition of the word AND the process , with clear guidelines for the sole purpose of safeguarding Magisterium from heretics and apostates inside and outside the Church..
There you go again telling us what the “Pope” really means. Bergolio told all of you that AL is magesterial. It was perhaps the only unambigious thing he ever uttered and you still question and resist.
mpoulin–Father Corapi knew he was a target for the reasons you mention and also because he knew too much about the bishops and was preparing a series on exposing them. From my brief encounter with Father Corapi, I sensed his sincerity and determination to fight the enemies within. I believe he did win a multimillion dollar settlement regarding a medical report that stated he was in need of open-heart surgery when, in fact, he was quite healthy. Could this have been a ruse to “get him under the knife”? I don’t know if he took the vow of poverty and therefore had to turn these funds to his order. Putting that aside, I believe he threw in the towel because he knew there was no way he could fight the ruthless enemies within the church. Perhaps, they threatened his mother or other family members. All this is speculation, I know, but I just find it so difficult to believe that someone so well known and so recognizable by countless followers could just “disappear without a trace”. Does make you wonder, doesn’t it? Please forgive my conspiracy theories, but stranger things have happened in history.
I sincerely doubt that any act of formal correction was ever intended.
Place not your trust in men but in God.
O my Jesus, I wish to be all Thine own, cost me what it may. I wish to love Thee with all my strength, but what can I myself do? Thy Blood is my hope. O Mary, Mother of God, my refuge, neglect not to pray for me in my tribulations. In the Blood of Jesus Christ, and then in thy prayers do I place my eternal salvation. In thee, O Lady have I hoped; I shall not be confounded for ever. Obtain for me the grace ever to love my God in life and in eternity. I ask for nothing more.
It isn’t just homosexual Communists who infiltrated the Church but Masons who are as vicious an enemy of God and of the Catholic Church than Communists.
How many cardinals, bishops, priests and laymen are Masons? No one will ever know but since the goal of both Communists and Masons is the same, destroy even in the mind the Christian faith, in particular, Catholicism, and rewrite it out of history to make way for the new world order ruled by them, they think, but in the end, ruled by the Antichrist.
Then there are the Talmudic Jews who though outside the Church, are more beloved by the last three popes than faithful Catholics, and have had as much if not more influence, on the theology, philosophy, and actual practices laid down by the last three popes, than Communists or Masons.
There are five extremely vicious enemies of Christ all working together to try to destroy our Catholic faith and never before in history have they had such success in the world and in the Church in destroying man’s mind, heart and soul:
1. Communists, including cultural Marxists
3. Talmudic Jews
I heartily agree with your sentiments, however, veritas odium parit- truth begets hatred.
Today is *Day 5* for the novena to *Our Lady of Good Success*:
Let us beg Her unceasingly for Her intervention to crush the serpent’s head and to restore to us the beauty of Holy Mother Church.
God bless all of you and especially you, Louie!
Sweep, 2 Cents and Katherine,
Along with Bella Dodd’s book, have you also read the book “AA 1025: Memoirs of the Communist Infiltration into the Church”?
A terrible, truthful read!
The goal of Freemasonry IS communism.
All Catholics MUST wake up ! There is a goal here. Pope Francis has appeared to take the side of the clerical pederasts. Until the filth is purposely addressed and cleaned out , the institutional church should not be given a penny from any right thinking person who called themselves a Catholic. Right thinking clergy MUST speak out too for the sake of Christs little ones.
Truly stupid and disgusting….
Thank you, servant of Our Lady! What a refreshing reminder. I have been saying my novena to Our Lady of Good Success here in this vale of tears. She is our refuge. We must depend on Her. Our Lady of Good Success spoke directly of this time in which we have been living, so what better time to have recourse to Her with this novena? Thank you for mentioning that to us here, on Louie’s site. We must rely on Her with all our hearts. We have to constantly smash that into our tiny heads.
I just wanted to say thank you, Louie, for posting this particular post. It helped give some clarity to a situation which is developing in Canada about the Prime Minister and the CCCB.