On this, the 23rd anniversary of the passing of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, I offer the following:
Contrasting Virtues
March 25, 2014
97 Comments
On this, the 23rd anniversary of the passing of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, I offer the following:
Sting in the tail if there ever was one. Magnificent.
As clear as a glacial spring. Let the nervous revolutionaires drown in it. Great job, Louie.
You tread on dangerous ground, my friend …
Michael Voris says: “SSPX is not in communion with the Church”. For figure!
What, I would ask, is the meaning of “communion” – ‘yes sir Pope’, or acting in accordance with the “Word of God”?
What is the meaning of “Church” – the Pope or the “Word of God?
May the memory of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre be eternal.
That’s beautiful (at least the right side).
I can imagine the response to this from certain quarters: “Don’t give people too clear a picture – they might not be able to handle it!”
The pontificate of John Paul II was a disaster. Archbishop Marcel Levebvre was a hero. The contrast is immense. It is time that we all were more emphatic. Well done for this Louie.
Archbishop Lefebvre, selfless, sound and humble shepherd, passing on that which he had received intact, pray for us.
Our Lady Star of the Sea, intercede for us.
Thank you, Mr. V.
Merci Monseigneur.
Archbishop Lefebvre, pray for us. He died today in 1991, the Feast of the Annunciation.
Thanks for this Louie…it is quite clear.
In the light of all this it’s very hard to get enthusiastic about the upcoming canonisations. Its impossible to avoid the conclusion that they are more motivated by a desire to canonise Vatican II and thus quash any serious questioning of the causes of the catastrophe that has engulfed the Church. Hey! If every post-conciliar pope is a saint, well, what’s your problem? Even the eagerness to abandon of the normal processes for canonisation and the readiness to employ ‘dodgy’ miracles only serve to further undermine this sacred cult of the saints. But for me, the issue that will be of crucial significance will be the upcoming issue in October concerning a new “pastoral” approach concerning admission to the sacraments of the divorced and ‘remarried’. This has a real catastrophic potential. Rumour has it that some cardinals were very unhappy with Kasper’s ‘profound and deep’ approach so praised by Francis. Lets hope that this may be the beginning of a true Catholic resistance to this creeping apostasy.
Archbishop Lefebvre was one of the truly great Catholic heroes who fought tirelessly to preserve the TRUE Catholic Mass and all the glorious Traditions of the TRUE Catholic faith. He died on the Feast of the Annunciation. I am confident that he was warmly greeted by Our Lady who brought him to Her Son. Everyone who cherishes the Catholic faith should own the documentary of his life (www.sspx.org) Thank God for this holy priest!!
Both Pope John Paul II and Archbishop Lefebvre are Council Fathers, but which acted more like a father in protecting his children? Which can we call a “good shepherd”? Which servant of God made the best use of the talens that were entrusted to him? What are the fruits of their labor in the vineyard of the Lord? Which one faithfully submitted to Our Lady of Fatima no matter the consequences?
+ + +
Archbishop Lefebvre strongly condemned Pope John Paul II for his actions at Assisi; Pope John Paul II excommunicated Archbishop Lefebvre for consecrating bishops. (That excommunication has never been lifted even though Pope Benedict XVI had kind words to say about Archbishop Lefebvre.)
+ + +
The Society of St. Pius X is opening new churches, the “Conciliar Church” is closing churches.
……”If my work is of God, He will guard it and use it for the good of the Church. Our Lord has promised us, the gates of Hell shall not prevail against her.
This is why I persist, and if you wish to know the real reason for my persistence, it is this. At the hour of my death, when Our Lord asks me: “What have you done with your episcopate, what have you done with your episcopal and priestly grace?” I do not want to hear from His lips the terrible words “You have helped to destroy the Church along with the rest of them.”
……His Excellency Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre
Prayer For The Canonization Of His Grace Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre…..
O JESUS,
Eternal High Priest,
Who dist deign to raise
Thy faithful servant
Marcel Lefebvre
to the Episcopal dignity
and to grant him the grace
of being a Fearless Defender
of the Holy Mass,
of the Catholic Priesthood,
of Thy Holy Church,
and of the Holy See,
of being a courageous apostle
of Thy Kingdom on earth,
of being a devoted servant
of Thy Holy Mother,
and of being a shining example
of charity,
of humility and
of all virtues,
bestow upon us now,
by his merits,
the graces we beseech of Thee,
so that,
assured of his efficacious intercession
with Thee, we may one day see him
raised to the honours of our altars.
Amen.
The sins of Ecumenism—
“Ecumenism is not the Church’s mission. The Church is not ecumenical, she is missionary. The goal of the missionary Church is to convert. The goal of the ecumenical Church is to find what is true in errors and to remain at this level. It is to deny the truth of the Church. (Apr. 14, 1978)
—Archbishop Lefebvre
Thank you Louie V……….You have also been blessed with fearless faith, May God grant you the grace of perseverance.
We hear the very echo of the resolute words of St. Paul: “Work like a good soldier of Jesus Christ”…(2 Tim. 2:3).
A great service to the universal Church, Louie. Deo gratias!
Louie might want to think about renaming this blog
–
By the way, what’s the over/under for when Louie goes full on sede? I’m going to go with November 2014.
The Truth is the Truth. God bless, Louie. If people don’t want the truth God won’t coerce them into having it – this is what I don’t understand – if you don’t want the truth, you can walk away.
–
We have a holy obligation to judge and to judge by the standards established by the Tradition of the Church:
–
1co.6.1 Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to be judged before the unjust, and not before the saints? 1co.6.2 Know you not that the saints shall judge this world? And if the world shall be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? 1co.6.3 Know you not that we shall judge angels? how much more things of this world? 1co.6.4 If therefore you have judgments of things pertaining to this world, set them to judge, who are the most despised in the church. 1co.6.5 I speak to your shame. Is it so that there is not among you any one wise man, that is able to judge between his brethren?
‘know ye not that we shall judge angels, how much more the things of this world.’? Now who would honestly say the Bishop of Rome is not only in the world but of the world? At least at the time of writing?
@Ganganelli: I have three questions for you.
(1) Do you believe that it is possible for a Pope to defect from the faith?
(2) If you believe that it is possible for a Pope to defect from the faith, do you nonetheless also believe that the defection of a Pope will never become so public and notorious that the average faithful catholic would be able to determine by the exercise of right reason that the Pope has, in fact, defected? (3) If you answer “No” to question (2), I take that to mean that you believe that it would be possible for a Pope to defect in such a public and notorious manner that the average faithful catholic would be able to determine that the Pope, in fact, has defected. With that as background, do you believe that a catholic who through the exercise of right reason has determined that the Pope has defected from the faith is nonetheless obligated to believe what the defecting Pope teaches and to do what the defecting Pope commands?
Cyrprian,
–
I agree with St. Robert Bellarmine. The Holy Spirit will always prevent a pope from defecting from the faith. Not to mention that it is a FACT that in the 2000 year history of the Church a pope has never defected from the faith. Those are pretty good odds in my book.
I hear the jury is still out on Liberius. remember he excommunicated St Athanasius. in fact, if my facts are right, he was the first pope never to be canonized. after Liberius – quite a few failed to overcome the devil’s advocate. but now that there is no longer, thanks to JPII, a devil’s advocate, there’s really any sanctioned disputation/debate anymore, is there. doesn’t really lend to rigour of faith and reason.
@Ganganelli:
St. Robert Bellarmine stated:
“This opinion (that the Pope could not become an heretic) is probable and easily defended . . . Nonetheless, in view of the fact that this is not certain, and that the common opinion is the opposite one, it is useful to examine the solution to this question, within the hypothesis that the Pope can be an heretic.”
The commenters on this statement like you say that St. Robert established that it is impossible for a sitting Pope to lapse into heresy. His words, though, state that it is only probable that a Pope cannot lapse into heresy, and that the opposite proposition (that a Pope can lapse into heresy) cannot be disproven to a certainty. Perhaps that is why he devoted a section of his treatise to whether a Pope who lapsed into heresy could be deposed. This is what he concluded:
“The manifestly heretical pope ceases per se to be pope and head as he ceases per se to be a Christian and member of the Church, and therefore he can be judged and punished by the Church. This is the teaching of all the early Fathers.”
2. There has been an heretical pope. See Pope Honorious I.
3. Since St. Robert Bellarmine stated that it could not be established to a certainty that a Pope would not lapse into heresy, perhaps you can answer the two remaining questions I posited to you above.
4. I posit a new question to you: (4) Do you believe it is impossible for a heretic to be elected Pope?
Louie,
You should add this to the above graphic:
JP2: Died on April Fool’s day.
Archbishop: Died on the Feast of the Annunciation, When God took Man into His own most intimate Heaven.
@Cyprian – ‘scuse my interruption, but thanks for this point. Often heresy, material heresy is dependent upon some sort of ignorance to call it thus. How ignorant of Faith can we call a pope?
–
not to repeat myself but I will, re-vii – does this council constitute material or formal heresy? the Council in practical terms is now the excuse par ‘excellence’ to murder the Church of Christ. Our Lady of Fatima gave the date of 1960 for some pretty important requests to be fulfilled by the Pope and his bishops. instead they called THE COUNCIL! and then what did they do? in 1962 they signed the Mezt Pact (Vatican Moscow agreement) in which the Vatican promised satan’s states never to call communism an error (meanwhile Our Lady had specifically pointed to that very error as the source of the betrayal of the Church).-
–
then what happened? the man who had formerly gone behind Pius XII back and collaborated with the stalinists, was made Pope.-and then what happened? Protestants were invited in to change our Mass, to remove Our Lady, to banish the sacred tongue of the Church (could you imagine if a Jew declared Hebrew unnecessary?) but we accommodating catholics laid down like door mats for every enemy of Christ to walk over on the way to destroying the altars.-
–
now where are we? we have a pope who praises Marxists openly for all the world to see (except Mr voris), we have a pope who dissimulates and sidewinds his heretical horrors alongside the faith – and guess what? most of the Church aren’t on Christ’s side about this – they are gettin’ down with the world and its new coverman.
–
how can a Pope’s heresy be based in ignorance – an open question?
Cyprian,
–
St. Robert was of course well aware of Pope Honorious and never believed the protestant lies told about him or Pope Liberius. Isn’t it amazing that the protestant enemies of the faith could only come up with 2 cases in the entire history of the Church that they THOUGHT disproved the Church’s teaching on the papacy?
–
Furthermore, St. Robert would have laughed at the absurd proposition that we could have 56 years without a true pope as that would mean the entire hierarchy would be illegitimate and would make a mockery of the Church’s claim to visibility and indefectibility.
–
As the First Vatican council taught the De Fide doctrine:” Therefore, if anyone says that it is not by the institution of Christ the lord himself (that is to say, by divine law) that blessed Peter should have perpetual successors in the primacy over the whole Church; or that the Roman Pontiff is not the successor of blessed Peter in this primacy: let him be anathema.” PERPETUAL successors means you can’t have a 56 year vacancy. Period.
@catholic at Rome
interesting. I wonder if April Ist has the same connotations in his homeland?
On Wikipedia, his date of death was April 2nd. (April 1st would have been really ironic!)
@Lynne – in some parts of the planet it would have been April 2. God really is merciful.
1. Regarding Pope Honorius, the opinions diverge on whether he was merely negligent or heretical, but those claiming he was merely negligent like to de-emphasize that the Church herself continually associated the heresy involved with both Sergius and Honorius over many years, even in its official actions and anathematized him.
2. Since you apparently can communicate with St. Robert (I hope that you are not merely volunteering what you think he would believe) can you ask him his opinion on 1, the mass of Paul VI (including attendant architectural changes made to churches, e.g., a table replacing the altar; three chairs in the manner of a masonic temple replacing the tabernacle, etc.); 2. ecumenism as practiced by the conciliar popes; 3. the spectacle of majority catholic countries changing their constitutions in accordance with conciliar teachings on religious liberty; 4 girl altar boys . . .
3, Regarding VI’s decree, how do you feel about the proposal of Pope Francis to adopt a synodal model of church government after the manner of the eastern schismatics? Do you think his proposal comports with the portion of the VI decree you cited involving the primacy of the pope?
4. When he was Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Pope Francis participated in a Hanukkah service by wearing a kippah and lighting one of the candles of a menorah. Also when Archbishop, he recounts in a book that he attended a Rosh Hashanah service and prayed at that service. In addition, also when Archbishop, he participated in an Islamic burial rite for a deceased muslim. Further, as Pope, he organized several kosher meals for jewish friends and at one of them was said to have prayed along with the jews in attendance for unity. Do you believe these actions are those of a faithful catholic or those of an apostate?
Saluto………….Yes, April fools’ day is May 1st in Poland.
“St” JP II’s “The Great Religious Indifferentist”‘s death indeed seems to have taken place April 2nd local time:
http://www.traditioninaction.org/bev/065bev04-07-2005.htm
@Halina
–
God Bless –
–
ask and ye shall receive – in this even a little bit a knowlegde.
–
Edu – which local time – not that it matters for our neo-con and otherwise seekers – Christ knocks, the King of Time and Beyond Time.
@Edu – guess it’s its not Mr busdiness to know…one or two of April. All I remember about the physical close of Karol was an old man being pushed into public like a pawn on a giant chest board. it seems, however, that the ‘p’ in pawn stood for PC, rather than Pontiff.
Louie is going to feel pretty silly when the SSPX regularizes with Rome, and they will.. Yep, pretty silly.
Too bad IP addresses weren’t listed with each post. A certain someone would be out of business on this site.
Archbishop Lefebvre: Santo Subito!
Ora pro nobis.
The tide is turning: RC has the scoop.
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/03/very-relevant-exclusive-for-la-stampa.html.
————-
Rebellion among the general staff. Oh my…
—————-
Now if the bishop of Rome was from Venezuela….
Encore, encore…
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/03/an-achievement-and-mission-legacy-of.html
——-
“Archbishop Lefebvre, this great man of the universal Church.” Benedict XVI/CryptoLefebvrist
@heyho – S.Armaticus
–
missed yo input
–
re – ” John XXIII gave his opening speech at the Second Vatican Council, he said a pastoral council could be held as fortunately doctrine was accepted peacefully by everyone and there were no controversies; so a pastoral approach could be presented without fear of misunderstandings because doctrine remained very clear.”
–
izz I crazy oh izz “without fear of misdunderstasnding” a wee bit below the oxygen gasp?
And just in case anyone missed what those wild and wackey “nun” of the NuChurch are up to, here is the EP link:
http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2014/03/dissident-nuns-promoting-womens.html
——–
“Rediscovering and re-evaluating the role of women in the first centuries of Christianity.”
—-
Time travelers 😉
sadly time trippers didn’t miss the vows of the sacred-holy religious of the vows of the ‘well, but whoooooocares, so letsfollo Alyinsky rather than Christ”!
dear S. Armaticus,
Yay ! You’re back ! You missed the food fights !
Fr Malachi Martin allegedly said that when the crisis in the church is over, one of the first acts of the new pontiff will be to raise to the dignity of the altars Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop de Castro Meyer as saints. May that day come speedily soon!
–
I think the main reason why Archbishop Lefebvre rose up in defense of the faith while his episcopal colleagues were muted in silence by their cowardice (and I mean here the minority who deep down knew a revolution was taking place) has A LOT to do with his missionary work in Africa for so many years. It taught him love of souls, charity above all, and a profound detachment from the things of this world, especially detachment from feeling a need to find the praise and acceptance of this world. Archbishop Lefebvre never sought hierarchical promotions, but rose through the ranks entirely through his own merits and the good work he had achieved for love of souls through much sacrifice.
–
What missionary work did “St” JP II “The Great Religious Indifferentist” accomplish? Not much that I know of… From what I know, he was very interested in theater, hanging out in the wilderness with his parishioners, poetry (St John of the Cross) and the like… He didn’t have to pour sweat and blood like Arch Lefebvre had to win over souls for Christ and for the greater glory of God. And as pontiff, JP II’s theatrical side really showed through, with WYD extravaganzas, and plenty of trips throughout the world that did little to evangelize but a lot to promote his own cult of personality (even if he was not consciously aware this is exactly what was being accomplished) which later led so many gullible and duped souls to enthrone him with the utterly ludicrous title of “The Great”.
–
Archbishop Lefebvre santo súbito!!!
cont’d…
cont’d
–
As an aside and off topic here, this is the most likely category into which Mr Voris fits in opus dei:
–
Cooperators of Opus Dei PROVIDE FINANCIAL SUPPORT, but are not considered MEMBERS of Opus Dei.
http://www.odan.org/what_is_opus_dei.htm
This would fit in nicely with Mike’s claim that he is not a member of opus dei, whilst simultaneously heaping praises to the sky on the cult and saying that it is THE ANSWER, or at the least the best answer he knows of to the problems facing the Church. Go figure.
cont’d…
cont’d
See following video (4:45)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjIKZxfY6D4
Kudos to commentor Steve D for the link to ODAN.
–
For anyone interested in knowing what the heck this opus dei thing & Mike Voris is about, please see my earlier post in Louis’ previous article.
Louie: That is some box score. It appears the “runs” and “hits” are in the right hand column, and the “errors” are in the left.
As for the date of death of JP2, if you remember, it was announced world wide on April 1, then on April 2, but years later it came out that on April 2 some dozen or so episcopal nominations were made by those using the Papal signet ring in the presence of Ratzinger (see catholic-hierarchy.org for confirmations of this). Considering JP2’s medical condition there is reason to doubt that JP2 had the mental awareness to make episcopal appointments on April 2, even if he had lived. Announcing his death on April 1, I believe was honest, on April 2 a necessity for these other motives…we know that natural death can be adverted by a variety of interventions if the family wants the person kept alive at all costs.
And then there was his funeral, when the Holy Ghost blew through the gospel book laid on his coffin, effectively closing it.
As for the Santo Subito demonstrations, I have it on the personal testimony of a Focolari Member, that this was staged months in advance: they even went to the lenght to have the Santo Subito banners printed months in advance. The reason was that, since their communistic/pacificst movement was approved by JP2, by proclaiming and pushing his canonization, they were actually promoting themselves. Those crows which swelled into Rome were likewise members of this movement and others who came for similar purposes. “Orchestrated” would be to put it mildly…And then there is his life long theatre friend from Wisconsin, who said that Wotyla always wanted a stage, and acted accordingly…and then the butler of Benedict, who said that JP2 traveled to solicit money from bishops to pay Vatican debts, not to see the flock.
Saints never had such motivations…the canonization will be within the power of the Roman Pontif considered as a legal act, but a mortal sin of blasphemy considered as a moral act. I believe that Bergoglio will merit to be punished by God by a tragic death on account of this sacrilege of his sacred duties…because you don’t make a mockery of God’s Houshold of Heaven, without a divine retribution as punishment
@john of altar – what’s the run-n-hits mean re opus dei – in or out; do what a very specific someone, convinces one is authorty, an ‘bob’s ya bleedin’ Auntie.
@Catholic @ Rome
–
Yes, the “canonization” will truly be an abominable sacrilage… I hope as many catholics as posible wake up to this fact before the blasphemous event takes place…
–
We need to seriously strengthen our faith before the sacrilege takes place, as I have the impression that this is an event that could very well shake the faith of a good number of trads. I notice some poor souls are becoming so sick of the idiocy spewing out of the Vatican that they are being tempted to apostatize and join one of the “orthodox” churches. What an irony – to jump ship from the heresy of conciliarism, only to jump into a religion with even more heresies. These poor souls do not even realize that these heretics were also happily present during the Assisi apostatical gatherings!!
–
So yes, dear fellow catholics: The “canonizations” WILL take place. Do not hold your breath expecting a bolt of lighting to hit Francis during the sacrilegous event putting a stop to the madness (as much as I would like that). Instead, I would suggest preparing for the worst and arming yourselves with the arms of faith and prayer, under the protection of the sweet mantle of Our Most Blessed Mother.
–
“Be not deceived, God is not mocked. For what things a man shall sow, those also shall he reap. For he that soweth in his flesh, of the flesh also shall reap corruption. But he that soweth in the spirit, of the spirit shall reap life everlasting.”
~ Galatians 6:7-8
–
“Put you on the armour of God, that you may be able to stand against the deceits of the devil. For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and power, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places. Therefore take unto you the armour of God, that you may be able to resist in the evil day, and to stand in all things perfect. Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of justice,”
~ Ephesians 6:11-14
@Edu – if Archbishop Lefebvre’s ‘raising to the altars is foretold, Veni, Veni, Veni!
–
put it this way, if St. Marcel Lefebvre was raised to the altars, how clear and rock solid would be our interecession!
–
if jpll was so raised; how fractured, obscure and murky would be the intercession upon which one felt obliged?
….without doubt the world for JPII was his stage, and he was the main actor……..let those who have eyes SEE!
John Paul II has been exposed to the errors of Husserl, Kierkegaard, Hans Urs von Balthasar, Scheler, Rudolf Steiner, and indeed, Pope Paul VI himself. With these teachers, how could the formation of Karol Wojtyła be flawless?
Pope Pius XI has the answer for us: “Ignorant philosophers can never become good theologians.”
In Poland he has always supported the intellectual Catholics of the liberal wing of ZNAK (the sign) while in Cracow he introduced a ‘permanent synod’ very much open to the laity (yes, we are seeing and tasting their bitter fruits). In a clerical country like Poland, instituting this type of dialogue between priests and laity shows a bold attitude.
In this sense Karold Wojtyła was more progressive than his compatriot, Cardinal Wyszynski. He has introduced the teaching methods of his diocesan seminary to make them conform more to the contemporary world…….(crystal clear in Poland…..and in the Universal Church).
In The Times on October 17 we read:
“The Cardinals have perhaps made a wise choice, but they also take the risk of giving free rein to the forces of ‘humanism in politics and religion,’ which will not be able to control.”………(who can deny, that this was almost prophetic, coming from the mouth of secular newspaper)…..Ave Maria!
Alain Woodrow in his article with astonishing precision says: “Monsignor Karol Wojtyła fulfills many of the conditions posed by the Cardinals. He is conciliar and pastoral……John Paul II is above all an intellectual. Somewhat doctrinaire, he uses the deductive rather than the inductive method to impart principles, not realities. His formation is less Thomist than existentialist or phenomenologic-perhaps because of the influence of Scheler……and his intellectual curiosity is unlimited…..he has defended Vatican Council II’s document of religious Liberty and opposes those who wished to publish a sever condemnation of atheism (communism, protestantism, judaism, freemasonry,…….paganism).
How far off was this false and evil spirit to compare with the ‘true crusading spirit’ for the holy Faith?
What is Catholic heroism, what is a sound shepherd? Answer:
http://www.cfnews.org/page88/files/1ccf493281816b2f1d9e57daa9a3b58e-206.html
Saluto:
I have heard talk about the Metz Pack and other really unsavory things about Montini for years. There is mention of assassinations of bishops consecrated in pectore behind the iron curtain with the strong suspicion or knowledge that Montini had disclosed their identities to the KGB. There are also reports that Montini’s homosexuality subjected him to black mail.
Is there any scholarly and accepted history of these things?
Thanks.
Publius
Halina,
Perhaps you might be able to answer a question for me regarding Karol Wojtyla’s youth. Years ago, I read that in when in his youth, before he considered attending seminary, Karol Wojtyla was part of a theatre group and he fell in with some Anthroposophists in the group. Can you confirm that this is in fact true at all? Perhaps there isn’t really a way to know for sure, but, if true, then it shows that he had even in his youth a proclivity for “alternative” views of Catholicism. It’s not unusual for Catholics to fall into error in their youth, but they don’t usually go on to become popes.
Can someone be canonized without heroic virtue? It would seem so?
Cyprian,
–
The problem with trads is that they have such a superficial knowledge of what the Popes actually taught in past centuries.
–
Just to pick one example:
–
According to Fr. Hunwicke, The famous “Syllabus of Errors” Blessed Pope Pius IX BOASTED to Mgr Dupanloup that Rome contained both a synagogue and protestant temple. Maybe he wasn’t a Pope either?
Rich,
–
I have only posted here under the name Ganganelli and Louie could verify that for you. I know it’s impossible for you to believe there are actually Catholics who love the Holy Father and are disgusted by anti-papal protestantism masquerading as “traditionalism” but there are many more of us than there are of you. Heck, if you took all the traditionalists in the world and put them in their own church it would be smaller than the Anglicans. LOL.
We must pray to the great Archbishop Lefebvre during this time of confusion.
It just occurred to me how close we are to this canonization. It is possible it’s the will of God that it happens? Crazy question, but it is God’s Church, after all. If he doesn’t want it to happen, then he’s going to stop it. Right?
..and after all Ganganelli, that’s how we know were the Truth lies…where the most people are; it’s a popularity contest! Isn’t that what Christ said?…oh, um, wait a minute….
Susan,
–
And neither does the littleness of the sects separated from the Holy Father indicate indicate where the Truth lies. How many thousands of little sects believe themselves to be the “remnant”. Such spiritual pride!
–
No, to find out where the truth lies all one has to do is follow the teaching of the infallible First Vatican Council which states:
–
“Wherefore we teach and declare that, by divine ordinance, the Roman Church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other Church, and that this jurisdictional power of the Roman Pontiff is both episcopal and immediate. Both clergy and faithful, of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world.”
TSS,
–
“Can someone be canonized without heroic virtue”?
–
Let me shout this from the rooftops:
–
NO! NO! NO!
–
HEROIC VIRTUE AND HOLINESS ARE BOTH REQUIRED FOR A CANDIDATE TO BE A SAINT!!!
–
There is this confusión going around the blogosphere among a lot of trads that “St” JP II “The Great Religious Indifferentist” is a saint merely because he is now in heaven. This is not the Catholic requirement for sainthood!!
–
Let me repeat this in case someone missed it:
–
YOU CANNOT BE A SAINT UNLESS YOU HAVE A HEROIC LEVEL OF VIRTUE!!!
–
The new farsical canonization process set up by JP II has virtually nothing to do with holiness! Due to the removal of the devil’s advocate, someone can be proclaimed “blessed” without the VICEPOSTULATOR of the cause knowing the DEFECTS of the CANDIDATE!! Sorry to bring this up again, but I have been doing some research about this lately, and the candidate in question was Msgr Escriva de Balaguer (founder of opus dei). If you don’t believe me, take a look at this video (in Spanish, 24:20) the exact quote from the vice-postulator is, “I do not know the defects of Msgr Escriva”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjyOLeuEcjw
The most that the priest could say is that “the only thing I know is that Msgr Escriva FELT profoundly flawed!” I guess that’s an excellent way to determine the holiness of a person!
–
Again, I am just using this as an example of the bogus canonization process set up by JP II “The Great” hopefully to illuminate to people how on earth JP II has gone through the whole canonization process with such dizziyng speed without any impediments.
@Ganganelli:
The prior teaching on the wrongfulness of catholics in joining in the worship services of non-catholics in general and jews in particular can be summarized in a few citations:
Regarding jewish rites, Pope Eugene IV decreed in Cantate Domino the following:
“It (the church) firmly believes, professes, and teaches that the matter pertaining to the law of the Old Testament, of the Mosaic law, which are divided into ceremonies, sacred rites, sacrifices, and sacraments, because they were established to signify something in the future, although they were suited to the divine worship at that time, after our Lord’s coming had been signified by them, ceased, and the sacraments of the New Testament began; and that whoever, even after the passion, placed hope in these matters of the law and submitted himself to them as necessary for salvation, as if faith in Christ could not save without them, sinned mortally. Yet it does not deny that after the passion of Christ up to the promulgation of the Gospel they could have been observed until they were believed to be in no way necessary for salvation; but after the promulgation of the Gospel it asserts that they cannot be observed without the loss of eternal salvation. All, therefore, who after that time observe circumcision and the Sabbath and the other requirements of the law, it declares alien to the Christian faith and not in the least fit to participate in eternal salvation, unless someday they recover from these errors. ”
A Church doctor (St. Alphonsus Liguori) on joining in the rites of non-catholics: “It is not permitted to be present at the sacred rites of infidels and heretics in such a way that you would be judged to be in communion with them.”
St Pius XI in Mortalium Animos: “[the] Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics.”
This following article discusses a related issue – that of praying with non-catholics who claim to profess belief in Christ:
http://www.christendom-awake.org/pages/thomas-crean/praying-with-non-catholics.htm
Note that the good father concludes that VII for the most part does not contradict the prior teaching of the church i.e., it is not permissible for a catholic to actively participate in the rites of non-catholics who claim to profess a belief in Christ. Further note that the basis for allowing some praying together with non-catholics who claim to profess a belief in Christ is that the Catholic is doing so in the hope of a restoration of unity. It is not seen how any of this analysis applies to jewish worship since the jews profess no belief in Christ whatsoever. The only unity that can be had with jews in the context of the religious sphere is if they convert to belief in Christ.
In light of the foregoing teachings I repeat my question – are the actions of Pope Francis in actively participating in jewish and muslim rites those of a faithful catholic or those of an apostate?
brethren,
to consider,— and dear Halina,
this is for you–God love you.
http://culbreath.wordpress.com/2014/03/26/the-annunciation-and-archbishop-marcel-lefebvre/
….let all who have eyes SEE and READ…..this Pamphlet
Catholic ‘Exclusiveness’ Explained
Knights of Columbus Pamphlet (1950).
“Catholics tell us to investigate the Catholic religion,” some of our friends will complain, “and they invite us to come to church with them. Yet Catholics are not allowed to investigate Protestantism or to attend Protestant services. This is one-sided. Is the Catholic Church afraid that Catholics might lose their faith if they found out about Protestantism?”
This complain is familiar and — according to Protestant principles—-it is quite logical. Catholics, however, act not according to Protestant principles but according to Catholic ones. And it is Catholic principles that rule out religious instruction from Protestantism and participation in Protestant worship.
When we invite Protestants to investigate the Catholic Church, it is only because of what these Protestants themselves believe about their religious duties……
Protestants…….obviously have as their idea of religion that it is a ‘search for truth’. If the foundations of religion are constantly to be re-examined, if it is considered that truth is not yet possessed in a definitive form, then they may certainly be invited to look into what the Catholic Church teaches. It is only logical that in the search for truth the teaching of Catholicism should not be ignored.
But this is not the Catholic position on religion. In Catholic belief, the Catholic religion is the truth. The reasonable bases on which the Catholic Faith rests can be shown to the satisfaction of any inquiring person. We do not conceive of religion as a searching for, but as a’ possession of the truth.’ We are NOT seeking truth——we have it. Hence we do not investigate what other religions have to offer. (Amen).
Some may be tempted to dismiss this as prejudice and narrow-mindedness. But we repeat, the reasons for what we say of the Church can be ‘shown’. A non-Catholic may reply that these reasons are not sufficient to convince him. That is not the point; for us they are sufficient……
Protestants and Catholics mean vastly different things when they speak of ‘faith’ and of ‘losing faith.’ They consequently place vastly different values on its possession and loss. Loss of faith to some Protestants is not of major consequence. If it does not matter greatly what a man believes, then it does not matter much more whether he believes at all. Loss of faith can be just as much ‘the search for truth’ as finding faith.
But faith to the Catholic means the acceptance of truths, on God’s word, which we must believe if we shall save our souls. This acceptance is a reasonable act. But it is precisely because not every person is capable of demonstrating these reasons that the Church safeguards faith in many ways which seem repressive to the Protestant.
A skilled debater might present to an ‘unlearned Catholic’ arguments that he could not meet, arguments that might shake his faith. This does not mean that the arguments cannot be answered—they can. But that will do no good for the person in question. Meanwhile, faith is all important, and the Church cannot stand idly by and see faith destroyed in an individual simply because he is a poor hand in an argument. A Catholic who truly believes in the Church will, therefore, heed her command to stay away from no-Catholic religions. (Amen).
In this sense, then, the Catholic Church is afraid that Catholics—-some of them—might lose their faith (masses of such left the Holy Church). Her fear arises merely from her concern as to what might be the eternal consequences of such a loss………..
But there is an even more important reason for Catholics to avoid non-Catholic religious services…………the reason is, rather, that worship is an act of religion. Worship is an expression of the faith that prompts it. Toa greater or less degree, the worship of any religion is a reflection of the principles according to which that religion exists. Episcopalians worship in one way—according to the creeds and the prayer book of the Episcopalian Church. Methodists worship in their way, Quakers in theirs, Unitarians in a third way…………to name the few………….And Catholics worship according to the faith of the Catholic Church.
Catholics believe in one true Church. They believe that that one Church was set up for a great purpose—- to guide mankind through its teaching authority and to safeguard Christ’s revelation in its purity, to provide men with the Sacraments, the mean sof heavenly grace, and to offer due worship to GOD. We believe, therefore, that the worship of the Catholic Church is what God has commanded of us and that God will be displeased IF we attempt to offer Him any other form of worship……….AMEN!
Do not misunderstand us. We do not say that God refuses to hear any sincere prayer. We do not say that persons of other faiths displease God when they worship Him according ‘to their conscience.’ We know that many good people are outside the Catholic Church and that they are perfectly sincere in their own beliefs. Their worship is likewise sincere. But their worship would not be sincere if offered by us. For we do not believe in it if we are consistent Catholics.
We all worship God. But we worship Him in many ways. And the Catholic who believes in the Catholic Church maintains that he worships God in God’s way. If God has revealed a true Church to offer Him true worship, then it is base ingratitude for a member of this Church to attempt worship in any other way…………AMEN!
Why waste your words trying to convince Ganganelli? He’s a total worshipper of the Pope, right or wrong. His use of logic is so bad: equating Pope Pius IX’s words about having a synagogue in Rome (assuming it’s true, which I doubt) with worshiping in common with non-Catholics, particularly Jews, animists or allowing Buddhists to desecrate churches with their false worship of Buddha and other idols in the name of praying for peace!
Denise……..I cannot confim, but I can only say that, I heard such and much more. It would take many books to write, but I do not want to go there, it’s too much troublesome. God has already judged him. Miserere!
One thing I can only say, Karol Wojtyła had peculiar interest for many novelties, either out of false compassion for others, or because he was a very naive man, who allowed his young brain and his heart to be molded according to the enemy’s whims.
We ought to pray for his soul!
I have no doubt in my heart that someday, perhaps far in the future after I’m long gone, +Lefebvre will be canonized.
Cyprian,
–
You quote papal documents like a protestant quotes the bible. Did you not know that Pope SAINT Pius X permitted Communicatio in Sacris with the Russian Orthodox?
–
http://papastronsay.blogspot.com/2010/09/communicatio-in-sacris-ii-tollerari.html
–
So to answer your question, I believe the actions of Pope Francis are those of a faithful Catholic.
–
Now, do you believe the absurd notion that we haven’t had a Pope for almost 56 years?
@Publius
–
here’s a couple of interesting links:
–
http://www.fatimacrusader.com/cr16/cr16pg05.asp
http://www.topusnewstoday.com/interview-with-alice-von-hildebrand-should-pope-paul-vi-be-canonized.html
p.s. there’s also a book:
–
“Moscow and the Vatican”. by Alexis Ulysses. Floridi S.J.
–
but I think its out of print.
actually, there’s a good store of used copies on Amazon:
–
http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/0882336479/ref=sr_1_1_up_1_main_olp?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1395885505&sr=1-1&condition=used
@Ganganelli: You conclude from the apparent fact that some pre-VII popes have allowed communicatio in sacris with eastern schismatics – who profess belief in Christ and have valid sacraments and orders – that it is ok to extrapolate from this factual circumstance and to conclude in the absence of any papal decree that it is also permissible to participate in the rites of jews and muslims who deny the divinity of Christ? That is what Pope Francis did after all starting when he was archbishop. You persist in this belief even though a prior Pope has condemned participation in jewish rites after the proclamation of the gospel as being mortally sinful and a damnable offense if not repented of? I don’t see any reason in your position.
Regarding the supposedly daunting and unprecedented fact that there has been according to some no valid Pope for 56 years, you know that the great western schism lasted for forty years, and the Arian heresy for much longer than that? That it has been estimated that at the height of the Arian heresy the vast majority of the bishops were Arian heretics? In view of these historical precedents, I am reluctant to eliminate anything as impossible, I nonetheless believe in the promise of Our Lord that the gates oh Hell will not prevail against his church.
See, here’s the thing Cyprian. YOU don’t get to decide that what Saint Pius X did with eastern schismatics/heretics was OK but what soon to be Saint John Paul II did with western schismatics/heretics/jews/mormons/etc. is not. It’s not YOUR decision. Again I refer to you the INFALLIBLE teaching of the First Vatican Council:
–
“Wherefore we teach and declare that, by divine ordinance, the Roman Church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other Church, and that this jurisdictional power of the Roman Pontiff is both episcopal and immediate. Both clergy and faithful, of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world.”
Gangi said…”And neither does the littleness of the sects separated from the Holy Father indicate indicate where the Truth lies. How many thousands of little sects believe themselves to be the “remnant”. Such spiritual pride!”
weak return. I thought you might have a little better in you. Tell me, were you stomping your feet and holding your breath while your little troll fingers furiously blasted the keyboard?
You have no interest in the good of the Church and the welfare of her people…only interested in stirring up quarrels and unsettling souls. You take pride and find joy in being merely an irritant…the embodiment of the type St. Paul warned about repeatedly; whipping up dissension and desiring only to argue. It’s a shame you’ve apparently lost any sense of Catholicism, using one part of Scripture to ‘disprove’ 4 others, and particularly losing all sense of brotherly Charity.
I think calling a troll a troll is warranted here…you shouldn’t be encouraged by the good people; for the sake of your own soul. Ignore his bait folks…it would be the better part of true Charity.
Susan,
–
I’m here to explain the teachings of the Holy Catholic Church especially the supremacy of the papacy which is attacked by so many protestants and pseudo protestant “traditionalists”. I understand that in doing so I will inevitably prick the conscience of those who insult Our Holy Father the Pope and will therefore invite the attacks of those like yourself. God will be my judge.
@Susan – gangli likes to stir the pot (although he/she obviously believes he/she is trying to poke at people’s conscience). What gangli seems incapable of acknowledging is that genuine supporters of this blog and Louie’s apostolate are here because they have well formed Catholic Consciences that have, in most cases, long ago conformed to the True Magisterium.
–
steve d’s comment on Louie’s latest post pretty much sums it up:
“he Catholic media, apologetics mafia, and many bloggers who should know better, who don’t want to admit the plain truth of what he’s [Bergoglio] really saying. It’s not a matter of speech, it’s a matter of willfully refusing to understand what is actually being said.”
and what is actually being said is antichrist stuff.
Edu,
This means the modern canonization process is no longer valid or no longer infallible?
Or does it give us a a new canonization status – meaning it can only tell us a person is in heaven, not that they are truly a Saint in the traditional sense?
TSS,
–
St Thomas Aquinas said that against a fact there is no argument.
And these are the facts: that since the inception of JP II’s bogus canonization process, people have been “raised” to the altars that have clearly not merited such a dignity. In other words, people have been declared “saints” that are not “saints” as commonly understood by the church for 2000 years i.e. souls that have reached heroic levels of virtue and holiness.
–
Because it seems to me that people are often forgetting that a canonization is supposed to present to us someone who is to be held as a MODEL and EXAMPLE. Now, if Francis “canonizes” someone who is CLEARLY NOT to be held as a model, and who inflicted incalculable damage to the Church we have a serious problem. It is up to each person to reach an appropriate conclusión based on this fact. And this is where a lot of trads claiming that the “canonization” of JP II “The Great” is nothing to worry about get it wrong, because they will claim that the canonization is only telling us that he is heaven and nothing more, but they are FORGETTING that SIMULTANEOUSLY the Church is telling us that this is a candidate WORTHY of imitation. In other words, Catholics can start kissing Korans, holding apostatical inter-religious meetings in the mold of the Assisi gatherings, start praising Luther and invoking the intercession of the saints for the protection of false religions, look the other way when crimes against children are being committedd and basically not perform diligently (to put it mildly) your duties in your state of life WITHOUT ANY QUALMS OF CONSCIENCE, and that all of these actions are indeed worthy of emulation.
–
So, I’m pretty much convinced myself what the logical conclusion is of this sacrilegous “canonization” but as I said it is up to each individual conscience to make a judgment since currently we have no church authority willing to speak these truths.
“He that is not with Me is against Me,” the words of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
Christianity does not tolerate indifference…..Period.
He who is not firmly on Christ’s side, working with Him for the extension of HIS KINGDOM, by this very fact is opposed to Him and to what is good for the faithful. He is an enemy of Christ, the Holy Church and a partisan of evil. Amen!
You do all realize that this blog’s sympathy for Archbishop Lefebvre’s position is merely transitory? That Louie is probably only passing through SSPX-friendly on his way to sedevacantism?
***
Canonizations are an infallible act of the Church. The canonization of Pope John Paul II will cause lukewarm trads to choose either hot or cold. Barring a sudden change of heart, Louie likely has already rejected John Paul II’s canonization. Sedevacantism will follow naturally. And many here will follow Louie naturally to sedevacantism.
***
But to set the record strait, neither Louie nor any other commentator on this thread grasps the true spiritual genius of Archbishop Lefebvre. That is, complaining about the Novus Ordo, the Council and the post-conciliar hierarchy was only a small part of his work. For the most part, the Archbishop promoted Tradition, doing so in a positive light that enflamed the imagination of his listeners.
***
The Archbishop’s way was in contrast to this blog, where there is no passion for Catholic Tradition or the things of Christ. Merely bitter zeal. To quote Pope St. Pius X in combatting the Janenists: “It is vain to hope to attract souls to God by a bitter zeal.” (E Supremi, par 13)
***
If, Louie, you truly desire to be a Catholic faithful to the Tradition preserved and passed on by Pope St Pius X, I strongly suggest you read–and more importantly, practice!–the teachings of his encyclical. Here is a link to the Holy See’s English translation:
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_x/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-x_enc_04101903_e-supremi_en.html
Torque,
I’m sorry that you think that this blog is promoting bitter zeal. You’re right that ABL did not spend a lot of time criticizing the Pope. But then, he had a job to do, and did it well – training up good men in tradition to become priests who could offer the sacraments according to tradition. His job was different from that of a lay person who has a website devoted to pointing out the errors of the hierarchy and pope. ABL did of course criticize the pope, but not frequently.
I think it’s possible that the upcoming canonization is not infallible due to the change in the process of beatification and canonization – but – like so many issues having to do with the Church since the Council, we don’t really know for sure. It’s not a black-and-white situation. I would hope that Louie won’t go down the path of SVism, and I haven’t seen any indication thus far that this will happen. I think you’re right to be concerned that lukewarm trads will become SV’s. I have that concern as well. The antidote, I think, is to have a strong prayer life and not give in to despair over this situation.
@TT: What is your position on Pope Francis joining in and practicing the rites of the jews? One hundred years ago he would have been removed from office for such an offense. If he did not repent of the offense he would have been defrocked. His acts are those of an apostate. He violated divine law by his actions. Since he is an apostate all his actions are invalid, including the upcoming canonizations. The Almighty made this easy – after all the photograph of Pope Francis lighting the menorah candle was widely circulated upon his election. What else do Catholics need to see? If a jew saw a fellow jew participating in any of the public actions of catholicism, he would certainly conclude that the participating jew had defected. Why do catholics not conclude the same thing about Francis?
Ganganelli
1-The story about Pope Pius IX and the synagogue and protestant temple sounds questionable, but even if it is true, this does not, in and of itself, contradict any of the official teaching of Pope Pius IX. Please show me how.
2-First Vatican’s teaching on the pope would seem to be based on the pope upholding Holy Tradition, not deliberately choosing to depart from it.
3-Regarding Pius X and the Orthodox, I’d appreciate it if you can provide me with the full complete comprehensive details as to the particulars of the situation that was brought to the pope, as well as what the pope comprehensively said with regard to his directive and the various contexts as to when it would or would not apply.
4-What exactly constitutes separating from the See of Peter? When Fr. Chad Ripperger, a fully recognized and regularized traditional priest who was with FSSP says in open sermon that Pope Benedict XVI’s remarks about separation of church and state don’t appear to be compatible with tradition, then we should set such ideas aside, and follow the remote rule of tradition, which always should take precedencen over the proximate rule of tradition, is he separating himself? If so why? If not, I would think any number of us here are not separating ourselves either.
JPII was a terrible administrator and seemingly had a childish, New-Age take on ecumenism, it’s true. But his Theology of the Body may prove to be the ultimate ammo against homo marriage–not in our time, but for future generations. He had personal holiness as well and if made a saint I will accept. I imagine Marcel’s time will come as well.
Redfeather, is it really enough for a pope to exhibit personal holiness in order to be canonized? That the was weak in passing on the deposit of faith, in itself, should prevent his canonization. Pope St Pius the X not only had great personal holiness, but he passed on the Deposit of Faith unadulterated, and he understood true charity in that he had a good Franciscan sense about the importance of caring about people’s personal needs, but also he cared very much about the salvation of souls.
Mundabor, on his excellent blog, wrote a good article which is titled, “Better Ten Alexanders Than One Francis.” Though the article is about Pope Francis, rather than Pope John Paul ll, it highlights that a Pope’s personal holiness isn’t necessarily needed in order to pass on the Faith. Pope Alexander Vl was a Borgia Pope, and a terrible sinner, but he didn’t mess with the doctrines of the Church. If given a choice between the two evils, I’d rather see a Pope who is a sinner, but doesn’t alter the Faith, because a job of a Pope is to pass on the Faith of his predecessors; it is not his job to change Church teaching.
Gangi, You aren’t interested in the Truth
–
you said….”I’m here to explain the teachings of the Holy Catholic Church especially the supremacy of the papacy…”
–
To use Matt 16:18-20 to negate or obliterate Mark 10:10-12, Matt 19;19, AND Luke 16:18…not to mention 2000 years of Tradition, the Deposit of Faith, and Papal and Council statements, just because the current man sitting on the throne of Peter along with his hand-picked favorite theologians and capos (Kasper, Marx, et. al.) say it’s ok is insane. Christ cannot be bound against Himself. “Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will not pass away.”
–
To ignore that this year past has been a WILD shift from the last 2000 years of Tradition is simply dangerous for your soul. And your ranting and tilting at windmills for the simple thrill of riling and unsettling good souls is a feint of the enemy. You might want to seriously examine your motives in this holy time of Lent. God will indeed be your judge.
Hard to argue with this..Oh Lord, what has happened to your Church??
Susan,
I totally agree. Ganganelli is knowingly lying about a good many things. He participates here because the Modernists and Freemasons in the cloth fear sites which expose the truth.
By citing the non infallible declarations of some men against the infallible declarations of Roman Pontiffs, he uses the authority of the flesh against the authority of Christ; he has to ignore the fact that not everything the Pope says is protected by the grace of infalliblity, so as to push his argument that a “good Catholic has to accept Conciliar novelties”. His very goal in arguing thus requires deciet, subterfuge and inconsistencies. Ask him a hard question, and he will always ignore it. He is the perfect imitator of the protestants you find on the streets of Rome.