In a tribute to Pope Francis’ “brother bishop” Tony Palmer that ran in the Boston Globe yesterday, it is reported that Cardinal Bergoglio advised him against conversion to the Catholic faith.
Palmer and Bergoglio had intense discussions about Christian separation, using the analogy of apartheid in South Africa. They found common ground in believing that institutional separation breeds fear and misunderstanding. Bergoglio, whom Palmer called “Father Mario,” acted as a spiritual father to the Protestant cleric, calming him (“he wanted to make me a reformer, not a rebel,” Palmer told me) and encouraging him in his mission to Christian unity.
At one point, when Palmer was tired of living on the frontier and wanted to become Catholic, Bergoglio advised him against conversion for the sake of the mission.
“We need to have bridge-builders”, the cardinal told him.
Sounds about right based on all that we know of the man. Of course, no one other than Pope Francis himself can verify whether or not this is true.
As I write, Pope Francis is about one hour away from doing an unscripted live radio interview with an outlet in Argentina. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the pope were asked about this report?
His answer, no matter what it is, would only serve to instruct.
Which leads me to wonder… If Pope Francis were to confirm the accuracy of this account (something that would hardly surprise me), how would the papal defenders react to what amounts to a pope who rejects the mission of the Catholic Church?
I don’t expect the question to be raised, but given the Holy Father’s love for media interviews, the opportunity will arise, and for the love of God someone in the media with access to the pope needs to ask it.
I would like to ask Bergoglio if he thinks that Catholicism is objectively, demonstrably true. That is, does he think that it can be made the object of proof in accordance with standard accepted criteria such that a non-believer may be intellectually convinced of its claims?
This is but another confirmation of what I and several other contributors here have come to suspect had transpired.
Diabolical. The duty of the Church is to save souls by teaching them the True Faith and so persuading them to convert to it. The only “bridge” to others is the truth, Our Lord Jesus Christ, and His Commandments as given to His Church. One cannot convert others by not converting oneself – that is a lie.
Oh what a horrid end, to stand before the vicar of Christ and be told not to convert, and, then, to die in a motorcycle accident some weeks afterward!
Clearly, the Lord’s anger burns against leaders of false religions, who seek excuses not to convert….and find them from false pastors…
Rorate Caeli: She wanted to convert. She listened to Cardinal Ratzinger and died a Lutheran. http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/02/she-wanted-to-convert-but-she-listened.html
What does it mean to die a Lutheran? To me that means believing the heresies of Luther. Did she? Or did she die a baptized Catholic believing the truths of the Catholic faith.
You guys can’t have it both ways. You can’t say the SSPX is “in” the Church with an “irregular” situation while at the same time claiming this woman died a Lutheran. If you are baptized and believe all that the Catholic Church teaches, you are, in fact, a Catholic.
A MESSAGE FOR ALL HOLY BLOGGERS FROM POPE FRANCIS
“I have a dogmatic certainty: God is in every person’s life. God is in everyone’s life. Even if the life of a person has been a disaster, even if it is destroyed by vices, drugs or anything else—God is in this person’s life. You can, you must try to seek God in every human life. Although the life of a person is a land full of thorns and weeds, there is always a space in which the good seed can grow. You have to trust God.”
Pope Francis
(Not for the easily frightened).
Pope Francis’ “holy unity in unholy diversity” got us looking at united religions and- the Maitreya–apparently a 2nd coming expectation among many religions appears to be a commonly belief. Unless this is a hoax, one group thinks Pope Francis is a prime candidate for conversion. (salvemur are you behind this?) 🙂 http://www.christmaitreya.org/
___
According to the above group’s assessment:
“Christianity – Christians will have great difficulty in accepting Maitreya. They are all waiting for the return of Jesus, not some other Son-of-God.
However, I have high hopes for the new Pope – he is a very open-minded as well as genuinely spiritual. I am sure he will recognize Maitreya for what he is – a new Avatar for the Age of Aquarius. (The previous Pope, the one who resigned, would have been a disaster. He would have refused to recognize the Christ. In fact, Ratzinger had been made aware of this story many years ago while he was a Cardinal and just ignored it.)
— However, even if the current Pope acknowledges the authenticity of Maitreya as an Avatar sent by God, many of his bishops will refuse to go along, since it is a Catholic dogma that Jesus is the one and only begotten Son of God. There will be a great schism in the Catholic Church – it will in fact split into two – those who accept Maitreya as the Christ and those who continue to wait for the ‘real’ Christ.”
____
“Islam – expect the Imam Mahdi to be an Arab and descendant of Muhammad. The real problem will be that Maitreya will not promote or favor Islam over other religions. In fact HE MAY he may not even talk very much about religions or may SUGGEST THAT EVERYONE JUST FOLLOW THE ONE THEY WERE BORN WITH” ( OUR EMPHASIS ADDED)
(This might be funny if it weren’t so horribly real at the Vatican)
_____
“Atheists/Skeptics -They will not give up their beliefs (or non-belief) easily. They will claim that it is all a trick and a lie. They will say that the voice of Maitreya they heard in their heads was merely some kind of illusion or even some high frequency electronic signal. They will claim that all believers who heard it were subject to mass hysteria and all the miraculous healings taking place are just a placebo effect. Some of them may literally go crazy because of this severe blow to their belief system.”
____
If this (prophetic hearing a voice thing) is some hoax, we apologize, but these technologies already do exist, and the European Union and the U.S. are both funding Human Brain Projects. https://www.humanbrainproject.eu/
(We’re not making this up–from their website a sad complaint that sounds like our Pope again:, ‘The members of the HBP are saddened by the open letter posted on neurofuture.eu on 7 July 2014, as we feel that it divides rather than unifies our efforts to understand the brain'”
(–apparently some groups want greater oversight of where all the money is going and who the researchers are)
____
HSS (Hypersonic Sound) has military weapons applications:
. “The aluminum plate is connected to a CD player and a.. very odd and very new amplifier — that directs sound much as a laser beam directs light.
Popular Science magazine – It is no exaggeration– HSS represents the first revolution in acoustics since the loudspeaker was invented 78 years ago — and perhaps only the second since pilgrims used ”whispering tubes” to convey their dour messages.
____
The inventor has fun aiming sounds at shoppers in a mall, and watching their reactions to walking into a waterfall, or ice in a glass…etc.–(it’s amazing what sounds he can make them hear)….
http://boingboing.net/2003/03/24/profile-of-hypersoni.html
http://www.rexresearch.com/norris/norris.htm
Dear Ganganelli,
That seems to be object of Louie’s post today. If there is not only lack of concern for people converting, but a deliberate effort to convince them to RETAIN the beliefs they would willingly have given up, (and that has been testified to have been the case by some over many years) then, they may actually fall back into those beliefs and practices.
___
In which case God is still their only judge. But knowing human nature, if you were in a faith that said you don’t have to worry about divorce or contraception or confessing to a priest, you could start out desiring the Catholic Faith, and then fall into a complacency about it, through convenience. In which case you would incur some kind of guilt for rejecting the truth.
___
Point being, the watchman is guilty first, and then, the victim is judged.
Not for the easily frightened….
Pope Francis’ “holy unity in unholy diversity” got us looking at united religions and- the Maitreya–apparently a 2nd coming expectation among many religions appears to be a commonly belief. Unless this is a hoax, one group thinks Pope Francis is a prime candidate for conversion. (salvemur are you behind this?) 🙂 christmaitreya.org/ (add prefix) http//www
___
According to the above group’s assessment:
“Christianity – Christians will have great difficulty in accepting Maitreya. They are all waiting for the return of Jesus, not some other Son-of-God.
However, I have high hopes for the new Pope – he is a very open-minded as well as genuinely spiritual. I am sure he will recognize Maitreya for what he is – a new Avatar for the Age of Aquarius. (The previous Pope, the one who resigned, would have been a disaster. He would have refused to recognize the Christ. In fact, Ratzinger had been made aware of this story many years ago while he was a Cardinal and just ignored it.)
– However, even if the current Pope acknowledges the authenticity of Maitreya as an Avatar sent by God, many of his bishops will refuse to go along, since it is a Catholic dogma that Jesus is the one and only begotten Son of God. There will be a great schism in the Catholic Church – it will in fact split into two – those who accept Maitreya as the Christ and those who continue to wait for the ‘real’ Christ.”
____
“Islam – expect the Imam Mahdi to be an Arab and descendant of Muhammad. The real problem will be that Maitreya will not promote or favor Islam over other religions. In fact HE MAY he may not even talk very much about religions or may SUGGEST THAT EVERYONE JUST FOLLOW THE ONE THEY WERE BORN WITH” ( OUR EMPHASIS ADDED)
(This might be funny if it weren’t so horribly real at the Vatican)
_____
“Atheists/Skeptics -They will not give up their beliefs (or non-belief) easily. They will claim that it is all a trick and a lie. They will say that the voice of Maitreya they heard in their heads was merely some kind of illusion or even some high frequency electronic signal. They will claim that all believers who heard it were subject to mass hysteria and all the miraculous healings taking place are just a placebo effect. Some of them may literally go crazy because of this severe blow to their belief system.”
____
If this (prophetic hearing a voice thing) is some hoax, we apologize, but these technologies already do exist, and the European Union and the U.S. are both funding Human Brain Projects. https://www.humanbrainproject.eu/
(We’re not making this up–from their website a sad complaint that sounds like our Pope again:, ‘The members of the HBP are saddened by the open letter posted on neurofuture.eu on 7 July 2014, as we feel that it divides rather than unifies our efforts to understand the brain’”
(–apparently some groups want greater oversight of where all the money is going and who the researchers are)
____
HSS (Hypersonic Sound) has military weapons applications:
. “The aluminum plate is connected to a CD player and a.. very odd and very new amplifier — that directs sound much as a laser beam directs light.
Popular Science magazine – It is no exaggeration– HSS represents the first revolution in acoustics since the loudspeaker was invented 78 years ago — and perhaps only the second since pilgrims used ”whispering tubes” to convey their dour messages.
____
The inventor has fun aiming sounds at shoppers in a mall, and watching their reactions to walking into a waterfall, or ice in a glass…etc.–(it’s amazing what sounds he can make them hear)….(prefix for following http//www.)
boingboing.net/2003/03/24/profile-of-hypersoni.html
http://www.rexresearch.com/norris/norris.htm
I don’t understand either.
Since the SSPX professes an apostate *is* inside the Holy Roman Church, no matter the heresies, and there is no way to be expelled from the Body of Christ except explicit excommunication, Mr. Tony Palmer would be part of the Catholic Church just as much as Bergoglio.
But would it have mattered if Mr. Palmer had joined the Vatican II church and converted to believe all its heresies? Wouldn’t he then become an apostate catholic, instead of a heretic catholic (protestant)? What is the difference as far as Salvation goes?
Dear Ever mindful,
–
No one here is denying that Pope Francis says many things which sound very “spiritual”. What is under discussion is whether the “spirituality” he is promoting is the Catholic faith.
Dear Matthew,
Good point. It’s easy to say nice sounding words that many people can relate to, but the mandate of Jesus was to go teach what He taught, and Baptize.
Generic religion statements can confuse people into thinking they are fine as they are, especially when they are then told to thank their parents for whatever religion they are in, and hear that no one wants to convert them.
___
We quote a religion lesson here: “God is the God of all Mankind. He is almighty, all wise and all powerful. merciful and full of love. sound familiar? But it goes on to say that man is born, lives, and is re-born on earth again and again until they achieve complete union with God..That is the God of the Sikhs”
___
So when does Pope Francis talk in public about the things that make the Catholic Faith different from all others? That seems to be the problem..
Finally, yes their aim is to see the divine order that God has given to everything, and through it to understand the nature of God.
Most human beings can’t see the true reality of God because they are blinded by their own self-centred pride (Sikhs call it haumain) and concern for physical things.
God inside us
Sikhs believe that God is inside every person, no matter how wicked they appear, and so everyone is capable of change and in everything.
Well, that’s the question. Did he accept Pope Francis’ refusal as a welcome excuse, or did he accept it out of a desire to be obedient to Vicar of Christ? I won’t presume to judge the man’s soul, as only God can do that.
Just so it’s clear: This blog is not some kind of SSPX-er club, so don’t expect to see many people run to defend any baited questions regarding the SSPX. If you’re truly curious about their position on things, it would probably be wiser to go ask them directly.
Cardinal George had something interesting to say on the matter in his column last week:
“The going out will be tough. We live with those who actively resist conversion, who are part of an ‘anti-evangelizing campaign.’ Pope St. John Paul II wrote in his memoir, ‘Crossing the Threshold of Hope’: “If in fact, on the one hand, the Gospel and evangelization are present in this world, on the other, there is also present a powerful anti-evangelization that is well organized and has the means to vigorously oppose the Gospel and evangelization.” Alone, each of us will be overcome by the distractions and opposition of the day. Together, as Christ’s church, gathered into parish and other communities, we will be effective in offering human hospitality in the name of Christ. This will, we pray, eventually result in eucharistic hospitality, full communion in the faith that unites us to our eucharistic Lord.”
http://www.catholicnewworld.com/cnwonline/2014/0727/cardinal.aspx?a=print
I’m sure going to miss his Eminence.
Dear Matthew. Good answer! I suspect that B.S. and Mr. G. are a tag team of trolls. PLEASE DON’T FEED THE TROLLS.
“Since the SSPX professes an apostate *is* inside the Holy Roman Church” – what a bunch of complete crap that will only fool blissfully ignorant neo-Catholics waiting to be fooled. And that, Mr. Troll, is the only crumb you will get from this Catholic.
Really they do not?
So they consider most (up to 99%) of “catholics” in the Vatican II church to have fallen away from the faith and ipso facto outside the Catholic Church?
I said SSPX but the question is valid for all Traditionalists inside the Vatican II church too.
If one joins the one true Church, one has the grace of the sacraments, one can be in a state of grace as necessary for salvation. One is not culpable for being innocently in error. The Church will supply the lack.
If she believed the truths of the Catholic Faith, she would have known and understood that she was required to seek the sacraments and follow the precepts of the Church. May she rest in peace.
If a person is in an obstinate state of mortal sin, he has rejected God and does not have His Grace in his life.
Dear RW,
I don’t see nuthin’ “clearly” about it. God has not shown himself reaching down in every instance of error to slap around the guilty. Instead it behooves us to contemplate our own end and make sure we’re ready for whenever God deems it time. I’ve no knowledge where Tony was coming from or going to at that early hour, or what internal decisions he’d made. He did seem to be a likeable chap who wanted everyone to know and love Jesus. God may have chosen that moment in time because this baptized Christian had made a perfect contrition. No, I do not see any reasonable hope that all are saved, far from it. But I don’t see anything wrong with God utilizing a few loopholes. And I hope I get to heaven too, to congratulate the beneficiaries of them.
Dear Roman Watcher,
“Clearly, the Lord’s anger burns against leaders of false religions, who seek excuses not to convert….and find them from false pastors…”
That statement seems generally true (from Scripture), but how can you be sure enough to apply it so definitively to Tony Palmer? Or even to conclude that the manner of his death was a direct sign of God’s anger? Doesn’t knowledge of why and what someone was “seeking” -especially just before death, require the Divine ability to read a heart and mind–a judgment forbidden to us all?
___
And since he had so publicly described his struggle to continue to submit his will to God’s despite the agony it was causing him and his family- as a painful but necessary self-sacrifice for the good of the Church -horribly mistaken as that was-, doesn’t the only real evidence point to the opposite conclusion, that he was perhaps more innocent than guilty of that, and his false teacher just the opposite? Or are we missing something?
beg pardon, the above was supposed to end after the word problem. The remainder was more of the false teachings people are left to wander in.
Wrong – we are told to ‘seek ye first the Kingdom of God’, and love God first and above all else. Louie explains why a couple of posts back. What Bergoglio describes is neatly explained in the buddhist maxim, ‘the buddha in me salutes the buddha in you’. So what.
If this is true, the ‘blood’ of Palmer’s soul is on Bergoglio’s hands. The ‘watchman’ bishops of newchurch must have blood all over their hands. “And if the watchman see the sword coming, and sound not the trumpet: and the people look not to themselves, and the sword come, and cut off a soul from among them: he indeed is taken away in his iniquity, but I will require his blood at the hand of the watchman.” Ezechial 33.6
–
such a ‘watchman’ is not Catholic and most certainly not the Vicar of Christ.
The fact is, in the above passage, it is highly likely that the likes of Bergoglio are in fact, ‘the sword’ whose whole purpose is to ‘cut off the soul from among them’ and with the help of weak ‘watchmen’ this sword of iniquity is very successful; the sword of iniquity is most certainly not Catholic and the absolute opposite of Christ’s Vicar.
p.s. who can dare to claim they ‘trust God’, when they deny His mission and His warnings? such a one does not trust God – not at all – they do not trust that God is telling the Truth with His most clear directives – the very Word of God. Instead such a one denies God and prefers to trust in their only silly fantasy, just like Eve did, and just like all universalists do.
p.s. Christ is the Sword of Truth.
–
Bergoglio wields the sword of iniquity. The enemy should be as plain as day.
Dear Matthew and Indignus famulus
Once again thank you for comments that provide perspective and a call to think deeper
And so I shall ponder and reflect
Mike and Indignus,
I am very surprised at your responses, so unlike what a Catholic should think!
The public facts of the demise of anyone have been the valid basis of the discernment of God’s will in every ecclesiastical writer of note for 2000 years.
I cite you one example. From St. Alphonsus dei Ligouri, in his Glories of Mary, citing another writer, who noted that indecent dancing being an offense against the 9th commandment, when a large dance hall scheduled a public dance on the Vigil of Pentecost in one year in the 18thc century, the Lord Holy Spirit, according to St. Alphonsus, published the public sin by sending an Angel in the form of a torch bearer into the hall, lighting it all a flame. The hall burnt down, and in the confusion several hundred young people burnt alive.
St. Alphonsus says at the end of the story, that they died for the sin of sacriege, since they did not respect the holiness of the Holy Spirit’s feast day!
Fault me, if you like, but fault St. Alphonsus along with me. And, then trouble yourselves at where you will end up on judgement day.
The error of you both lies in this: that you believe I speak of the state of his soul in death, when I only spoke about the objective immorality in its global public aspects.
You seem to both want to make him a saint for failing to become a Catholic, or for having an invincible ignorance of the truth. You can find the truth about the necessity of becoming a catholic anywhere on the web; the leader of any Christian sect cannot claim ignorance on that account. If he loved the Lord Jesus, he certainly would have done a simple Google search to save his own soul? Therefore, both your objections are preposterous….
Vengeance is Mine sayeth the Lord! As St. Alphonsus says, some want a God of the OT to pose against the merciful God of the NT. But the truth is that they are the same God: before we use up the number of mercies assigned to each of us, God is good to us with mercy; but when we use them up by abusing His patience and providence, He remains for us the God of venging justice.
I’d wish Bergoglio would put his preaching into pratice by stop persecuting those who go to the TLM….even Fr. Z had to flee Italy for saying the TLM. Jorge’s animus against Tradition is leading many bishops to persecute priests and laity and religious in the same cruel way. I know one vocation to the priesthood, who offered himself to his local Bishop, who took 3 days to decide that the diocese did not need another priest! The vocation’s sin? He wanted to say the TLM…..the Bishop, wanted to be loyal to Bergoglio…
Here’s some helpful tips for those who know it is time to remove themselves from the antichurchness that occupies most parishes these days:
–
http://www.fathercekada.com/2014/07/31/what-to-do-if-you-have-no-mass/
Salvemur,
Fr. Cekada is not a good source for counsel, he cannot even distinguish according to Thomistic principles, between valid and invalid formulae in sacraments….he is also a sede, because he puts anger before reason, and fails to use the means which Tradition approves for such crises…he wants to arrogate to himself. and teaches others to do the same, the right to judge canonically and forensically the human person of the Roman Pontiff. We can also, we admit, see the errors of a man, but howsoever much they appear to us, we cannot arrogate to ourselves the hierarchical functions of the Church. The College of Cardinals and the clergy of the Roman Diocese have the sole rights, canonically and theologically, of judging the matter of a heretical pope. To say that one should separate himself from any priest who does not arrogate himself that right, is preposterous. So too are all the sedes preposterous, for they have imbibed the error of the protestants of making yourself pope…
Dear Ever mindful,
–
Again, you are welcome. Something you might also want to take into consideration during your reflections are the words of other popes. In regards to the relationship between the Catholic Church and other religions – perhaps one of the biggest causes for concern at present – high on the list are Leo XII’s ‘Satis cognitum’ (1896) and Pius XI’s ‘Mortalium animos’ (1928). Read them, ponder over them, and then ask yourself: is there merely a difference in style between the teachings of popes of the past and those of Pope Francis? Or is there a fundamental difference in substance? We can and should expect the former; the latter, however, we must firmly reject (John 10:4-5; Galatians 1:6-9; 1 John 4:1). This very teaching was – somewhat surprisingly – confirmed as recently as this year in the ITC document “Sensus fidei in the Life of the Church” (§60-65).
Thank you for your answer. Could you point to canon teaching this?
Especially how that very notion can be reconciled with : Cum ex Apostolatus Officio, Satis Cognitum, the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of Christ of Vatican I where it is said : “… the judgment of the Apostolic See, whose authority is not surpassed, is to be disclaimed by no one, nor is anyone permitted to pass judgement on its judgment.”
And Proposueramus quidem: “..Neither by Augustus, nor by all the clergy, nor by religious, not by the people will the judge be judged….The first seat will not be judged by anyone”
And In terra pax hominibus: “By passing judgement on the great See, concerning which it is not permitted any man to pass judgement, you have received anathema from all the Fathers of the venerable Councils..”
“.. As the hinge while remaining immovable opens and closes the door, so Peter and his successors have free judgement over all the Church, since no on should remove their status because ‘the highest See is judged by no one.’ ”
thank you.
So, Lynda, your personal belief is that an apostate or heretic IS INSIDE the Church?
“One is not culpable for being innocently in error.”
So how can we know if any of the Vatican II clergy is innocent in error or not?
For instance, would someone who knows very well what the Church teaches about Sodomy yet DISAGREES with Her, be innocent or not?
Hey Roman Watcher – I’m a convert. I was in my forties before I forced a rudely reluctant universatlist ‘catholic’ priest to baptize me (he never conceded that there was any need). RE: ‘To say that one should separate himself from any priest who does not arrogate himself that right, is preposterous.
–
Thing is…arrogate to what?
–
Bergoglio Inc. TM represent RICHIE RICH of Vatican2ooooo – they arrogate/sublate (in their minds) Truth to – insert whatever here might get an antichrist check-list-tick and Rytcheewritchtwo will pat you on the back for it.
p.s yee haw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcP8zvGzSSs
See my comments on the radio “interview” on my blog article titled “bergoglio the mediocre country priest”:
–
http://publicvigil.blogspot.com/2014/08/bergoglio-mediocre-country-priest.html
–
It really wasn’t much of an “interview”. bergoglio mostly read from a text. It was the usual “ecumenical” mixture of protestant and catholic-lite statements that we have by now (sadly) become used to….
–
I don’t think that even a bolt of lightning from the sky could convert bergoglio. He is hopeless.
–
And even if he were to convert to Catholicism, he would be no St. Paul.
–
The best that we could hope for is that he would come to his senses and realize that he is just totally unfit to be the pope of the Holy Roman Catholic Church. And then just fade into obscurity….
OK, Bert. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt for a moment. First, are you Catholic? Or, perhaps considering converting to the Catholic faith? I ask because you seem to have either received very poor formation or none at all. If you’re serious about learning about and/or deepening your understanding of the Catholic faith, people here will generally be quite helpful. But if you’re looking to pick a fight for the fun of it… then not so much. If you want to make a point, make it. There’s no need to try and catch someone in a logical error. State your case and let the matter stand or fall on its own merits.
Another nice one, RW. Spot on.
Hands up any cradle catholics who give a crap about converts?
–
woohoo!!!
–
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcP8zvGzSSs
p.s. I defy any one to contradict me on the ecumenical stats that ‘willin’ is the best gospel song of a all time (last 30 years).
First of all, who cares how the “papal defenders” (aka sycophants) would react to a Pope who rejects the mission of the Church? And secondly, don’t we already have a mountain of evidence that this Pope does indeed reject the mission of the Church?
Quit worrying about the “papal defenders,” Louie, and just keep promoting Tradition. The sycophants will wither away and die from the emptiness of their own self-deception, and their deception of others, and their promotion of various “party lines.”
oops:
–
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2pAfJy1lTo
sycophant
ˈsɪkəfant/
noun
a person who acts obsequiously towards someone important in order to gain advantage.
synonyms: toady, creep, crawler, fawner, flatterer, flunkey, truckler, groveller, doormat, lickspittle, kowtower, obsequious person, minion, hanger-on, leech, puppet, spaniel,
Dear Great Pretender51
Is that a fair label on those who are trying to listen to Pope Francis with a generous heart?
Dear Matthew, and All
For anyone who may have missed it, here’s s the link to the Tony Palmer video we posted on Louie’s July Tony Palmer blog:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NHbEWw7l_Ek
__
It appears to confirm, from Tony Palmer’s own lips at least, what the above newspaper report claims. As Louie points out, the missing link is still Pope Francis’ confirmation of his own alleged guilt. But this Pope’s own words on so many other occasions regarding this same issue of conversion/non-conversion, build a circumstantial evidence case against him, which greatly supports the idea that what has been reported here is in fact, true.
__
Another such outrage was provide for all concerned by Matthew’s July 22, 2014 2:33 pm Reply on Louie’s Tony Palmer blog spot as follows:
“There appears to be something of a pattern emerging here. Greg Venables, the Anglican Bishop of Argentina, related the following exchange which took place during Bergoglio’s time in Argentina:
__
“He called me to have breakfast with him one morning and told me very clearly that the [Anglican] Ordinariate was quite unnecessary and that the Church needs us as Anglicans.”
__
That is, Pope Francis does not see conversion as necessary for Anglicans to enter the Church. … I am being uncharitable for thinking that Tony Palmer was denied conversion – and, thus, the true Bread of Life – only to be used (willingly, apparently) as a pawn for the purpose of subverting doctrinal clarity on both sides of the divide? Domine, miserere nobis peccatoribus.
Matthew, I’m currently part of the Vatican II church by Baptism and other Sacraments.
I stopped actively frequenting my parish when they removed the altar and the crucifix and all the statues inside my church.
I’m trying to understand the position of Traditionalists and how one should relate to the Novus Ordo, and if they themselves are in error by being in communion with the Vatican II apostates and heretics, or even if they are considered as such.
Surely answering a simple question instead of branding one as a troll is not asking much on my part?
I’ve tried asking both novus ordites and traditionalists, and studying on my own some documents such as those listed below in my response to the user Roman Watcher. Both sides of the argument seem to be in disagreement with canon and ex cathedra statements of Popes.
How can one be sure whom to trust?
Both are only able to bring up opinions of theologians to their cause.
If I cannot trust the infallible Magisterium and take something as written, why should anything from both camps, be any more valid?
It is quite a conundrum, you see.
And another thing I have noticed is their suggestion to avoid such and such source, or website or forum or person as “valid” opinion because they alone hold the correct position.
For instance in this very comment section “Roman Watcher” says to avoid one Fr. Cekada, because he’s wrong and sedevacantist.
Yet other people say the very same thing about Trads, especially Michael Voris, and to avoid them altogether because they cannot be trusted.
Correct me if i’m wrong, but shouldn’t the generous heart be the one who simply sees the bigwig antichrist for what he is?
Bert,
–
Thank you for the insight into your particular situation. I’ll do what I can to help you find the answers you’re looking for.
–
First, this blog has Catholics of varying opinion on particular matters. The owner, Louie, has created a space here where faithful Catholics can discuss difficult matters without too much worry about censure or reprimand, and we’re thankful for it. Though we have, at times, differing opinions on some things, we are united by a deep commitment to the truth of the Catholic faith and an equally deep love for Christ’s Church. I say this because some of your earlier comments seem to operate on the assumption that ‘traditionalists’ are a kind of monolithic block. Tradition encompasses far more than just the SSPX – not to slight them in any way – and you’ll find that this blog is frequented by people who attend Sede, FSSP, as well as Novus Ordo parishes.
–
Evaluating your particular situation will take some time and a lot of prayer. I hold the position that the Novus Ordo Mass is sacramentally valid if it is done properly, and if sufficient precautions are taken to avoid profanation and desecration. Nonetheless, I attend the traditional Latin Mass, and would only attend a Novus Ordo Mass if there were no other way to fulfill my obligation.
–
As should already be clear, I do not consider people who attend a Novus Ordo parish to be ipso facto heretics/apostates. Most don’t even know what’s going on in the Church; and among those who do, not all have other options available to them. There are also quite a few who hold materially heretical positions, but do so out of ignorance, i.e. they really don’t know any better, and would change their position if they knew what the Church really teaches. Then you have those who know what the Church teaches, know that rejecting it means to fall into heresy and to place one’s soul in grave danger, and still choose to remain obstinate. They are, in my experience, a minority. A very vocal majority, but a minority nonetheless. Accordingly, relations to the Novus Ordo are equally varied.
–
If you are looking for advice, I would suggest first seeking the grace of God. Go to confession. Even if the priest is a flaming nitwit, if you are truly contrite and he speaks the words of absolution, it’s valid. Next, look for a more traditional parish in your area. A parish having a regular Latin Mass is a good, though not always sure-fire, indicator of orthodoxy. If you need help finding one, people here can point you in the right direction. Then, get back to attending Mass regularly, and confession as needed (though monthly is a good start). Finally, be prepared to re-learn everything you think you know about the Church. As you were raised in the Novus Ordo, there’s no telling what parts you have right and what parts need correcting. I and others here have a veritable library of freely available, solidly orthodox Catholic books which we can link you to so that you can get your bearings. The goal is to rekindle the genuine sensus fidei in you. And by the grace of God, it’s certainly possible.
Dear Salvemur
By generous heart, I meant to listen with a heart willing to discern a Truth perhaps not always clearly expressed, as opposed to listening with the intention of mentally logging up areas to be attacked
Of course it is a spiritual act of mercy to correct the sinner, and to prevent followers being misled; but this is surely possible heeding St Paul’s advice to speak the truth in love
I initially was responding to an earlier point made that anyone expressing any form of loyalty to the Vicar of Christ was now labelled a sycophant, and being ignorant of the term(and many other areas ) thought a definition might help
Taking Matthews advice I looked up the two very interesting encyclicals “Satis cognitum”(1896),and “Mortalium animos”(1928)…very beautifully worded, and for those not familiar, here is the first paragraph
SATIS COGNITUM (On the Unity of the Church)
Pope Leo XIII
Encyclical promulgated on 29 June 1896
To Our Venerable Brethren, the Patriarchs, Primates, Archbishops, Bishops, and other Ordinaries in Peace and Communion with the Apostolic See.
Venerable Brethren, Health, and Benediction.
1. It is sufficiently well known unto you that no small share of Our thoughts and of Our care is devoted to Our endeavour to bring back to the fold, placed under the guardianship of Jesus Christ, the Chief Pastor of souls, sheep that have strayed. Bent upon this, We have thought it most conducive to this salutary end and purpose to describe the exemplar and, as it were, the lineaments of the Church. Amongst these the most worthy of Our chief consideration is Unity. This the Divine Author impressed on it as a lasting sign of truth and of unconquerable strength. The essential beauty and comeliness of the Church ought greatly to influence the minds of those who consider it. Nor is it improbable that ignorance may be dispelled by the consideration; that false ideas and prejudices may be dissipated from the minds chiefly of those who find themselves in error without fault of theirs; and that even a love for the Church may be stirred up in the souls of men, like unto that charity wherewith Christ loved and united himself to that spouse redeemed by His precious blood. “Christ loved the Church, and delivered Himself up for it” (Eph. v., 25).
If those about to come back to their most loving Mother (not yet fully known, or culpably abandoned) should perceive that their return involves, not indeed the shedding of their blood (at which price nevertheless the Church was bought by Jesus Christ), but some lesser trouble and labour, let them clearly understand that this burden has been laid on them not by the will of man but by the will and command of God. They may thus, by the help of heavenly grace, realize and feel the truth of the divine saying, “My yoke is sweet and my burden light” (Matt. xi., 30).
Wherefore, having put all Our hope in the “Father of lights,” from whom “cometh every best gift and every perfect gift” (Ep. James i., 17)—from Him, namely, who alone “gives the increase” (I Cor. iii., 6)—We earnestly pray that He will graciously grant Us the power of bringing conviction home to the minds of men.
Dear BS, I do not believe either a) what you ascribe to me; or b) that you are as ignorant as your question suggests. One’s conscience must be informed by objective truth which is knowable by all persons of reason. A Catholic’s conscience must be informed also by the substance of the Deposit of the Faith. There is constructive knowledge and actual knowledge. There is culpable ignorance. This is all a matter of reason. I am quite sure you are capable of understanding these basic truths.
For the avoidance of doubt, it follows that sodomy, as being intrinsically evil, this knowable by reason, that if one opposes this natural law prohibition one is culpable. There may be mitigating circumstances in a given instance.
@Ever mindfull, please don’t include me on your list of syncophants!
Dear Ever mindful,
–
Excellent! I’m pleased to see you’ve actually started reading them. Keep going! Some of the best parts of Satis cognitum come in the middle and then again at the end, and Mortalium animos is simply brilliant throughout. Enjoy! 🙂
Dear Salvemur, Not only do we have a duty of care for converts (who are Catholics in the same way as those who were baptised before the age of reason) but we have a duty of care to the souls of all men, that they might convert and attain eternal salvation. By the way, I very much admire and applaud your perseverence and intrepidness in getting baptised into the Faith, fighting for your salvation against a priest who’s been contaminated by heretical ideas. God bless you and keep you strong in the Faith.
Ever mindful -“a heart willing to discern a Truth”. Well said.
p.s. the Truth. After all, ”a truth” sounds a bit like a poker game.
Dear Evermindful, unity is dependent on objective truth. There can be no unity, as a matter of fact, unless there is unity in the unchangeable Deposit of Faith and the Moral Law. If one is not in complete conformity to the Faith and to objective morality, a function of reason, then one is not in unity with the Mystical Body of Christ.
The link below contains a report of the Anglican testimony above, plus another devastating-to-Catholics quote on this same issue:
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2013/march-web-only/argentine-evangelicals-say-bergoglio-as-pope-francis-is-ans.html?paging=off
___
We could find not one Argentinian article which claims anything contrary to this idea that this Pope is actively out to eliminate the Church’s
obedience to the mandate of Christ to convert, and also to destroy the one to “Avoid” under pain of anathema, those who reject such conversion and cling to other Doctrines; replacing them with his own single mandate of working together, hand in hand, side by side with all sects remaining as they are.
___
These Argentinian sect leaders say they know him well -apparently believe so:
—Norberto Saracco, co-leader- Buenos Aries Council of Pastors:
“His election has been an answer to our prayers,” His priority is unity at the level of the people.” “.. a new time is coming for the Catholic Church”….
—David Ruiz, associate director-World Evangelical Alliance’s Mission :
“Bergoglio is recognized as a..conciliator and a friend. “[This is for Catholics].. a time of reflection about what is the meaning of the great mystery ‘Christ in you, the hope of glory,'” said Ruiz. “To learn how to join hands in the mission…
“It is not a secret that the global paradigm shift taking place in Christianity is becoming more and more evident in Latin America,” said Ruiz. “After spending some time looking for an identity, both Catholics and Evangelicals are particularly well positioned to take an unparalleled role in global evangelization.”
=====
The writer of that article then noted [where Bergoglio began as a leader of the Jesuits, and tended the flock for 40years from 1973-2013 before becoming Pope]: In a region where Protestant communities have seen rapid growth in Traditionally Catholic Nations, Ruiz believes Bergoglio may change he tenor of what at times seems like sectarian competition.
Loyalty to the office of the Papacy. and to a particular pope insofar as he does not oppose the Deposit of Faith or morals, is required of members of the Church. That is not sycophancy. Sycophancy is an objective evil, involving falsehood.
Pope Francis recent words to Protestants in Caserta, demonstrate another use of the phrase “diversity in the Church” proclaiming it the intention of the Holy Spirit to be inclusive of sects comprised of Baptized persons whose lives and beliefs are a continual witness to heresies- [even if we charitably strictly limit that description, to only those who live according to their sects’beliefs
after the age of reason].
___
[Echoing the words of Tony Palmer, that “Unity is divine, diversity is diabolical”], Our Pope said at Caserta: “It’s not the Lord Jesus who creates division! He who creates division is in fact…Satan.” “He interferes in communities and creates divisions, always! from the first moment of Christianity, this temptation was in the Christian community..I am the Church, you are a sect.””so the one who wins.. is the father of division–not the Lord Jesus who prayed for unity”
======
In direct contract to that, Jesus Himself said “Think ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no; but separation. For there shall be from henceforth five in one house divided: three against two,….The father divided against the son..I have not come to bring peace, but a sword” [UNCHANGING TRUTH] that DIVIDES (evenfamilies)..”If you follow Me the world will HATE you, as it hated Me.”…
___
But this Holy father ignores all that and cries on: ..” so the Church is one in diversity. And, to use the word of an Evangelical whom I love very much, a “reconciled diversity” by the Holy Spirit. ”
___
In direct contrast to St. John the evangelist who wrote in Saccred Scripture ” do not even open the door of your house.. to one who preaches another doctrine, do not even wish him Godspeed..lest you partake of his evildoing” ,Tony Palmer claimed in his video that a miracle is taking place worldwide, and ““We are witnessing the Unity of Christians by the Spirit of God, and Not by the doctrines and traditions of men”
So which evangelist that he loves very much, was the Pope quoting at Caserta? And if it was Tony Palmer, then agreeing with him, and preaching his message of unity without doctrine or traditions of men, is working for the devil, against Christ.
___
Our Pope has obviously done far more than open the door. He is continually spreading a feast for them, while starving the true flock,
and he is enthusiastically participating with their attempts to eradicate the Divine Mission of the One, Holy, Catholic and apostolic
Church. For our part, we call for our Hierarchy to denounce these errors, and do what is necessary to correct this Pope or remove him
from office, if he pertinaciously persists in holding, publicly proclaiming, and teaching these errors.
Yeah, but you’d have to read Latin to read them….see the Tractatus Postumus by Michel de Corona….published in the 17th century, you can download it from google books
Note, that it is not a question of the Cardinals judging the first See, but of the Cardinals judging whether the man has not the faith or if the circumstances of his being catholic were falsified when they elected him. In either case, you resort to the norms of law, that the body empowered to elect, is the body empowered to judge the validity of the election….but you are not going to find it in the Code, because not all Church laws are in the code…
that is, the assertion that one should separate himself from a priest, because that priest does not arrogate to himself the right to determine whether the election of the Roman Pontiff was valid or the man elected has the faith, is preposterious, because the right to do those things belongs to the Cardinals and to the Roman Clergy, not to every priest; and so if the priest does not claim to have this authority, it is preposterous to say you should separate from him on that account, because by not claiming the authority, he is acting properly…all this omnibus paribus, that is, we are not talking about any other characteristics of the priest only about this question….he could be someone to avoid for a host of other reasons, but Catholics have always acted on the presumption of the legitimacy and honesty of any incardinated priest, no matter how many problems there are, provide that the diocese or order is not a public proponent of heresy or immorality….in which case they may be in defacto schism from the Church or not part of Her at all, on account of heresy, or rebellion… etc…
There’s also this:
–
“In addition, [by this Our Constitution, which is to remain valid in perpetuity, We enact, determine, decree and define] that if ever at any time it shall appear that any Bishop, even if he be acting as an Archbishop, Patriarch or Primate; or any Cardinal of the aforesaid Roman Church, or, as has already been mentioned, any legate, or even the Roman Pontiff, prior to his promotion or his elevation as Cardinal or Roman Pontiff, has deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into some heresy: the promotion or elevation, even if it shall have been uncontested and by the unanimous assent of all the Cardinals, shall be null, void and worthless…” (Paul IV, “Cum ex Apostolatus Officio”)
–
“It shall be lawful for each and all of the cardinals,…as well as for all the clergy and the Roman people,… to withdraw without penalty and at any time from obedience and loyalty to the person so elected even if he has been enthroned (while they themselves, notwithstanding this, remain fully committed to the faith of the Roman church and to obedience towards a future Roman pontiff entering office in accordance with the canons) and to avoid him as a magician, a heathen, a publican and a heresiarch.” (Julius II, Council of Lateran V)
Dear Bert,
We heartily second everything Matthew just wrote to you above, and would like to add our daily prayers for you, and our welcome to you, into our own little family of seekers and lovers of God’s will and the Truth.
__
We are a Catholic couple who stayed with the Church, continued going to Mass etc for the last 50 plus years, despite the many devastations of our parishes who all say the Novus Ordo Mass.(only came upon the TLM in the last 7 years) When we went to our Bishops in the 1980s to discuss the outrageous things they were doing to our parish, and were told he wished all Catholics were parents like us, BUT he was experimenting to bring in the “fringe” in our particular parish, so we should “find a place” where we are comfortable.
___
That began our long journey home to finding the true Faith. Years of home-schooling our family with a Catholic Program, helped a lot, Our Lady of the Rosary and Seton Home Study School are two great ones which have spiritual advisors and simple initial lessons to help you or anyone you know in growing from the ignorant state our Catholic teachers helped us reach-who were themselves, deluded by philosophies and high-sounding New-age words, which they attempted to pass on to us, and thank God, failed to do.
(one ninth grade teacher of ours opened the year with the news that Mary was not a virgin, because Scripture says she came to see Jesus later “with his brethren”) Who needs truth and dogma right? She was a 70’s nun.
____
Read about out Lady of Fatima– we recommend the apostolate Louie is advertising in his upcoming Toronto talks, for good summaries of what has been going on.
___
Regarding your excellent summary of the confusion to be found when coming at all this controversy from a Novus- O experience point of view, we are still exploring all the arguments and agree with what you say about the dogmatic statements you find on either side. (It took us months just to get all the initials straight) 🙂 We continue to read their arguments, but see that they are all trying to know and follow God’s will. Obviously since they disagree, some have to be wrong.
___
Right now, we go to Mass as often as possible ( alternating between 3 different N.O. parishes), participating actively when possible in order to stay available to set ideas straight. (Often cringing through homilies–especially now as the modernists love to quote the Pope’s most dangerous unifiers) But that’s after 40 years of learning what straight is. We offer up the awful parts we cant change, and keep chipping away at what we can. We attend the TLM as often as possible (If you try it and never have, get the book with the English translation, and speed read the prayers from the moment the priest kneels down to the Gospel of John at the end. You may not keep up the first time, but you will be roughly in tune. Each successive time gets easier, and finally, like us, you’ll find yourself switching to the Latin and learning what heaven feels like) Stay with the N.O. where no TLM is available, or, if its too much for you, go to NO and try it occasionally to see if you changed your mind. The Doctrine you seek is IN that Mass, and you will see that if you are looking for it.
____
. We know great people in all these groups-NO, TLM, SSPX, SFFP, a–those last two only from conversations here. Our analysis is that a lot of very sincere, devoted, Catholics have resulted from this mess. God and Our Lady working as always to do His will, have called us to go through this terrible time of distress, persevering in the simple Catholic life. Go to Mass every Sunday (matter how painful) Revel in the minute it takes you to walk back to your pew with Jesus in your mouth, remembering you are becoming part of Him at that moment. What else matters? Saving your own soul and others.
— DON’T receive him in mortal Sin. Go to Confession and confess staying away. Take any advice the priest gives you with caution. Ask him what he thinks of contraception or gay marriage, if you want our favorite test questions these days. The answer will indicate whether you maybe can start thinking about trusting his advice, unfortunately.
___
Father John Hardin wrote a Catechism, but The St. Joseph Series is a great place to start for reviewing the basics of your faith. The Douay Rheims Bible with commentary by Rev. Leo Haydock, got us years ahead in our Faith, than where we were. Read all the footnotes every time you read a verse that leaves a question in your mind.
___
Pray the Rosary daily, meditating on the mysteries. God will help you learn the faith this way. Never Assume you understand a questionable concept until you verify it with pre-VII teachings (encyclicals, books by non-heretics etc) and WAIT to decide big issues. Ask questions here all you want.
Hope this helps give you a good Start. Confession (Make an appointment, don’t wait.) and think about all the sins you’ve ever committed and ask him to let you confess all you can remember at once. We guarantee, if you resolve not to do them again, you will get THE best night’s sleep you ever had.
God Bless you and yours.
p.s. hope other posters will forgive the length of this post, and will pray with us for Bert..
Dear Bert:
Bert?
_____
Bert, Bert, Bert……
_____
Bert?
Dear salvemur:
You wrote: “Correct me if i’m wrong, but shouldn’t the generous heart be the one who simply sees the bigwig antichrist for what he is?”
_______
Not sure what your point is, but I agree that the “generous heart” should see Francis for being the convert to Charismatic Pentecostalism that he is, and should correct him in his error.
________
Look folks. It’s one thing to allow a “generous heart” to explain away all the stupid stuff that Bergoglio says, but our Faith commands us to correct error. Regardless whether the error is committed by a country priest of the bishop of Rome.
_______
But that has nothing to do with judging the man.
_______
Error stands on its own merits. It’s an objective reality. What Bergoglio says is exactly what the words mean. It is not up to us to correct Bergoglio or to find a correct explanation for what Bergoglio really meant to say. We need to be honest with ourselves, and interpret the words exactly how Bergoglio says them.
_______
And if our interpretation is incorrect, then let Fr. Lombardi correct us.
Pope Paul Paul IV encyclical was based on a paranoid fear that a brother Bishop (who he had arrested) was secretly a Protestant awaiting his death to take over and destroy the Church. It was hardly an objective overview written in a vacuum. I highly doubt Paul IV could foresee that his bull would be used 500 years later as a means in which to break with the Hiercarchy ordained by the will of God to set up a rival self proclaimed “remnant” such as sedevacantists have. — on too of that Paul IV would have been aware that less than 100 years prior the idea that individual Priest, Bishops or laity judging a man unworthy to being Pontiff due to his wicked acts prior to election is a heresy condemned at
the Council of Constance. Here is the condemned error : “If the pope is wicked and especially if he is foreknown, then as Judas, the Apostle, he is of the devil, a thief, and a son of perdition, and he is not the head of the holy militant Church, since he is not a member of it.” (Denz . 646. See also Denz . 661)
The Hierarchical structure of the Church is not without fundamental procedures to handle these situations. Paul IV knew this.. why don’t sedevacantists who use Paul as their main source for their entire position? To conclude that the Hierarchy is null & void and we are free to judge everyone heretics and conduct our own little remnant church is absurd and defies rational thought. If Bergoglio is declared a formal heretic it will be in GOD’s time, with HIS authority. HIS will be done. Who are we to claim we knows God’s will? Just read the book of Job.
A correction to my previous post. First sentence. “Pope Paul IV’s bull”.
Yes Matthew, that’s an excerpt from Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio, which I have read both in English and Latin here: http://www.dailycatholic.org/cumexapo.htm
And I took as sufficient proof of not having to follow any of the Vatican II “pontiffs”.
There is also canon 188 of 1917 Codex Iuris Canonici which states:
“Can. 188. Ob tacitam renuntiationem ab ipso iure admissam quaelibet officia vacant ipso facto et sine ulla declaratione, si clericus:
……
4.o A fide catholica publice defecerit;”
This was changed in the 1983 codex adding the necessity of a declaration from competent authorities.
I have a friend that left Catholicism for Orthodoxy due to him believing VII and the Popes opposed the Deposit of Faith. Is he a sycophant?
Thank you both Matthew and Indignus famulus for the kind words and lenghty responses.
Mat, i would like to get some titles, even though I admit I have nihil trust on people’s opinions, even Saints and Doctors of the Church, because I have witnessed people from opposite camps use them, by misquoting or twisting their words to further their agenda.
About confession and mass, I have read about two possible problems:
a) if Novus Ordo mass is invalid it would de facto be a “non-catholic” service, and therefore even attending it would constitute a mortal sin.
b)priests ordained in the new rite might be invalid, therefore confession would have no effect. It would be better to go to a old rite priest then, even a manifest heretic, as they can administer some sacraments.
Of course I had no notions about any of this until recently.
My catechism was outright awful and we were taught by young women with no credentials at all. I remember even being thought that the existance of God is not a certainty and that atheism is a valid and respectable position, at least in a instance. I can’t recall ever hearing about Hell in a meaningful way or the Four Last Things ever being mentioned.
Anyway, it seems Satan laid such an intricate web of traps that even people who genuinely desire to belong to the Church are unable to anymore.
I’m starting to think the End is near, given the state of the Catholic Church, the massive apostasy, the incredible increase of Demonic activity (like Fr. Amorth reports) in the last few years, and the numerous false apparitions (like Medjugorje). Coupled with global events both economic and political.
It is maybe best to try and avoid thinking about such things and focus on what one can actively do, I will keep on trying to find a suitable parish in light of what I know or suspect now it is right, keep researching the matter and be a bit more positive.
Bert, God bless you, and may you get ever closer to our Lord. I would echo all that Matthew and Indignus said, but I don’t speak as well. 😉 Anyhow, I was a young altar boy prior to VII, and still attend N.O. liturgy and the indult TLM. I understand your concern heard from the hard right sede group regarding the validity of certain priests and the NO Mass. While you iron all those things out in your head, get to confession to either a really old priest or, as an alternative, you could seek out a Byzantine rite which is in union with the Church. I think everyone agrees that they are still in the apostolic succession. That way your soul gets cleansed with a clear conscience. Personally, I believe the argument against priestly validity is solemn nonsense, and if the Chair is Vacant, it doesn’t stop me from praying, going to Mass, receiving the sacraments or loving my neighbor as I love myself. Good luck.
Dear Lynda
Thank you for your reflection with which I fully agree
I have been slowly reading, studying and meditating on sections from the ipieta app, especially Thomas a Kempis, St Teresa of Avila, St Therese and then 8 different New Testament translations
Here follows a sample from book two of The Imitation of Christ
The Royal Road of the Holy Cross
TO MANY the saying, “Deny thyself, take up thy cross and follow Me,” [20] seems hard, but it will be much harder to hear that final word: “Depart from Me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire.” [21] Those who hear the word of the cross and follow it willingly now, need not fear that they will hear of eternal damnation on the day of judgment. This sign of the cross will be in the heavens when the Lord comes to judge. Then all the servants of the cross, who during life made themselves one with the Crucified, will draw near with great trust to Christ, the judge.
Why, then, do you fear to take up the cross when through it you can win a kingdom? In the cross is salvation, in the cross is life, in the cross is protection from enemies, in the cross is infusion of heavenly sweetness, in the cross is strength of mind, in the cross is joy of spirit, in the cross is highest virtue, in the cross is perfect holiness. There is no salvation of soul nor hope of everlasting life but in the cross.
Take up your cross, therefore, and follow Jesus, and you shall enter eternal life.
salvemur, It wasn’t Latin, but it was refreshing. Thanks
Dear Roman Watcher,
Both you and St. Alphonsus have each exhibited to us at different times, great wisdom. But we do believe in asking questions when things don’t hit us as quite right, hoping to find truth, and this is one of those times..
____
In the illustration you provide, St. Alphonsus (unless he had a vision of the angel with the torch) apparently based his judgment- that God used that fire to punish-, on the fact that there was an ongoing public sin (a terrible scandal) being committed, and that it occurred–on the feast of Pentecost. Dancing in those days, was preached against openly and regularly as sinful, so there was no obvious excuse for it, nor any question of it taking place.
___
We agree it looks very bad for Mr. Palmer, and would never condone anyone subscribing to the “certainty” that all are saved by God’s Mercy as that is the sin of presumption. But neither do we see it as Catholic teaching that we should ourselves judge the fate of another soul. And it is not at all un-Catholic to hope that all men accept and act on the Grace to do what is necessary before death to be saved. Tony Palmer could have gotten an extraordinary Grace, accepted it, made a perfect act of contrition, and been saved by stealing heaven like the good thief. And you could be dead wrong, couldn’t you?,
____
In today’s situation–that even the Pope seems to have coerced him to remain as he was, it doesn’t seem to us to add up to the same reason God condemned the false prophets in the Old Testament, or even the scribes and Pharisees who were motivated by more base sins like envy, jealousy, respect of men, and greed..—another possible reason God might have acted to save him.
____
In your opinion, are you free to tell the world that Tony Palmer was cut off from any possibility of salvation, suddenly and purposely by God’s wrath, and went straight to Hell for all eternity?
___
We do not subscribe to using “sinful judgment” as an excuse to end the duty to admonish the sinner or speak out in truth. But we do believe it has to apply somewhere, or Our Lord would not have made such a major point of it, and linked it to the user’s own salvation. Where DO you apply it then?
____
.The internet would have told Tony Palmer this: “The Roman Catholic Church also teaches that the doctrine does not mean that everyone who is not visibly within the Church is necessarily damned” Wickipedia posts the exceptions to the rules AS the rules, apparently, as do most people today..
____
St. Alphonsus also wrote: It is true that we shall have to render a rigorous account to the Eternal Judge of all our sins. But who is to be our Judge? The Father hath committed all judgment to the Son. Let us comfort ourselves, the Eternal Father has committed our judgment to our own Redeemer.
___
Call us stubborn if you will, but as faithful Catholics, we have and will continue to pray for the repose of the soul of Tony Palmer, in case he is in Purgatory, (not assuming he is there) and urge all others, including you, to do the same. Please correct us if we mistook your meaning in any way. God Bless.
_____.
Thank you, Ever Mindful, If we are obedient to God, to the Faith He gave to us, we will certainly have to bear a cross. You are most likely a much more virtuous person than I. I like to hear what other sincere Catholics are doing to keep the Faith in this most terrible of times in the Church. God bless you. Your sister in Christ, Lynda
Dear Matthew, Indignus Famulus and Mike, the advices above directed to Bert, I find very sound and helpful for myself in my struggle to hold to, practise and promote the True Faith. The truth resonates. It’s great to have this help from Catholics who clearly are not subscribing to the dominant errors in the Church throughout the world at this dark time. Thank you. It is very rare one gets access to such clear, simple, sound and profound advice for growing in the Faith and in the moral life.
There are other possibilities – the greatest statistically being simply a lack of real understanding of Catholic authority including papal authority. And, sadly, a lack of faith.
—–
Orthodoxy (a poor term to describe ecclesiastical bodies in schism) is a circular system that isn’t logically-consistent. It’s a dead end.
—–
(For Bert, G, or anyone else who might be tempted to take the ‘What’s the difference between them and the SSPX?’ cheap shot, here’s the answer: The ‘Eastern Orthodox’ do not recognize the pope. They do not even recognize the papacy – the primacy of Peter. Thus do they refuse to submit to him. On the other hand, the priests & bishops of the SSPX do recognize the pope, and do submit to him, but, as true Catholic teaching requires, they offer fraternal correction to the errors of the post-conciliar popes, and they cannot participate in the destruction of the Church. Rather than they refusing communion with Rome, it is modernist Rome that refuses communion with them – for no valid reason, since they fully accept and live every single actual Catholic teaching.)
Dear Lynda
Thank you for the kind words, though I would be far closer to St Paul’s reflection in 1Timothy 1:15…This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief.
As Thomas a Kempis reflects :” Who has a greater struggle than he who strives to overcome himself?”
Yes, it is the statements themselves that are in objective contradiction to the objective content (truths) of the Faith that condemn the maker of those statements – not one who acknowledges the occurrence.
My hand’s up! Of course, I care about all the little children of the world. Yellow, black or white, we’re all precious in God’s sight, even the least of these… Seriously, I’m amazed that we still get converts considering the confusion we’re all going through. I think it would be an interesting study to find out why. Was it because they were harshly proselytized, wanted to marry a faithful Catholic or just oppositionally defiant to being told not to convert? Whatever it is that made you decide, I’m glad you’re in. Now if we could just get you to drop arrogating the right to judge the Pope… 😉
S.A. I have a tough time listening to Fr. Lombardi when his lips are moving.
Dear Ever mindful
You’re very welcome. And just a side thought, all the beautiful more pleasant aspects of our Faith are also a part of our lives and we would venture to guess, most of the posters here, too. The fact that the negatives get discussed so often of necessity, may obscure that a bit, so don’t let that give you a one-sided impression, please.
St. Alphonsus de Liguori gives a good standards to use for charitable discourse
in order not to practice the sin of detraction, which we especially try to keep in mind when posting: They have to do with sticking to the truth and avoiding sinful judging: . Avoid all exaggeration, never impute what is false, or present virtues as defective, never ascribe bad motives.
____
He teaches regarding Charity: The most perfect form is zeal for your neighbor’s spiritual good..as the soul outweighs the body. It is practiced first by correcting our neighbor’s faults. Failure by silence, caring not while a soul is lost, is more criminal than his reproachful language. Do not excuse yourself saying I do not know how. If you prudentially judge that your advice would be unprofitable, make your concern known to someone who is able to apply a remedy.
____
It’s still all about love in the end..no noisy gongs allowed, and ongoing plank removal a must 🙂
The Orthodox do indeed recognize the Pope. They recognize his primacy as it existed in the first 1000 years. Whether they can be convinced of the claims of Rome that were elevated to Dogma after the split is the challenge. Unlike sedevacantists, the Orthodox look at Rome and say.. Yeah, that’s Pope but we believe he is in heresy and refuse communion until he repents of his errors. They have seen the effects of Latinizations forced on the Eastern Catholic Churches. The have seen how the Pope can change everything, like in the wake of VII …because of the prerogatives that grew post schism and were solidified at VI. What would they being coming in communion with?? There are even Catholics that reject the Pope. Sedevacantists would say the Pope can’t change things. The Orthodox can point to the first Vatican council that says he can and then look at the Church today and Vatican II and their worst fears of the Papacy right before their eyes.
Tony Palmer had a Catholic Requim Mass at St John the Evangelist Catholic Church in Bath England.
Does that mean he was “secretly” Catholic, or that he thought he was Catholic, or was it an “ecumenical” sacrilege and blasphemy?
I think it’s a fair question to ask what is the difference between the Orthodox and SSPX. The Orthodox are looking at you and your relationship with Rome. I’ve never met an Orthodox person that didn’t desire unity at some level. They want to have their Traditions intact just like you. And like you.. they see full communion with Rome as detrimental to that.
Dear James,
–
One part of Catholic Thinker’s comment that you might be overlooking is the matter of the doctrinal differences which still exist between the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox. The SSPX professes every defined dogma of the Church’s infallible Magisterium; the Orthodox do not. Even if they could resolve the problem of hierarchical unity, there still remains the problem of doctrinal unity. I don’t mean to detract in any way from what you’re saying regarding the issue of hierarchical unity, only to underscore what I see as the more readily identifiable difference between the SSPX and the Orthodox in relation to Rome.
Dear Ever mindful,
We read the posts in which you refer to, ( sycophant ) and think an important point has not yet been made clear to you.
___
Sometimes charity is misguided, and can actually contribute to harming souls.
If you, for example, find beautiful sounding ideas in the words of this Pope, and seeking only those out, continually repeat them, even posting them on-line never mentioning that many souls are likely to be led further into error by many of his other words, you inadvertently abet the evil that results from the trust people are led to put him.. Your selective reporting becomes part of a false representation of who he really is. A sin against charity.
_____
It can happen to anyone, so don’t feel bad.
Here’s an example of an equally famous, very religions man, and we’ll leave out the bad thing that happened at the end of his life, to demonstrate how only knowing the good about a public figure can distort the truth.
___
He once wrote ,” As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice. ”
___
He worked very hard to support himself, starting out with almost no formal education, and eventually gaining fame as a public orator. His hatred of communism, even led people to credit him with helping to stop its spread in the world. His strong faith led to him saying,” I go the way that Providence dictates, with the assurance of a sleepwalker.
____
He was also musically gifted. He experimented briefly with playing the harmonica and flute, and sang occasionally, but whistling was his best talent. He could whistle loudly and on pitch, and could even reproduce long passages from Opera with incredible accuracy.
___
His favorite actresses were Greta Garbo and Shirley Temple. He also enjoyed King Kong. He loved chocolate with whipped cream, and had such a sweet tooth he sometimes put sugar in his red wine.
finally, he wrote, ” I believe today that my conduct is in accord with the will of the Almighty Creator.”
Who was he? Adolf Hitler
Dear Roman Watcher, (I hope it’s okay to call you R.W.),
I really enjoy and respect your comments. What I’ve read from you has been an inspiration, usually. (Yeah, there’s a “But”.) IMHO, I’ve spent not a little time trying to develop a rightly formed conscience, not without a lot of opposition. I guess I fault both you and St. Alphonsus, (barring Indignus’ suggested vision) with a pious assertion. Good things happen to bad people, bad happens to good, and the rain falls on the just and unjust alike. If a politician clamed, ” that’s the Truth, so help me God”, I’d probably back away from the podium. And if there were a smoldering pile of ash seconds later I’d say that’d make a strong case for divine intervention. But if his plane dropped out of the sky 7 months later after being hit by geese, I wouldn’t hang my hat on it. That’s all I take issue with. I sat through a sermon where the priest lambasted those who blamed hurricane Katrina on the sinning in New Orleans, and I disagreed with him too. I say we take a lesson from all of these things and realize we need always be ready. As for St. Tony, get thee behind me… I try to keep the teachings of the Church, whole and entire, including what a now dead Cardinal called “that horrible dogma”, no salvation outside the Church. But I wouldn’t be upset with God choosing to show mercy when He wants to.
— Additionally, in your second sentence you seem to infer that Tony sought “excuses not to convert”. I would think that steps out of the realm of objective and into subjective, not that there isn’t a preponderance of evidence for that, (but I would think the proof of that would be found in the confessor’s or analyst’s chair). (Does the bishop have his priests keep a check-off sheet?)
— R.W., please accept this with no intent of disrespect, I consider your comments among the top 4 on this blog, (we shouldn’t upset the host). Anyhow, with the anonymity we enjoy here, I wouldn’t know you from salvemur. (Nah, I probably would.)
–God Bless and may we greet each other in Heaven.
@stevenw, Probably…
James, I’m not sure what your sources on the Orthodox are but it would seem they are lacking. They “recognize the pope but say he’s in heresy”? Really? So the split with the “Orthodox” must have occurred right around 1965? Actually it was nearly a millennium before that, of course.
—–
The Orthodox do NOT recognize the primary of the See of Peter as a matter of theology – period. What started as a schism ended up in core theological differences (this being but one of them).
—–
The Orthodox system of authority is nonsensical – what councils they recognize as infallible is completely arbitrary. Their refusal to acknowledge the primacy of Peter is completely anti-Scriptural and in opposition to the infallible teaching of the Fathers. For starters.
—–
“I think it’s a fair question to ask what is the difference between the Orthodox and SSPX. The Orthodox are looking at you and your relationship with Rome. I’ve never met an Orthodox person that didn’t desire unity at some level. They want to have their Traditions intact just like you. And like you.. they see full communion with Rome as detrimental to that.” Any question can be called “fair” – as for the rest of your statement, it simply doesn’t really make sense given the implication that there is no meaningful difference here with the SSPX. The Orthodox do NOT submit to Peter nor desire communion with him *in the Catholic sense* – instead, they want to be told they’re just fine as they are like every other schismatic or heretical sect. Sure, they want to have their Traditions (such as denying Christ’s command regarding divorce, denying various theological truths such as Marian dogmas, etc.) intact – every heretic sect wants its non-apostolic traditions left as they are. The SSPX, however, wants CATHOLIC Tradition left intact.
—–
Obviously, none of this has anything much to do with the sanctity of any particular Orthodox member (whose levels of ignorance and culpability are not assumed).
Case settled. Roman Watcher is Catholic, not a troll. Anyone who can say so much without a period is either St. Paul or a product of Catholic Schools.
If he retires would we have papal emeritusses?
ACT, I’m not sure what YOUR sources are on the Orthodox. Mine are from Orthodox themselves. Of course they recognize that the Pope had primacy. They disagree about infallibility and universal jurisdiction. Both which developed through the centuries and were defined as dogma in 1870. The Orthodox see the Papal dogmas as heresy. Plain and simple. They were declared while East and West were not in communion. Perhaps you missed my point. I did not at all imply the Orthodox somehow went in schism in 1965. The issue for them was the first Vatican council where absolute power was given to the Pope. They view Vatican II as a direct consequence of the Pope to wield his power which was granted a VI. The result of which resulted in the complete destruction of the Liturgy, changing the sacraments, etc. As far as divorce and contraception, etc. the Church Fathers were opposed to these things. There are sensible Orthodox that realize this and reject those evils. There are also Catholics that support these things …and worse.
Dear Evermindful and Lynda,
This post reminded us of one of our favorites from the collection of letters by Padre Pio called “Listening to God with Padre Pio”
____
#38 “Let us follow the Divine Master up the steep slope of Calvary, loaded with our cross and when it pleases Him to place us on the cross, by confining us to a bed of sickness, let us thank Him, and consider ourselves lucky to be honored in this way, aware that
-to be on the cross with Jesus is infinitely more perfect than merely contemplating Jesus Himself, on the cross-
___-
Jesus’ invitation” caused St. Therese to come out with that prayer to the Divine Bridegroom, “Either to suffer or to die.” …Mary Magdalen de Pazzi to utter
“Always to suffer and never to die” also St. Francis. .”So much good awaits me that every suffering is a joy.”
Dear Lynda,
Thanks. That’s good to hear. We were taking a chance, still wondering if we were walking in troll-country, but figured if it’s truth, it can’t hurt, and it might just help. You know the lonely days like we do, and how much you want to spare anyone else any way you can. God Bless.
Matthew, the Orthodox reject doctrines that developed over time and were defined after the split. The Orthodox have a valid Priesthood & sacraments. They have witnessed the destruction of the Roman rite and mass apostasy in the West. VI paved the way for VII. What need do they have for the Pope? The SSPX HAVE to claim they accept all the doctrines and dogmas of the Church, otherwise Rome will declare them schismatics. The Orthodox couldn’t care less if Rome calls them schismatics. They view Rome as having gone a stray and defined dogmas that give them power over all churches on earth.
ACT, if the SSPX were out of communion with Rome and Rome declared a dogma that the SSPX rejected and saw as contradicting Tradition and the Fathers, what would happen?
Dear Bert,
You obviously didn’t need our little tips on how to break into the TLM with English. 🙂 Hope our “basis” approach didn’t insult your intelligence.
God Bless
Dear James the Lesser,
Sorry if this is a bit of an interruption, as your interchange with ACT is very interesting. But IOHO, why would the Pope need to promulgate anything dogmatically, when he can get the whole world to ignore the existing rules and make sweeping changes without doing that?
___
The methods we’ve all observed clearly work . Suggest, as in Fr.Bergoglio phone calls, and Pope Francis interviews with old Atheists who do their writing and quotes from memory, or in ecumenical meetings that speak of the Holy Spirit willing a new understanding of unity in diversity.. Let people go in their new practices; remain silent while it all spreads, and before the next generation starts pre-school it’s commonly held practice and thought to be Officiial teaching, while the “books” still look the same.
____
When all else fails, use the confusion generated by the changes in the 1983 canon law, to justify or excuse theologians postulating outrageous theories that lead to things like nuns in tights dancing around the altars, and transcendental meditation classes weekends at the local parish centers, and the Jews announcing their pleasure at the Church’s dropping them from the proselytizing list.
LOL! Your comment definitely went in a direction I didn’t intend. 🙂
God bless!
p.s. @Lynda
We’ve noticed your “way with words” since we saw your first post a while back, and wonder if you’ve had extensive training in theology, etc, or have you somehow managed to self-educate to this level? You add another very special element to the conversations here, which is much appreciated, and how you manage to do it so succinctly each time, amazes us. ( guess we wanna be like you when we grow up) 😉
Dear Roman Watcher,
We took another look at your previous post and realized we responded as if you HADN’T said you were not commenting on the state of his soul at death, which made about 3/4 of our response about as useful as spittin’ into the wind.
Sorry. The way you ended it left us with the opposite impression, as we’ve read some of St. Alphonsus’ works and were aware of what he meant by “using up the mercies assigned” to a person, and the vengeance of God combined with that, left the impression you were still declaring him lost, rather than just saying there is reason it is likely. That doesn’t change our view on the other side of that coin, but please don’t mistake us for anyone in the “everybody’s a saint” crowd.
___
Dear Indignus famulus
Thank you for your wise feedback, including the profound insight that a few good quotes in isolation do not make a Saint, and of course satan himself quoted Sacred Scripture to our Blessed Lord
I note you said :”Your selective reporting becomes part of a false representation of who he really is. A sin against charity.”
Would selective reporting of only the negative things said be a true representation of who he really is??
On Judgement Day, are the scales missing half their construct??
Here’s some background info
http://www.cfnews.org/page10/page97/tony_palmer_requiem_mass.html
turns out that the protestant in question was married to a wife who was Catholic and had raised his children Catholic.
So there is even less reason to excuse his omitting of converting to the Faith.
But, as I have said, I do not judge the man, but the man’s actions; and the teaching of the doctors and fathers is, that we suffer publicly on account of our public sins.
In fact, the Saints teach, and I have never read elsewhere among their writings, that the good never die out of a tragedy (remember that those dying at the hands of the unjust on account of remaining just, such as martyrs or honest Catholics killed by the mafia, are not dying of a tragedy, but holily).
No canonized Saint, for example, died because someone dropped a piano on his head, or because he tripped over a rock and fell to the ground, or by any other such misfortune. I except here the cases where a saint in ecstasy of mind, bumped his head and died (St. Thomas Aquinas) shortly after, perhaps from a brain hemorrhage.
Why is this so? Because we have a guardian Angel assigned us at Baptism, who watches over us against these things, unless out debts by sins are such as to keep him too distant from us to prevent them. We only have so much time to do the Lord’s will for us; if we do it it saves us from misfortune, and might lead us to martyrdom of some kind, heroic or ordinary. But it is definitely a teaching of the saints and Scripture, that for sins a man is punished with misfortune, and for holy deeds he merits God’s protection through His Holy Angels.
You know, the world preaches, “Do not judge!” so vociferously, that I easily understand why you misunderstood. You have imbibed unwittingly the false gospel of the world, which insists on faulting those it judges to be judging others, rather than judging matters by their conformity to the 10 commandments and the duties of a Christian.
James the Lesser,
you quote, the Council of Constance
“20. If the pope is wicked, and especially if he is foreknown to damnation, then he is a devil like Judas the apostle, a thief and a son of perdition and is not the head of the holy church militant since he is not even a member of it.”
from its Catholic Session on July 6, 1415 A.D., which are ecumenical.
The above, was one of the condemned teachings of the heretic John Hus.
However, you must read what it says, and you will find it does not say what you perhaps think it does. The error condemed, taught that a merely immoral man, who is pope, is not pope, or a man who is of the Elect, who was elected to be pope, could never be Pope. Both these errors deserved to be condemed, because they are donatism reivived. The ancient heresy of donatism, from N. Africa, taught that only a man in the state of grace, or virtuous, could be a bishop and rule the Church, and thus, when a bishop fell from virtue or from grace, he was no longer Bishop.
The distinction here, which the Church has always upheld, is that once righly installed, a bishop deserves our obedience in all legitimate matters, even if he is not such a good Christian. We see this affirmed in the letter of Pope Clement I to the Church of Corinth in about 75 A.D., and in every other pronoucement. This is so, because even a sinner can repent in an instant, by the Grace of God, and a public society such as the Church could never remain united if the subjective state of soul of superiors was the criterion upon which subjects gave them their obedience, since such knowledge of the heart is reserved to God.
So the decree of the Council of Constance does not touch upon the matter at all.
No, it was Bergoglio who ordered that he be given the burial due a Catholic Bishop!
See John Vennari Article at cfnews.org
Bergoglio and Palmer–the plot thickens!!
http://www.cfnews.org/page10/page97/tony_palmer_requiem_mass.html
Dear Roman Watcher. Thank you for pointing us to the latest article at Catholic Family News.
–
http://www.cfnews.org/page10/page97/tony_palmer_requiem_mass.html
–
“Father David told us that because Tony [Palmer] was not a Roman Catholic he had to ask his bishop’s permission to celebrate the requiem and though Tony’s wife and children are Roman Catholics, permission still had to be given for the requiem. The bishop agreed but said that Tony could not be buried as a bishop as he was not a Roman Catholic bishop. However, Pope Francis said he should and could be buried as a bishop, and so that put an end to that little bit of ecclesiastical nonsense!”
–
If it is true that bergoglio said he should be buried as a bishop, then what?….. What does this tell us about this papacy under bergoglio?….
–
Those of us who have carefully followed bergoglio’s words and actions will have little trouble in believing that he would be capable of personally ordering the Catholic burial of a VERY publically professed non-Catholic.
–
The only part of the statement above that even I have a hard time believing is that Palmer was actually buried as a Catholic BISHOP!!!
–
But this is the testimony of someone who was actually present at the burial!
–
If all of this is true, then bergoglio has declared to be a Catholic BISHOP someone who was never even ordained as a Catholic priest…. someone who he himself said should not even convert to Catholicism…. someone who bergoglio sent out as an agent on a semi-clandestine mission to create a false “ecumenism” between Catholics and protestants in complete violation of Church teaching even by Vatican II standards.
–
God help us!
–
Kyrie eleison!
–
Holy Mary Mother of God, pray for us!
Dear James:
You write:
“The SSPX HAVE to claim they accept all the doctrines and dogmas of the Church, otherwise Rome will declare them schismatics.”
______
The SSPX ACCEPT all the doctrines and dogmas of the Church, regardless of whether Rome declares them schismatics. What the SSPX doesn’t accept is the novelties of VII, a council that was declared pastoral when convoked and defined no dogma according to both popes who presided during it’s existence. If it declared no new dogma, than is could not change the Universal Magisterium. Simple logic, mein damen und herren.
______
Having said the above, I would just like to add: “Gentlemen, start your nuancing….” 😉
______
However, this is the objective reality of the matter.
_____
And on a PS, Vatican Council I was convoked in 1868, whereas the Orthodox schism occurred in 1054. So it must have been a bit more than just V I? Yes?
Dear Indigus Famulus,
You write:
“Sorry if this is a bit of an interruption, as your interchange with ACT is very interesting. But IOHO, why would the Pope need to promulgate anything dogmatically, when he can get the whole world to ignore the existing rules and make sweeping changes without doing that?”
_____
My simple answer would be that these heretics learned their lesson from the Arian heresy. And that lesson is that if you don’t “destroy the barque, the Bride of Christ will eventually find the driftwood.” A good case in point is ++ Burkes comments on Evangelii Gaudium, i.e. he still doesn’t know what it is. And if the head of the Vatican courts doesn’t know what it is, it can’t be anything that has always been taught by the universal Church. Therefore, the modernists are in check. They need everyone to play along, but it ain’t happening. In the mean time, they are dying out, and can’t find the magic formula to get their heresies defined as dogma. The new crop of clerics knows their game, or at least see the fruits of the new springtime, and want nothing of it.
______
So the most likely scenario is that circa 2050, the Council of Econe will be convoked, and will abrogate all the VII modernist heresies in one fell swoop. Besides, by that time, the majority of the cardinals and bishops will be a healthy mix of SSPX and Ecclesia Dei (or whatever this group mutates into).
______
Keep in mind, the original schemas of VII still exist.
_______
Just like int that famous ’60 Rolling Stone tune, “Time is on our side”.
_______
Oh yes it is. 🙂
_______
Spoke with some family in Poland this morning. The SSPX has one of the largest pilgrimages to the Shrine of Our Lady of Czestochowa this year. For reference purposes, the Warsaw pilgrimage is in its 303 rd year, while the SSPX is in its 20th.
Dear Indignus famulus
I hope all readers of these comments get the chance to read this truly eye-opening article, which for me is a real turning point
It takes a good half hour to read carefully and prayerfully
http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/364-the-francis-effect-a-gathering-storm
THIS IS A MUST MUST READ
ALLOW 30 minutes
Just starting to be…ever mindful
Dear my2cents. I have commented on this new development above and also on my blog in an article aptly titled:
–
“Did bergoglio order that NON-Catholic Tony Palmer be buried as a Catholic BISHOP!!!”.
–
See link below.
–
http://publicvigil.blogspot.com/2014/08/did-bergoglio-order-that-non-catholic.html
Tony Palmer Handed Pope Francis Text Draft of common “dialogue paper” for Reformation 2017.
http://eponymousflower.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/reformation-anniversary-dialogue-paper.html
Tony Palmer handed Pope Francis a text draft of a common “dialogue paper” for the Reformation anniversary 2017… ‘2017 marks not only the 500th year of the “Reformation” and the 50th anniversary of the emergence of the Charismatic Movement in the Catholic Church, but also for the 100th anniversary of the apparitions of Fatima. It’s an anniversary that has so far remained unnoticed in Rome.’
http://eponymousflower.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/reformation-anniversary-dialogue-paper.html
Dear R.W., I only had time for a quick perusal of your response of 5:44 this AM before running off to Mass. It was the TLM, and when the Epistle came up, I almost laughed out loud. It was from 1 Cor. 10 and included this verse: “[8] Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed fornication, and there fell in one day three and twenty thousand.” Okay, so you can add St. Paul to your list of confreres. 🙂 However I’m very reluctant to see tragic circumstances and claim God did this because… and the same for seemingly miraculous rescues, though I do enjoy using them both as teaching moments. I do believe that I’ve experienced signal graces and been blest with heavenly encouragement at times, for which I am thankful. Regarding the falling piano, while I’m not aware of any canonized saints dispatched as such, I do know of Thomas a Kempis, author of The Imitation of Christ, (fabulous book), who was not made a saint because they found scratches on the inside of his coffin. The thinking being that since he was buried alive we don’t know if he despaired in the end rather than accepting his fate. Would you consider his guardian angel asleep at the switch?
Dear Ever mindful. Thanks for the link to the Remnant article by Chris Ferrara. This article from March 11 covers an immense number of bergoglian heresies and yet it only addresses the ones committed during a brief span of 3 weeks.
–
Ferrara is a lawyer and it shows in his writing style. He carefully constructs his arguments. Personally, I don’t need that much convincing. I’m able to draw conclusions by myself based on the facts.
–
But there are times like the present situation involving a heretical pope where it is necessary to be able to argue logically and thoroughly the points.
–
Because even though it is brutally obvious that bergoglio is indeed a heretic and is leading the Church in a heretical direction, many Catholics refuse to fully accept this because…. he’s the pope.
–
How much longer before large numbers of faithful Catholics in the pews begin to speak out? Or is that too much to ask?
–
And what of the bishops and cardinals? Will there be any form of organized public resistance to the upcoming synod on the family and its heretical agenda? Or is that too much to ask?
–
Personally, I think it is more likely that it will be the pewsitters that will lead the resistance…. perhaps after witnessing the failure of the bishops and cardinals to do so….
Dear Indignus Famulus, It wouldn’t be right or proper for me to say much about myself here on Mr Verrechio’s blog (for which I am very grateful). No, I have no formal training in theology; and what is available here in Ireland is generally atrocious. Ten years ago (the academic year 2004/05, the year Pope John Paul II died and Pope Emeritus became pope (I could tell you more about this in respect of the college!)), I attended evening classes in Systematic Theology and Fundamental Theology at undergraduate level in a “Catholic” college (once a seminary).
Suffice to say, three out of the four priest lecturers put forth a theology of very dubious origin, mostly in opposition to the doctrine of the Faith. I was not the star pupil! For example, in one class on Moral Theology, the teacher became apoplectic at me, even raised his hand in anger as I dared to introduce the analysis of Veritatis Splendor (a Papal Encyclical! – the horror!!) to the subject of the moral act and its elements. He nearly flung me, my book and the terrible notion of intrinsic evil, out of the class!
This teacher lauded the usual suspects (heretical theologians) and railed against “King Rat” for his war against his friends and their heretical writings (such as Fr Sean Fagan). May the Lord have mercy on this priest-teacher’s soul.
Unsurprisingly, I did not return to this college (known among many as as “All Heresies”) for a second year.
I am a lawyer by training but did not practise for circumstantial reasons. I have been especially interested in the fight against legalised killing of innocents, babies in utero, etc., since late childhood. I probably came to a seriousness about the truth of the Faith via, inter alia, my thirst for righting injustices such as the killing of babies prior to birth.
I am a single mother in my mid-forties. My only child is a young man. We both suffer from a chronic illness which is quite debilitating, meaning we have little physical or mental energy. My lack of energy is probably a big factor in my being (sometimes!) rather short, if not always succinct. Of course, my lack of detailed knowledge further contributes to this tendency!!
Apologies to Mr Verrechio and readers for writing such personal material here. I understand if you remove it.
Yes, but it was VI where Papal claims became dogma to be believed under pain of damnation. If you ask any Orthodox they will tell you that in order for unity to happen VI needs to repudiated. One Orthodox guy told me that the Papal Dogma is now on par with the resurrection. To reject either sends one to hell. (Unless you lived prior to 1870). Even though such Papal claims have never been recited in the Creed.
Correction: substitute “Fundamental Moral Theology” for “”Fundamental Theology”, supra.
PS. The Orthodox would also say they accept all the doctrines and dogmas found in the deposit of Faith and handed down by the Apostles. They would say they reject Rome’s novelties not found in the history of the Church, Traditon or the Fathers and which only developed in the West.
This is so gravely wrong on so many levels! What contempt for the Faith! Surely, there is no provision for a Catholic funeral for a person who deliberately chose not to become a Catholic?! How did his own “Church” allow it, either?? What terrible scandal. This basically says it is of no difference to one’s soul and one’s salvation if one joins the One True Church (given us by Christ as the means for our salvation) or not!! There are not words to describe the magnitude of this lie for which the Pope himself appears responsible. Lord, have mercy!
If a pope purported to magisterially and infallibly declare something that was objectively not in conformity with the unchangeable Deposit of Faith or the moral law, it would necessarily follow that the pope was not truly the pope. A valid pope cannot infallibly pronounce a falsehood.
Not at all! In fact my understand of latin is not what it used to be back in school, so I would probably have serious problems if I ever were to attend TLM, which I had never the pleasure to unfortunately.
Yes, that’s why I think Chris Ferrara and others with such knowledge and skills are needed to compile the case that ought to be brought to the College of Cardinals regarding the various statements and actions by the Pope against the doctrine of the Faith or Divine Law.
P.P.S. The Orthodox view unity as a profession and strict adherence to the Orthodox Faith and worship. They would say that unity is based in a common Eucharist and not one man. That is why Rome has had current problems with not expelling heretics, such as nuns on the bus, they are in communion with the Pope after all. Such deviance from the Faith would not b tolerated in Orthodoxy. That is why the Traditional Orthodox view the new calender Orthodox as heretics, because they deviated from the Faith by changing to the new calender in order to be ecumenical with Rome. Also, the Orthodox hold a different interpretation of Matthew 16:18. They view the rock as Peter’s profession and the local Bishop as a figure of Peter that heads his diocese and safeguards the common Faith centered around the Eucharist. Btw, part of the struggle of the VI was that the Church Fathers were not unanimous on Peter or Peter’s profession being the rock. Even Augustine retracted his position and stated that it could be either.
Question: Aside from having Tony given a burial as a Bishop, did the Pope say anything about a eulogy, or praying for Tony’s soul in case he’s in Purgatory?
I would suggest this book for a good objective look at history and what it would take for reunion.
http://www.amazon.com/His-Broken-Body-Understanding-Catholic/dp/0615183611
This is the definition from Vatican I:
when the Roman pontiff speaks EX CATHEDRA,
that is, when,
1.in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians,
2.in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority,
3.he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole church,
Now, can someone please explain to a poor ignorant soul like me why all the teachings about Religious Freedom, Salvation, etc. both in Vatican II itself and the various post Vatican II encyclicals do not satisfy these criteria?
Thanks in advance.
Dear Lynda, that would be helpful if the majority of the College of Cardinals didn’t agree with Francis about these matters.
Do you think this is the case? I mean, Francis’ behaviour and statements before his elections are ample and well documented, it’s not as if he completely changed his personality and beliefs only after he became “pope”.
In light of this, a negative answer to this initiative would only reinforce the Vatican II claim to legitimacy, and be a serious blow to “traditionalists” and their claim, in my humble opinion.
It seems to me your attitude is similar to Francis apologists (those claiming his statements and actions are ALWAYS taken out of context etc. etc.) only on a bigger scale, ergo towards the Cardinalate.
Moreover, after the recent scandal about Benedict the XVI being “forced to” or otherwise “willingly” giving up his seat, I (and surely other reasonable, realist people!) believe there is no way for the V.II church to allow another scandal on this scale. From a public relations pov, it would be tragic. And let us not forget the pederasty/pedophilia/homosexuality scandal is still vivid (and ongoing, partly) on people’s minds.
I hope to be wrong, yet it looks to me like just yet more wishful thinking.
Thanks,
Bert.
Or if the Pope declared heresy officially it could be argued that maybe Vatican I was a sham.
Dear Ever mindful
A fair question. The objective in all writing should be to serve God by presenting and promoting the truth for the sake of the salvation of souls. The objectives in the Major media, most often to promote the opposite–new-age values; praising anyone whose life or work assists the spread of Syncretism, World Government, Forced tolerance of sin, intolerance of dogmatic truth that condemns it, etc. That leaves a great imbalance in the public forum, making this kind of blog a Godsend.
____
You’ve seen the outcome of one-sided public praise of someone who is doing great evil, (as we tried to show in the Hitler piece, above) The harm is obvious, and we see it growing again today. It leads the unsuspecting to misplace their trust, follow with less thought, and according to Our Blessed Mother, the loss of many souls has already resulted. Even one instance of that is too many.
____
But a “more or less” one-sided public DENOUNCEMENT of the evil actions, words and philosophies of that same public person, if done the Catholic way, leads people to break with programmed acceptance; new understanding and knowledge of the truths of our Faith as it gets contrasted with the falsehoods being presented; less inclination to follow someone blindly into sin–even if it’s the Pope, and a search for answers about what to do next. All beneficial to souls.
___
We say “more or less” one sided, because the Faith we practice demands we not judge the heart of those who promote evil things, but focus with true Christian love on denouncing what they promote that is evil, and exposing the harm it does. That sets us apart from those who promote hatred of persons (as a means to oppose the fawning adoration of them by the press) Of course that must be kept in mind by all of Louie’s posters… which is why he called us all to correcting one another with Charity when necessary so we obey Our Lord instructions to love enemies and pray for persecutors. God Bless.
____
We doubt the small number of blogs like these can completely counter the major media’s efforts to crown the Pope king of the world, as they already have made him Time’s Man of the Year, and Forbes’ Greatest Leader on Earth. But this is no time to quit. But just think about how much that type of thing will help whomever will eventually fulfill the Bible’s final prophecies of the False Prophet and Beast, paving the way for them to seduce everyone into handing over their freedoms for the sake of false unity and peace.. Jesus tells us to persevere to the end in fighting the good fight, instead, and so we are, with much gratitude to Louie, who is providing heroic, Catholic leadership in this way.
Dear Lynda,
Thank you, no need to apologize…. That was beautiful, and so inspiring. We both suffer from debilitating illness as well, lifelong, in fact, and can relate very well to what you say about it. If there weren’t two of us, working together, ours would be shorter, too. 🙂 We’re so grateful you didn’t succumb to that indoctrination, and not only survived, but are able to express the Faith so well. We’ll pray extra for your family that God blesses you with the Graces to offer up all you can, while keeping your Faith strong–especially these days! God Love you.
Dear Lynda,
Please see our reply to this which posted just above # 25 below, 😉
Dear Lynda,
Sorry again, correction it posted above # 24 .
Dear Roman Watcher,
Sorry, in this case it appears you have judged US wrongly. (Guess we’re even)
No, we don’t drink that cherry kool-aid that teaches all “judgiig” is sinful judging, and never have, in fact we’ve gotten in more trouble for denouncing that than we care to recall over the years..
We were just in a rush when we read your post–did it too quickly, and actually missed the words in question. Had you or anyone else been actually judging the man’s soul, it wasn’t a bad defense of Church teaching, was it?
🙂 God Bless.
No offense, but the question seems almost nonsensical.
—–
First of all, the SSPX are in communion with Eternal Rome and in submission to Peter.
—–
Secondly, a true dogma would be necessarily Catholic and thus it is unthinkable that the Society would reject it. Did you have a dogma in mind? The only possibility I can think of in the past half-century that has not been formalized would be the title of Mediatrix of All Graces given to the Blessed Virgin. The SSPX priests & bishops would be thrilled beyond words with such a promulgation.
—–
Did you mean a false teaching promulgated as a dogma? Well, that can’t happen, unless Christ was wrong about the nature of His Church.
James, I would recommend *Catholic* sources regarding the Orthodox, considering that the Catholic Church is the true Faith.
—–
If you did this, you would realize that your facts – your root assumptions – again, are wrong. It is not accurate to say that the primacy of the Petrine See “developed over centuries”. This statement reveals a lack of understanding of the nature of dogma: The declaration of a dogma is the formalization of a teaching, but not its origination or even any substantial change of form. And, thus, we can demonstrate that both the primacy of jurisdiction of the Roman See and the charism of infallibility inherent on the Petrine Office always existed and were always taught in some form from the time of the apostles.
—–
http://www.acatholicthinker.net/peter-the-papacy/
—–
From the Catholic Encyclopedia: “History bears complete testimony that from the very earliest times the Roman See has ever claimed the supreme headship, and that that headship has been freely acknowledged by the universal Church. We shall here confine ourselves to the consideration of the evidence afforded by the first three centuries. The first witness is St. Clement, a disciple of the Apostles, who, after Linus and Anacletus, succeeded St. Peter as the fourth in the list of popes….The tone of authority [in his Epistle to the Corinthians] which inspires the latter appears so clearly that [Protestant scholar J.B.] Lightfoot did not hesitate to speak of it as ‘the first step towards papal domination’ …Thus, at the very commencement of church history, before the last survivor of the Apostles had passed away, we find a Bishop of Rome, himself a disciple of St. Peter, intervening in the affairs of another Church and claiming to settle the matter by a decision spoken under the influence of the Holy Spirit. Such a fact admits of one explanation alone. It is that in the days when the Apostolic teaching was yet fresh in men’s minds the universal Church recognized in the Bishop of Rome the office of supreme head….The limits of the present article prevent us from carrying the historical argument further than the year 300. Nor is it in fact necessary to do so. From the beginning of the fourth century the supremacy of Rome is writ large upon the page of history. It is only in regard to the first age of the Church that any question can arise. But the facts we have recounted are entirely sufficient to prove to any unprejudiced mind that the supremacy was exercised and acknowledged from the days of the Apostles.” (volume 12, article “Pope” page 263, 264)
—–
Yes, we know that the Orthodox “see the Papal dogmas as heresies” – good for them. Heretics and schismatics call truth error and error truth – that is the nature of heresy and schism. The Orthodox arguments regarding the papacy are false – and to be a good Catholic you must understand and believe that.
Yikes – do you really believe that the SSPX only “claim” to believe all Catholic doctrine and dogma? As if there were any question about this? If so, frankly, you know nothing of them.
—–
James, you have made yourself out to be an Orthodox apologist here. That is really too bad. Your understanding of the facts – and of Catholic truth – has been distorted by an Orthodox lens (perhaps provided by that friend you mentioned). Please do some reading from *Catholic* sources regarding these questions.
—–
“The Orthodox couldn’t care less if Rome calls them schismatics” because they are schismatics and they know it.
—–
While you DO have a point that *in a certain sense* the Orthodox churches have kept themselves clean of the novelties of Vatican II and can rightly condemn them, in other senses they have also caved in to the evils of the modern world – such as their acceptance of divorce – and unlike the wounds on the Catholic Church this has been “official” in their churches in every sense of the world.
—–
Ultimately, Vatican II is a red herring in the question of the Orthodox. The split had many factors – including errors and maybe even sins on the part of churchmen on both sides – but since then hearts have been hardened and errors and falsehoods created and propagated by the schismatics to justify their present state, but errors and falsehoods they remain.
I never said I believe the Orthodox claims. If I did, I would be Orthodox. 🙂 But the modernist, neo-Catholic, novus ordo establishment has me questioning everything.
No man, I believe the SSPX are Catholic in every sense of the word. That’s why I said they HAVE to claim to believe all the doctrines and dogmas, or else they would not be Catholic!
I was trying to get you to visualize the perspective of the Orthodox by drawing a comparison to your communion and its lack of being fully united with Rome. Apparently, you didn’t get it and I failed. But I can see your point of the society being united to eternal Rome. BTW, do you believe the Orthodox sacraments are valid and the holy spirit works to sanctify individuals unto salvation in the Orthodox Church? JPII wrote that this was the case.
BTW, I am not afraid to search Truth and read both sides. It hasn’t lead me to become Orthodox yet. 🙂
No – it simply follows dogma that one should not give up Christ and follow a false teacher – even if that teacher calls himself the pope.
So is this how it will look in the next wicki- article?
(corrections welcomed)
__
In February, 2014 in his video entitled the Miracle of Unity, Anglican bishop Tony Palmer publicly professed his belief that The Holy Spirit is calling all Christians to “unite without the doctrines or traditions of men”.
___
On July 20, 2014 he died in hospital, in the UK, 10 hours after a drunk driver came into his lane hitting him head on- while he was riding his motorcycle.
___
On August 6th, 2014, The Feast of the Transfiguration of the Lord,
Tony Palmer became the first- ever unconverted and publicly professed heretic, to be buried by the Roman Catholic Church with full privileges of a Bishop including a Requiem Mass.
___
(As stunned Catholics began asking questions, it was learned that the local ordinary initially denied permission for a Bishop’s-funeral to be given to a professed sect member, not recognized as validly ordained as even a priest; but his decision was abruptly over-ruled by a direct order from Pope Francis, and the law-breaking (correction) ground-breaking event then took place at St. John the Evangelist Roman Catholic Church, in Bath.
___.
(Pope Francis is resting this month in the Vatican, preparing for the upcoming October 2014 synod, which Catholics expect may produce similar or even greater shock waves throughout what is left of Christendom, (unless rumors of the Hierarchy taking some formal actions to prevent that, prove true .)
____
Ironically, the Church bestowing the honors on Tony Palmer, was named for the author of these ( far less welcoming ) lines from Sacred Scripture:
“If any man come to you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him, Godspeed, you. For he that sayeth unto him, Godspeed you, communicates with his wicked works.”. (2 John 1 10-11)
___,
These Words were observed more generally in the Roman Church prior to Vatican II, but are still practiced today by a rapidly growing number of the faithful, who are viewed by many progressives in the church as “neo-promethean pelagian, restoration-ists”, a selection of terms occasionally used by Pope Francis, which Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi, has not yet had time to explain fully, as the Holy Father’s press engagements keep him extremely busy.
Dear All,
Perhaps the overwhelming evidence that seems to daily increase, is only the leaves turning green-sign Our Lord reminded his us of in Matthew, which he say we would recognize easily, as the time in which Our Good Shepherd will intervene in human history on our behalf.
_____
Our Lady’s messages at Fatima and Akita, foretold all of this, and asked only for our prayers, sacrifices, and daily duties according to our vocations, along with our continued Faith in her Divine Son’s words, with love.
“Et portae inferi non praevalebunt”
(rough translation to English)
and the gates of hell shall not prevail !
Dear salvemur,
Time to switch back to water? 😉
Dear Indignus Familus,
I reckon Matthrew 24 does indeed ring a bell these days to many catholics.
About Fatima, do you believe the publicly revealed Third Secret is the genuine one?
And do you also believe the Consecration of Russia has not yet happened, like many traditionalists do?
What about Medjugorje? Do you believe it to be a genuine Apparition?
It cannot be a hoax, as many claim, because supernatural occurences do indeed go on there, and illusions of the Sun are fairly common and witnessed by dozens of thousand through the years.
But as you can see, the Spirit leading the “seers” preaches the Vatican II “gospel”:
“All religions are equal before God,” says the Virgin. (Chronological Corpus of Medjugorje, p. 317)
“The Virgin added: ‘It is you who are divided on this earth. The Muslims and the Orthodox, like the Catholics, are equal before my Son and before me, for you are all my children.” (Fr. Ljubic, p.71)
Question: “Is the Blessed Mother calling all people to be Catholic?” Answer: “No. The Blessed Mother says all religions are dear to her and her Son.” (Janice T. Connell, The Visions of the Children, The Apparitions of the Blessed Mother at Medjugorje, St. Martin’s Press, August, 1992.)
Now, one can interpret it in two ways:
either catholic doctrine has been wrong for the past two millennia, and all past apparitions were false or,
the Vatican II agents are assisted by Hell itself via demonic apparitions and false signs.
Both perspectives are outright bone chilling.
Thanks,
Bert.
Dear Michael,
We had trouble getting in to leave a comment on your blog, but thought you might be interested in this video showing what may be more of an idol made of the Virgin who unties knots, -so popularized in Argentina by Bergoglio.
___
It is said at least a thousand people do this activity every month at this church, which doesn’t sound or look like normal Marian devotions at all. But sometimes looks can be deceiving, so see what you think.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bv8-Z1ruNM
____
Ironically, we checked the Douey Rheims Bible for the word knots, and found only ONE reference. And it condemns idol worship, of all things: –Wisdom 13:13 against smoothing out the knots in wood to make an idol to hang on a wall with an image on it, to worship.
____
What is most concerning is that IF he has fostered a false cult using the charismatic movement mixed with superstition and people susceptible to those things, then in addition to all the other twisted abuses Holy Mother church is being assaulted with, this one turns the Protestant false accusations about Marian “worship” into a true one, in Argentina and elsewhere, and attacks Our Blessed Mother’s devotions–something Satan just loves to do….
_____
Ironically St. John Bosco’s vision of the Pope who restores the Church after a Council, included the command from God:
“Now Heaven’s voice is addressed to the Shepherd of shepherds. You are now in conference with your advisors. The enemy of the good does not stand idle one moment. He studies and practices all his arts against you. He will sow discord among your consultors; he will raise up enemies amongst my children. The powers of the world will belch forth fire, and they would that the words be suffocated in the throats of the custodians of my law. That will not happen, they will do no harm but to themselves.
___
” You must hurry. If you cannot untie the knots, cut them. ” ************
____
If you find yourself hard pressed, do not give up but continue until the head of the hydra of error is cut off. This stroke will make the world and Hell beneath it tremble, but the world will be safe and all the good will rejoice.
(THAT seems to us to be the Consecration of Russa.)
http://virginmarywindow.com/st-john-bosco
Dear Bert
Bert: “About Fatima, do you believe the publicly revealed Third Secret is the genuine one?”
—Yes, the vision of the Bishop in white seems true, but since Sr. Lucia’s memoirs ended the 2nd secret with “the Dogma of Faith ..preserved in Portugal, etc.” we don’t believe there were no words after that et cetera. We don’t know what anyone did with them, but it makes no sense to write that and not finish the thought. We suspect it mentioned the “reason” Dogma would be endangered, and since our Lady revealed to Sister Lucia that Diabolical Disorientation would hit the top of the Hierarchy, it makes sense that it spoke of that, which is why John XXIII sealed it up after reading it and said, “This does not apply to my pontificate”.
Have you read about Akita–it got more specific on that.
–Bert: “And do you also believe the Consecration of Russia has not yet happened, like many traditionalists do?
—Judge for yourself. John Paul’s last consecration was of the world, with the added words,”and those peoples whose consecration you are awaiting.” Does that sound like he was doing it, or admitting it was being awaited? Then look around us. Mary said Russia was the instrument chosen by God to chastize the world, and unless we obtain the conversion of that poor nation,by the Pope and bishops consecrating her, …then listed everything that has happened up till now, including bloody persecutions of Christians (100,000 just got chased into the Iraqi desert in August), with the only remaining thing undone–the annihilation of nations, or is that happening as we watch? . Also Lucia said Jesus appeared to her and said go tell my ministers that as they delay in grantingy My requests, like the King of France, they will fall into misfortune. The lask King lost his head under a guillotine 100 years after the first one refused to consecrate France to the Sacred Heart.. (Now we have terrorists that lop them off), and a 100th anniversary coming up. Pray.
—Bert… “What about Medjugorje? Do you believe it to be a genuine Apparition?” NOPE. Too many bad fruits among the good, and too much talk from Our Lady, about unity without conversion-way at the beginning, years ago. It’s not Catholic, and we called it right from the start. IOHO.
–Bert: “Both perspectives are bone-chilling” YEP. Here’s another: –Just our take, but it makes sense:.
Check the words of John XXIII Opening Speech at Vatican two. Search for the words “gloom and doom”.–with which he rejected Fatima IOHO
See what he said after that about man doing it all by ourselves, and fulfilling God’s mysterious plans. and what would result.
-Out of his mouth came a sweet, false prophecy that day, to replace Mary’s.
Now check Revelations Ch 10. The angels says Time’s up. The voices speak, St. John is told NO, don’t write it, (its a secret).
Then he is given a scroll to eat. Sweet in his mouth, bitter in his stomach. Double meaning here= false prophecy in old testament always sounds sweet, but when digested is bitter (fruit of lies). John XXIII died of stomach cancer. John Paul II got shot in the stomach on May 13, 1981, read the secret in the hospital, and still refused to Consecrate Russia, Kissed the Qua’ran, etc. died from Peritinitis in his intestines.
Benedict and Francis ? No Consecration yet. Fatima Prophecy yet to be finished. Angel with fiery sword (Akita Fire falling from sky)
–The very next thing in Revelations, John is told to go measure the Temple, but not the outer courts which were given over to the gentiles for the time of the anti-Christ. Temple-Church. Gentiles=Pagans. Here we are.
Fatima is in there. Chapter 12 The woman clothed with the sun battles the dragon. Way too much more to say, this will have to do for now. Start a Forum if you like, we’ll talk there. God Bless.
You’re welcome. (We’ve been studying this for about 40 years) daily rosaries.
Dear Bert,
Answered a bit further down. IF you want more, maybe start a forum and we’ll join you in there? God Bless.
p.s. to Bert
All these things tie together, only one way. Satan is very gifted, much higher intellect than man. But sin dulls the intellect. He thinks (still) that he can beat God and destroy his body (again) like on Calvary, only this time its the Church Christ the Head we the body–why so many are assaulted with woes and temptations.
But virtue formed by living in Grace day after day, beats all of it. Intellect can only go so far, and then your emotions get assaulted doubts, fears, depression you noame it, he’ll try and try again. Only solution Confession. Mass. Scapular devotion (reminds you Mary, your mother, has her arms around you) not a superstition. A real thing she gave us to help remind our dumb brains that get so easily distracted by the world and the stuff in it. Rosary daily. Confession monthly at least. Don’t care what you think of the priests. Don’t worry, you’re confessing to God, and they are there to give you His Absolution, not theirs.
Don’t worry about N.O. validity. Best Proof: We would not have had the Graces
to battle habitual sins of the past, and win, without them. Certain truth. We can now look back, and say. I was that person, now I’m better. I still have weak spots, but now I decide, firmly commit, and keep away from those sins.
Try that without Sacramental Grace and you lose,. If you’ve gone, God Bless you. If you haven’t GO! Please, for all our sakes. Ave Maria Gratia Plena….
No Latin, that’s true. However, just imagine ‘catholic’ parishes all over the world where people gather in a sort of version of the Grand Ole Opry, and stomp their feet and occassionaly include religious terms in their songs. Thing is no imagination is required. Newchurch is it. I think they used to call it Protestantism, now it’s Newchurch. I wonder what it will be tomorrow?
Indignus – here’s the method to my madness. You have a ‘recovering catholic’ on central mike, you have a gospel choir, you have drums, bass and various guitars and you have the presider up the back on piano, going ‘AWRAIGHT, AWRIAGHT!’ And the song itself, a simple celebration of the little people and their little illegalities (although not so much illegal these days). Perfect for a Novus Ordo mass.
Dear S. A.
“Time” is indeed on our side.
Our Blessed Mother said “In the end” her Immaculate Heart will triumph.
The devil get’s what time God gives him to operate, and then one day it’s ALL over. We stick with her and we win with her. It’s pretty simple, really.
Thanks you Indignus for the exhaustive response.
I will post on my Google + page about such matters, because what you’re saying implicitly is very true.
I don’t want to abuse Mr. Verrocchio’s cordial ospitality either by posting about personal and / or unrelated matters at lenght on his site.
You can find my G+ page by searching for my name and surname here:
https://plus.google.com/
I won’t post the entire address in fear of being targeted by spam bots and the like.
I will post a response shortly, hoping you have the means to read it.
You can also come to me if needing help or clarification on Francis and Popes’ words in italian (or spanish, partially), or Bulls and Encyclicals as I am native speaker also.
It is risky to rely solely on english translations as sometimes they are not accurate.
Just one example, did you know that the term “co-redemptrix” does not even appear at all in the italian, and portuguese, versions of Iocunda Semper Expectatione?
It would seem it could have been just a fanciful term chosen by the translators.
Thanks again.
Bert.
For instance
Dear Indignus Famulus, Thank you for your encouragement to persevere in the Faith. I am very glad to have found this blog and “met” some truly committed Catholics. God bless and protect you and your family.
Dear Mr Schlomowitz, I think that there could very well be a majority of the College that would not denounce objective heresy or apostasy. But I think it ought to be done in any event, so that: 1) the scandal caused to so many souls by nothing being done, by those who have a duty to act, would be lessened in its deleterious effects, 2) the matter would be officially described in detail with the evidence and argument supporting the allegations and would entail an official response for the record, making everything clearer; and 3) the fact that many people believed there was highly probative evidence of the Pope’s contradicting the doctrine of the Faith and morals in several instances, would be put on the official record and assist future efforts, as well as encouraging the embattled and abandoned Faithful to persevere, and educating those who have been misled by their teachers.
Well, James, no, I didn’t really realize that you were playing a bit of “devil’s advocate” there.
—–
No Catholic believes that Orthodox sacraments are not valid – they definitely are. This has never been disputed, as far as I know. But they are not licit.
—–
Is it true that “the holy spirit works to sanctify individuals unto salvation in the Orthodox Church”? The Orthodox do have valid sacraments from which flow actual graces. A person who is a member of an Orthodox body but is in invincible ignorance regarding their schism could be saved; a person who is not is guilty of the sin of schism, which is a sin against the theological virtue of Faith, and is cut off from the Church. I realize this reply is not exactly comprehensive.
Dear salvemur,
Got it…it was just too deep for us. 🙂
Dear Salvemur
You mean like this craze Bergoglio got going all over South America –to Mary the untier of knots.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bv8-Z1ruNM
John Bosco said the ones that can’t be untied should be cut.
Dear Lynda,
We don’t know if you’ve ever read about St. John Bosco’s Dreams, but we posted part of one above because Matthew is exploring a related topic, and we’ll repost it here:
“Now Heaven’s voice is addressed to the Shepherd of shepherds. You are now in conference with your advisors. The enemy of the good does not stand idle one moment. He studies and practices all his arts against you. He will sow discord among your consultors; he will raise up enemies amongst my children. The powers of the world will belch forth fire, and they would that the words be suffocated in the throats of the custodians of my law. That will not happen, they will do no harm but to themselves. ” You must hurry. If you cannot untie the knots, cut them. If you find yourself hard pressed, do not give up but continue until the head of the hydra of error is cut off. This stroke will make the world and Hell beneath it tremble, but the world will be safe and all the good will rejoice.
(THAT seems to us to be the Consecration of Russa.)
_____
Our favorite is the Dream of the Two Columns-a tall one with the Eucharist atop, and a shorter with Our Lady Help of Christians. In the vision with that, a Pope falls and is killed, (just like the Fatima vision) and the next one calls a council just like the quote above. Peace comes when there are two moons in the month of flowers. (2015 has two moons in July) Roses? L-)
p.s. re the Revelations theory, likely does refer to the outcome of VII, but not necessary false prophecy. Not ALL OT Sweet and bitter are false. Ezecheial is a TRUE one, right from God. The sweetness of Truth in that case. So back to the drawing board. on that one.
Dear Indignus Famulus, I was aware only of Don Bosco’s “nightmares” wherein he was warned about the state of the souls in his care. Thanks for the information. I may look up when I feel well enough. God bless.
What do you guys think of Tim Haines’s take on Radical Catholic Reactionarism (from Vericast)?
–
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=roGOk60dnEQ