As the vast majority of readers of this space are perfectly well-aware, the current crisis in the Church concerning Francis in general, and Amoris Laetitia in particular, is part and parcel of the conciliar revolution.
As I wrote in the previous post, the documents of the Council – by turning on its head the constant teaching of the Church on such matters as religious liberty, ecumenism, the Church’s relationship with the Jews, etc. – actually set the stage for Amoris Laetitia to do the same with regard to adultery, marriage and family, Holy Communion, and even the very concept of mortal sin itself.
The authors of the dubia, Cardinal Burke chief among them, seem not to have a clue that the so-called “confusion” surrounding Amoris Laetitia pales in comparison to the “doubts” that plague the entire Church (and indeed the world) thanks to Vatican Council II.
With this in mind, and mirroring in form the dubia relative to Amoris Laetitia, I provide below a list of Dubia de Concilium – Doubts about the Council – comprised of questions, the answers to which every Catholic should have no doubt whatsoever (that is, if the sacred hierarchy was in the least bit healthy).
I’ve limited myself to just eight knowing very well that our readers will add to the list.
For the benefit of those readers who may perhaps be less familiar with the topics addressed, I hyperlinked the relevant documents, and would strongly encourage them to take the time to compare the propositions set forth by the Council with the immutable faith as taught so very clearly in the centuries leading up that disastrous event.
Dubia de Concilium
- It is asked whether, following the affirmations of Dignitatis Humanae (n. 2), one still needs to regard as errors worthy of condemnation the following propositions a) “Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true,” and b) “The Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church,” (Pope Pius IX, Syllabus of Errors, nn. 15, 55)?
- It is asked whether, following the affirmations of Dignitatis Humanae, one still needs to regard as “impious and absurd” the proposition which states that “the best constitution of public society and (also) civil progress altogether require that human society be conducted and governed without regard being had to religion any more than if it did not exist; or, at least, without any distinction being made between the true religion and false ones” (Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura, n. 3)?
- It is asked whether, following the affirmations of Dignitatis Humanae, one still needs to regard as valid the teaching of Pope Pius XI which states that “not only private individuals but also rulers and princes are bound to give public honor and obedience to Christ” (Quas Primas, n. 32)?
- It is asked whether, following the affirmations of Lumen Gentium (n. 8) one still needs to regard as valid the teaching of Pope Pius XII which states that “the true Church of Jesus Christ – is the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic and Roman Church (cf Mystici Corporis, n. 13)?
- It is asked whether, following the affirmations of Unitatis Redintegratio (n. 3), one still needs to regard as valid the teaching that the “the society established by the Redeemer of the human race … [is] the only haven of salvation” (cf Mystici Corporis, nn. 3, 41)?
- It is asked whether, following the affirmations of Unitatis Redintegratio, one still needs to regard as “a certain false opinion” the following propositions a) that the words of Christ, “That they all may be one…. And there shall be one fold and one shepherd,” (John 17: 21, 10:16) merely “express a desire and prayer, which still lacks its fulfillment,” and b) that “this unity may indeed be desired and that it may even be one day attained through the instrumentality of wills directed to a common end, but that meanwhile it can only be regarded as mere ideal” (Pope Pius IX, Mortalium Animos, n. 7)?
- It is asked whether, following the affirmations of Unitatis Redintegratio (n. 3), one still needs to regard as errors worthy of condemnation the following propositions a) “Man may, in the observance of any religion whatever, find the way of eternal salvation, and arrive at eternal salvation” and b) “Good hope at least is to be entertained of the eternal salvation of all those who are not at all in the true Church of Christ” (Pope Pius IX, Syllabus of Errors, nn. 16, 17)?
- It is asked whether, following the affirmations of Nostra Aetate (n. 4), one still needs to regard that the mission of the Church as expressed by Our Blessed Lord; namely, to baptize and to teach the nations (cf Mt. 28:16-10), is as applicable to the Jews in our day as it was when St. Peter called them to conversion on the day of Pentecost (cf Acts 2)?
The unfortunate truth is, folks, until such time as the Council’s errors are plainly condemned and the entire affair is consigned to the ash heap of history where it belongs, along with the Novus Ordo Missae, and Russia is consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of the Blessed Virgin Mary as requested at Fatima, the current ecclesial crisis is only going to worsen; even in the unlikely event that Jorge Bergoglio is justly run out of Rome in shame.
Our Lady of Fatima, ora pro nobis!
UPDATE: I recently received more than one email suggesting that the title to this post (formerly “Dubia de Concilum”) should be corrected. Here is the first of them:
I’m a Catholic layman and Latin student from Croatia. Just wanted to say, you should fix your title “Dubia de Concilium” to “Dubia de Concilio. “Concilio” is Ablative singular form of “Concilium, i, n.”. Ablative case is required by preposition “de”. Thank you for you great work.
I’ve said it before and it bears repeating: Readers of this space are among the most well-educated, formed and informed of any in the entire Catholic blogosphere! I greatly appreciate all of you!
Wow. This is fantastic. Informative and concise and here in “dubia form” for those of us still learning about the errors within the V2 documents themselves.
When you reference these documents of V2, I smile remembering the story you once told of Our Lady’s directing you toward a study of the V2 documents.
Another marvel of Hers to the benefit of Her children here reading your blog. She is outstanding! stupendous! and Our Mother Who loves us.
Praised be Her Son Jesus Christ Who gave us His Beloved Mother to direct us, guide us, and instruct us DESPITE the corrupt, evil people in the hierarchy of Holy Mother Church.
Thank you, Mr. V. for being Her beloved “slave.”
–
Our Lady of Fatima, ora pro nobis!
Saint Maximilian Kolbe:
“But we are an army whose ‘Commander’ knows each and every one of the enemies, who has observed and observes every one of their hidden actions, each one of their words, and even their very thoughts. Ask yourselves, under such conditions, can one speak of secret plans, clandestine actions and invisibility?”
–
St. Maximilian Kolbe reveals the name of the “Commander” of his army: “It is the Immaculate Virgin, the refuge of sinners, but also the one who tramples the infernal Serpent. She will crush its head!”
–
Above quotes taken from Tradition in Action:
http://www.traditioninaction.org/History/G_010_Kobe_Jewsl.html
Why can they not grasp the atrocities that have been perpetrated upon the faithful and place the horrific blame where it so rightfully belongs. The VII Dubia that Louie puts before us should be respectfully sent to his Eminence Cardinal Raymond Burke and the other three Cardinals . Praying to Our Lady of Fatima for the light of grace to dawn upon these Princes of the Church.
I believe Abp Lefebrve sent some sort of V2 Dubia to the JP2 also and it too went unanswered. I just heard this recently so maybe some one with more info on this can collaborate or dispel this story.
How can these boys be THAT clueless. I mean they walk up to a skunk, lift its tail, take a big whiff and say, “Hey that stinks for sure, but I have not a clue as to why I smell this bad smell. Perhaps we could invite some more people onto this panel to further duscuss this matter because for sure, this is a soft and fluffy animal who means nothing but mercy and kindness towards us. I feel this soft fur so let’s keep believing in this kind kitty cat.”
Of course, they have not one idea that it’s a skunk and this stench is of the devil. Perplexed and clueless as they stare at that white stripe running down its back and can’t figure out why this cat stinks. Few can plainly see that he comes from a family of skunks, of course.
Some people will NEVER see. So agitating to us, the little people, who hope on their every move in order that they speak of God’s Truth. There is an aweful demonic block that is almost meant and used to taunt us who recognize this evil, but could do nothing to stop it. It’s terrible, this block. We NEED these guys to state our case before the world…but they cannot. They, as connected and intelligent as they are, have not been given vision. Some people will not see Truth even as they stare it in the face. So perplexing, frustrating and taunting to us. This is surely the devil’s work.
This is what I think when I watch people like Raymond Arroyo and friends talk or interview Cardinal Burke about this dubia. They are so intelligent, so well spoken, but their faces, their faces, so baffled, bewildered, perplexed. They just CAN’T see. It’s like salt in my wound, so dang frustrating. They walk up to a line and that’s as far as they go. Is it their fault, their choice? I mean they must know of Louie and other Truth talkers by now. So what’s the gig? Even a dummy like me, born and raised Vatican 2, just coming out of this matrix, can recognize the Beautiful Voice of God. Why? Perhaps it’s just part of this punishment we so deserve.
Louie,
great job on the Council Dubia.
Re. The Dubia sent by Msgr. Lefebvre to the Holy Office, had to do with the question of “Religious Liberty”; the Vatican responded, and Msgr. was shocked by the responses; he stated that these were one of signs that impelled him to Consecrate bishops (the other being Assissi). He stated that the re-affirmation of the false principles of Religious Liberty by the Vatican was worse than Assisi, because Assisi was a transitory act, but the principles were the permanent basis for the destruction of the Church, which led to Assisi. The responses were never published (as far as I know).
Bishop de Castro Mayer’s declaration,
June 30, 1988, Episcopal Consecrations:
“My presence here at this ceremony is a matter of conscience: It is the duty of a profession of the Catholic Faith before the entire Church and, more particularly, before His Excellency Archbishop Lefebvre, before all the priests, religious, seminarians and faithful here present.
St. Thomas Aquinas teaches that there is no obligation to make a public profession of Faith in every circumstance, but when the Faith is in danger it is urgent to profess it, even at the risk of one’s life.
This is the situation in which we find ourselves. We live in an unprecedented crisis in the Church, a crisis which touches it in its essence, in its substance even, which is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the Catholic priesthood, the two mysteries essentially united, because without the holy priesthood there is no Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and by consequence, no form of public worship whatsoever. Equally, it is on this basis that one constructs the social reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
Because of this, since the conservation of the priesthood and of the Holy Mass is at stake, and in spite of the requests and the pressure brought to bear by many, I am here to accomplish my duty: to make a public profession of Faith.
It is sorrowful to see the lamentable blindness of so many confreres in the episcopacy and the priesthood, who do not see or who do not wish to see the present crisis, nor the necessity to resist the modernism momentarily ruling, in order to be faithful to the mission which God has confided to us.
I wish to manifest here my sincere and profound adherence to the position of His Excellency Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, which is dictated by his fidelity to the Church of all centuries. The two of us have drunk at the same source, which is that of the Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, and Roman Church.
May the Most Holy Virgin, our Mother, who at Fatima maternally forewarned us of the gravity of the present situation, may she give us the grace to be able, by our attitude, to help and to enlighten the faithful in such a manner that they will distance themselves from these pernicious errors, of which they are the victims, deceived as they are by many of those who have received the fullness of the Holy Ghost.
May God bless Archbishop Lefebvre and his work.”
Vatican 2 is their god. They firmly believe it was inspired by the Holy Ghost. They look at V2 as the beginning of the church. All faith began at that wretched council for these folks. They have to make it work. They cannot admit the error. That is why the conservative prelates and commentators on the church are bigger threats to the faithful than the Kaspers and Kungs. They prop up the false conciliar religion and call it Catholic and millions of faithful fall for the lie.
The Abbe de Nantes tried to deliver a Dubia against Pope Paul VI in person, but the Swiss Guards turned him away. Later on, this same Abbe de Nantes wrote another Dubia against Pope John Paul II. The Abbe de Nantes was never given a hearing.
I think the same about the Novus Ordo.
The following opinion has got me into trouble, but I stand by it:
A reverently celebrated, conservative Novus Ordo mass, with some chant, nice vestments, candlesticks and beautiful hymns, as rare as this is, is just as dangerous to the faithful as a regular, suburban, contemporary, guitar mass with a laid back “feel.”
The reason is that it gives the faithful the impression that this revolting Novus Ordo is in some way Catholic; that it comes from tradition and is what has been handed on from previous generations.
A reverent Novus Ordo masks the horrible reality that this is a rite concocted by malicious men in order to destroy the Faith which purports to be “ecumenical” (which was just a cover). It hides the fact that this new rite supresses Divinely revealed truths that Our Lord shed His Precious Blood for on the Cross.
It makes the Faithful think that there is no need to go to inconvenient lengths to find a traditional Mass celebrated by a Priest ordained in the old rite, by a bishop consecrated in the old rite.
The faithful who attend are not to blame. If they don’t know any better, they are just trying to be the best Catholics they can in a time when they see everything slipping away in catastrophic proportions.
But they have been robbed of their patrimony, and the means to worship God in the way He has provided the Church with since the time of the Apostles.
That it is also of doubtful validity is secondary, but extremely serious nonetheless. The true worship of God is first, and the Novus Ordo take that means away. “Those who worship God must worship in Spirit and in Truth”.
Thank you for the clarification.
High Anglican worship is very majestic and reverent too, but its still heretical.
Louie,
For the ill- catechized Catholics, could you please provide an answer key to your Dubia questions at the bottom of the post?
Haha. Half-joking.
Dear Cortez, your analogy is so illustrative and apt. The inability to recognize the skunkiness of Vatican II should be called the Cortezian Principal. Yes, that’s what’s at play in the blindness of otherwise earnest churchmen, the Cortezian principal.
Perfect, Akita!
So funny! 🙂
Admittedly, I am no fan of Cardinal Burke––I simply don’t trust him. I’ve said as much in past comments. But the more this Amoris Laetitia drags out, the more convinced I am that Burke and the others are wittingly involved in a clever head-fake to back-door advance the “Holy Communion for the divorce/remarriage” issue by using the current pope’s legitimacy for advancing that teaching.
What I’m suggesting is, unquestionably, Machiavellian, but these four men (and the rest of the modern bishops as well) are all supporters of the Second Vatican Council teachings––much of which was influenced by the heresy of Modernism, and all four cardinals were appointed by Modernist or Modernist-leaning popes. If adhering to the dogmatic truths of the Church is so important to these men, why were they never concerned about Religious Liberty, Ecumenism, and the teachings in Nostra Aetate with respect to the Jews––to name just a few V2 issues? Why are they now so concerned with this issue, when they had no problem ignoring many other Catholic truths during their entire priesthood.
So assume for the moment that these four men continue to weakly advance their canonical arguments (as they now appear to be doing), they will continue to fail to persuade very many of the other bishops and cardinals to join with them on what more and more appears to be a very Quixotic venture. Nevertheless, it’s fair to assume that the Dubia would eventually be presented in some forum and ultimately decided by the cardinals; and unless something changes dramatically, they are going to lose. And if they do, at the end of the day this pope will have been “acquitted” of professing any heretical act.
But while that, in itself is certainly not good, I believe what would be much more devastating, would be that the questions in the Dubia will have been determined to be orthodox teaching, since that is the pivotal decision to be made––assuming, of course, that the pope doesn’t recant, and that he prevails. Consequently, and notwithstanding how anyone else may view the five questions of the Dubia, for all practical purposes the issue of the divorced/remarried receiving Holy Communion will have been adjudicated as being acceptable, since to determine otherwise would mean that the pope is an anti-pope.
In short, I’m suggesting that it appears more and more likely (at least to me) that these four cardinals may very well have been part of a larger, Machiavellian scheme involving the pope and others to “Protestantize” not only that teaching, but all Catholic teaching. I reach this conclusion by recognizing that If the four cardinals fail in their efforts, this issue of “Holy Communion for the divorced.remarried” would fall into the category of “let your conscience be your guide”. If that happens, why would not every Catholic doctrine and dogma be considered in the same way? That is, of course, Protestantism.
I’ll continue to pray for Burke, Pope Francis and the rest of the bishops of the Church that they do what is pleasing to God, but from everything I’m seeing so far, things don’t look that good for the Church.
That’s so hysterically funny, Akita! I guess we’ll never cease being bewildered by their bewilderment. We may not share the same view as they, but we do share the same dumbfounded expression.
How devastating to think that the picture you paint may be a correct one!
I am sure, however, irishpol, that you are hoping as I am that you are dead wrong.
Wow, Irishpool. That only makes sense.
We are a pathetic bunch, wishfully thinking. You’ve stated your point well and in a dignified manner. I respect this mindset. I am beginning to realize that there’s really only one road.
I just can’t shake the feeling though that perhaps these four cardinals and those who support them must be genuine insofar as they are capable. Perhaps, just perhaps, this is a beginning for them grow courage in facing the whole Truth. We all had to start somewhere. After all what’s in it for them if they are planning to fail at this venture as you suggest? As far as I could read them, they are pathetically legit. They are all so immersed in it. I pray they find their ways out, not only for themselves, but also, of course, for the sake of Truth. It’s just not good to be so saturated in Vatican 2. It is almost impossible for them to escape its clutches. It will take a miracle of God alone for them to awaken from this nightmare. But who knows why God reaches down to whatever level any of us were at to pull us out of it. Right? Why me, right?
I am hoping that these very smart men can just open their eyes. Pray for a miracle. But REALLY above all pray for that Very Holy Prelate to show up-the one whom Our Lady of Good Success promised would be with us during the complete restoration of The Church. I hope he’s out there and close by. After all She ALREADY told us that this Holy Prelate will be with us, so we should have confidence in knowing that he will show up. I know God works in mysterious ways, but I don’t think this dubia thing is going to be the answer to ANY of our massive problems. Just another distraction. A DISTRACTION! (Yelling voice, slap! Let’s ALL WAKE UP!) Things will probably only amp up until Our Lady’s arrival.
Stay focused-the sun almost crashed into the earth at Fatima. The dubia ain’t the answer. It’s a distraction. Just honker down and live the Fatima message. She’s coming.
Yeah, these couple of questions that my second grade child could answer correctly aren’t going to solve the problem. It’s pathetic where we’re are, groveling at this.
Modernism unrecognised. Respect of worldly materialist men is put above the duty owed to God and the Faithful. A false intellectualism based on an empty materialism whose presuppositions are not acknowledged. False pride.
Servant of our Lady:
Certainly I am praying that our pope and our bishops embrace the true teachings of the Catholic Church, but there is a growing body of evidence to suggest that is not happening. Moreover there is every reason to believe we are moving further away from the truth each day and with each new episcopal appointment.
At this point in time there does not appear to be a “smoking gun” that would lead anyone to suspect that these four cardinals are colluding with the pope to achieve the diabolical end that I fear; but there is every reason to believe that these four men embrace the Modernist, heretical teachings of the Second Vatican Council. It is for that reason that I don’t trust them. We must to forget that in spite of the evil of Amoris Laetitia, Vatican II (including, of course, the Modernist run-up that began with the election of Pope Benedict XV in 1914), is the reason why the Church and the world is in the sorry state that it is today––not Amoris Laetitia.
The scenario I have outlined is an every day occurrence in the world of politics. Weaker politicians are regularly bought off by more powerful politicians and regularly find themselves in situations where they end up selling their souls out of greed or fear. Politicians, by definition, stand for nothing. There was a time in the Church when we could not expect that from bishops. I believe that day is long past.
But whether these four cardinals began their quest with a white heart or not, one would be foolish not to realize that there is much going on behind the curtain. These four men did not become bishops and cardinals because they were ignorant in the political world of the Vatican. Each one of them are being regularly threatened, cajoled or promised by Bergoglio’s side men to move this issue in a direction that benefits the outcome the Modernists seek, and their ecclesial history does not portend a good outcome. Yes, I do hope I’m wrong.
This mess that we find ourselves in is because of the reordering of the hierarchical purposes of marriage which began in the late 1800’s and which has culminated in the published written document of Humanae Vitae from PaulVI, which endorses publicly in writing the permission that a married couple may plan to separate conjugal intercourse in act, word, and deed from procreation through the conjugal act endorsed by NFP, which not only says that even though complete abstinence is acceptable NFP strongly endorses the teaching that it is not a sin to plan to have recourse exclusively to the infertile period in order to avoid having children while benefiting from the effects of unity through the conjugal act. Changing the primary purpose of marriage, the procreation and education of children for God’s glory, to the now false and heretical teaching of the unity of the couple as the being the primary purpose of marriage, is the cancer. Unfortunately I cannot help but believe that the four cardinals have endorsed in the past and perhaps continue to endorse the false and heretical teachings on NFP. I wonder if they cannot see and now regret their endorsement of the heresy of NFP which has brought us to this issue of the adulterers being able to continue their sex life because, after all, sex is no longer ordered toward the procreation and education of children for God’s glory but for the narcissistic needs of the couple to stayed united in their sin which was stamped and approved by Humanae Vitae.
Thank you for this. A reminder of how some of this began, and a reminder of what is at stake. A reminder, too, that laying down one’s life for the Faith is what may be required by priests, bishops and cardinals. Bishop Lefebvre and Bishop de Castro Mayer were prepared to do this.
This quote from Our Lady of Good Success seems to fit with what you said here, Lynda.
“But know, beloved daughter, that when your name is made known in the 20th century, there will be many who will not believe, claiming that this devotion is not pleasing to God…A simple humble faith in the truth of My apparitions to you, My predilect child, will be reserved for humble and fervent souls docile to the inspirations of grace, for Our Heavenly Father communicates His secrets to the simple of heart, and not to those whose hearts are inflated with pride, pretending to know what they do not, or self-satisfied with empty knowledge.”
Wow…right? I tell you we have been warned about these time 418 years ago by Our Lady of Good Success, Our Dear Mother. She has come to us so many times and places in history. I can’t imagine how it will be the next time she comes, and Oh! She IS coming.
They want to destroy everything that belongs to God. You are right, Anastasia, as to when they began to chip away at the Sacrament of Matrimony. Now look where we’ve come, their plans are moving along smoothly. Thanks for pointing afinger at its root.
Our Lady of Good Success:
About the Sacrament of Matrimony, which symbolizes the union of Christ with His Church, She said this: “Masonry, which will then be in power, will enact iniquitous laws with the objective of doing away with this Sacrament, making it easy for everyone to live in sin.”
I need to add that ‘Selfishness’ and or ‘fear of sacrificing for a higher purpose i.e God’s laws and order.’ might be, I feel, the more accurate description than ‘narcissistic needs’.
Thank you for the reminder of Our Lady’s direct messages to us. It’s good to be regularly reminded of her words of wisdom and help.
And respect of men (the worldly whose disvalues are imposed by the powerful).
Dear Anastasia,
This book makes your point in a unique way. Once I read this book (over the summer) I completely understood all that you have been saying on the topic of marriage. I highly recommend this book.
–
http://angeluspress.org/All-Love-Mothers
–
It is the memoirs of a Catholic midwife who live in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s. From the Angelus Press site:
“Forty-three short stories by a midwife who knew all the intimate details first-hand. The stories are grippingly historical but their purpose is educational and moral, making it a book for everybody. Forty years of stories about real people in real situations, false love, courtship, romance, abortion, marriage, dysfunctional families. Thoughtful medicine for public immodesty and ungoverned feelings. Mostly unhappy endings, but since when have fairytale endings taught us life’s hardest lessons? Parents, use the living examples in this book to explain the beauty, dangers, finality, order, morality, proper terms, and attitudes of the matrimonial union. Young adults, learn from the experiences of others instead of making your own disastrous mistakes. A can’t-put-it-down easy-to-read book, convincing readers that happiness on earth is only possible when the order of the Divine Creator regarding Human Life is respected. Fully appropriate and necessary material.”