In light of recent events, I’m certainly not the first to say: May God bless Monsignor Charles Pope!
Unlike many others, however, I do not mean to beg God’s blessing on him as a reward for his authentically Catholic (and subsequently deleted) blog post of September 4, 2014, indirectly calling attention to Cardinal Timothy Dolan’s willingness to deny Christ in order to satiate his bloated appetite for the earthly rewards that flow forth from “happy-clappy, lighthearted engagement of our culture” in all of its Godless, murderous, homo-deviant glory; rather, I wish to pray the Lord to bless Msgr. Pope with that which is apparently lacking in him at present; namely, the intrepid heart of martyr.
[For those who haven’t yet read the blog post to which I refer, or perhaps may wish to reread it, it is available in its fullness here.]
My intent herein is not to disparage Msgr. Pope; rather, it is simply to point out just how well the situation at hand answers the questions Catholics so often ask in our day:
Where is the voice of those churchmen who cannot but recognize the great apostasy being perpetrated from among their own ranks? Are there any prelates left who still think and feel with the Church?
Starting with the latter, the answer is that those men most certainly do still exist, and Msgr. Charles Pope is one of them. As for the former, their voices, like that of the monsignor, are being pressed into silence.
Let me be clear, however; the faithful voices of which I speak are not so much being silenced by the likes of the cardinal buffoon of New York, or his spineless counterpart to the south who would sooner curry favor with gay activists by chastising a faithful priest than to uphold the demands of Canon 915; rather, these voices are being suppressed from within thanks to a regrettable lack of fortitude.
The Baltimore Catechism defines the cardinal virtue of fortitude as that which “disposes us to do what is good in spite of any difficulty.”
It is, in other words, the virtue that allows one to persevere in defending and upholding the truth for its own sake in the face of any persecution, even death.
As for Msgr. Pope, there can be no doubt whatsoever that he was forced to remove the blog post in question, or perhaps more accurately, was made to express regret for having written it after it was unceremoniously removed at the behest of a superior.
His follow-up post addressing the now deleted hay maker of Sept. 4th pretty much tells the story.
I apologize if the language I used caused offense … I remain concerned … my intent is not to directly criticize any bishop or diocese.
This ain’t rocket science, folks.
Whenever two or more homo-militants are gathered to cry persecution, the media is present in their midst to breathlessly broadcast their every last grievance.
And yet, as far as I can tell, the deviants who pressed for the “right” to put their perversion on display in New York’s St. Patrick’s Day Parade are still too busy celebrating Cardinal Dolan’s apostasy to take notice of a solitary blog post on the Archdiocese of Washington website.
Hint: That means that the offended parties to whom Msgr. Pope offered apology are most likely a couple of men draped in red, even if perhaps under which are a pair of pink boxers.
In truth, however, there is but one offended party in this mess that truly matters, and that is Our Lord Jesus Christ; the same who will one day ask Msgr. Pope and others like him why they chose to bow down to the demands of faithless men rather than to accept the great blessing of being persecuted for His name’s sake.
Look, I don’t claim to know the heart of Msgr. Pope with absolute certainty; nor do I have intimate knowledge of the virtual waterboarding he most certainly endured at the hands of his superiors in the hours after he hit “publish” on September 4th.
I have, however, read enough of his lucid commentary over the years to confidently state that only a damned fool imagines that the Catholic sense that moved him to write that initial blog post in the first place, and the prudence that caused him to tactfully refrain from calling out the Big Apple’s plump little protestant prince by name, have somehow withered to the point of causing him second thoughts.
As such, it is reasonable to suspect that the fear of some loss – perhaps his blogging privileges on the Archdiocese website, his pastorship, or his freedom to celebrate the Traditional Latin Mass – whatever it may be, the potential loss of something likely motivated him to retreat.
While I don’t know what that something may have been, I do know that it wasn’t worth it.
As the Dolans and the Weurls (and while we’re at it, let’s be perfectly frank, the Bergoglios) of the Church go about abusing their exalted offices and thus the souls in their care – the same for whom Our Blessed Lord died – the flock at large is literally starving for clerics who are willing to serve up the truth unadulterated.
The last thing we need is one more miserable spoonful of sugar coated, lukewarm pabulum like, “I remain concerned… my intent is not to directly criticize any bishop or diocese.”
Well, if you’re truly concerned; that is, more concerned about the Truth than what may be lost by proclaiming Him – and I am here speaking to every single member of the sacred hierarchy who has somehow managed to avoid the diabolical disorientation that infects so many among their confreres – then why the hell not directly criticize the wolves who prowl about the sheepfold in clerical disguise?
As it is, this is a question that many men of the Church will one day have to answer before Christ, and I thnk all concerned realize that the excuse de jour, whatever that may be, isn’t very likely to cut it.
So, let us pray for the conversion of those prelates, like the aforementioned bishops, whose very words and deeds are as poison to the Body of Christ, indeed, but let us pray all the more for those clerics who, like Msgr. Pope, see their grave offenses for exactly what they are and as yet lack the fortitude to withstand the persecution that necessarily follows from confronting them head-on.
Lou you are absolutely correct in your suspicious. The pink mafia in the clergy are lauding every step of Bergoglio and waiting to consumate their abomination. Moves like the one against Pope’s blog post are one of the rare occasions where the power they have becomes undeniable to all who have eyes. I can assure you, though it is very said to report, that about 60% of seminarians at Rome are openly gay, some even soliciting others in the hall ways of the pontifical universities. Professors in sexual ethics openly declare that being gay makes you closer to God and that self abuse was only considered a sin after Augustine, who suffererd, according to them, with a distorted conscience. Complain about this to the Vatican and nothing is done, other than the complainers being kicked out of the respective pontifical insitutions and their ecclesiastical careers ended. So the parade is only the cherry on the top of the iceberg. An apostasy there is, and alas, many think it has only to do with the abandonment of the mass. I recall very well one of the first salvos of the commissioner of the FFI, at his talk for the profession of novices, he spoke about opening up things to make flowers bloom, a homo crypto signal, I believe, to say “let it all come out in the open”…
The laity need to soberly react and choose only clergy straight in morals. And the problem is not only among those who say mass in the vernacular. But most laymen have not a foggiest about how deep the problems go.
The solution is the restoration of the traditional catholic family with traditional roles of father and mother, with the father as head of the family, but not as one detatched emotionally from his sons and daughters. The hope of the Church is that our clergy do no marry, and so the future generation of priests is under the immediate and direct control of catholic parents with strong faith. Teach them well can keep them pure from the abominations of this world, is my advice.
I say all this to explain why Bergoglio is saying this…
http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/the-vatican/detail/articolo/santa-marta-36148/
I found the initial comment from Msgr. Pope regarding the removal of the post most telling:
–
“Bless you all for your prayers and encouragement. I hope you will understand if I cannot continue to post your comments on the parade article here. I will read them but cannot post them, I will send you an e-mail in gratitude. I ask your charity and understanding for the Archdiocese of Washington which has always generously sponsored this blog and been supportive of our conversations. I also hope you will understand if I cannot explain why it was removed. I am a loyal son of the Church and I love my Archdiocese.”
–
The threat he received from Cardinal Wuerl must have been still ringing in his ears as he wrote: “I am a loyal son of the Church and I love my Archdiocese.”
Sadly, Monsignor Pope will probably never be elected POPE. He sounds too Catholic. Vatican II has turned everything upside down!!
The more I think about it, the more more I am inclined to think that the Father Pope’s of this world have great a opportunity to do a great service to the Bride of Christ. Think about it folks. It’s not like he will be fired. Fr. Pope might be moved to a different parish. Might be degraded to an assistant pastor. But at the end of the day, he will not end up on the street if he criticizer his superiors.
_____
What is the worst that could happen to Fr. Pope?
______
And even if he is thrown out of his dioceses, he can always come over to the SSPX. The SSPX have about 140 chapels in the US and about 160 priests. In other word, they are always ready to accept a “few good men”.
______
Come on Fr. Pope, act like you got a pair……
______
PS And maybe this will set a good example for the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate.
Dear Roman Watcher:
I agree. It’s high time that we get rid of the Bergoglian decadent church structures.
____
Half a century of failure is enough.
——-
We all need to move on.
The Pope himself liberates a Sandinista priest and is now fast tracking Fr. Romero who was a supporter of ‘liberation theology’. Most certainly this pope is leading the Church in a new direction. I finally agree that we do have a ‘new church’, a post conciliar church that hates what the Church stood for during her first 1960 years. And prelates that compromise with the world and are soft on sin, such as C. Dolan who admits that he basically never ever preached on the difficult truths (necessary for salvation) are the ones on top. And others in high places truly dislike tradition and those who wish to embrace all the teachings and truths of the Church.
This priest nails it: http://www.audiosancto.org/sermon/20140817-Generation-Gaps-in-the-Membership-of-the-Church.html
As for the FFI: the anti-tradition faction went to sympathetic ears and got the holy founders deposed and assumed power themselves. And then they came for the holy Sisters too with the visitors saying they pray too much! Oh no! And the cloistered ones are really living cloister! Oh no! And they have full habits! Oh no! They need to go to sensitivity training and learn to embrace VII values as we know how well post conciliar Orders have done when they lost their charisms. The holy charism of the FFI is not one the modernist post conciliar ‘new church’ can tolerate.
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/09/update-on-visitation-on-franciscan.html
But all things pass. The FFI will resurrect one day in its glorious charism. This pope will not live forever but the next one will have a huge mess to clean up. In the meantime, millions of more souls are in immortal danger.
Dear Louie,
___
We agree that many in the hierarchy have consistently let us down this way; but question one conclusion you drew regarding Msgr Pope’s reason for removing his post:
You wrote: “While I don’t know what that something may have been, I do know that it wasn’t worth it.”
___
His withdrawn topic called attention to Catholics compromising our values by participating in “hijacked” Catholic annual traditions- like fund-raisers and parades. He knew his blog was already out there (likely copied) and his withdrawal statement called even more attention to it. Had he posted a re-write minus a few words he may have actually regretted using( we’ve all been there), it would have been compared to the original and ended up emphasizing those words..
___
More to the point we’re trying to make–, he has to be aware of the catastrophic potential of the upcoming Synod- regarding core teachings of the Faith,(sacrilegious reception of the Eucharist and the indissouability of marriage) as well as whatever reactions are coming- to the Pope and other persons promoting those attacks on the Church. If he’s just preserved the opportunity to make one last public outcry, can anyone blame him for making those things his priority?
Dear S. Armaticus,
I could not agree more with your assessment of the solution to this crisis. I don’t doubt that there are countless priests and religious who disagree wholeheartedly with the direction our Catholic Church has taken since Vat. 2. SPEAK UP!!!!! Don’t just sit there worrying about what the Bishop will say or do. Get out there and join the Church Militant who are fighting for Our Lord’s Church. Your first allegiance is to Christ Himself, not some wimpy Bishop whose first allegiance is to “go along to get along”. WHO WILL YOU FACE WHEN YOU ARE JUDGED???? Your eternity depends on what you do NOW—not SOMEDAY!!!!
The original article by Monsignor Pope was true in fact, in morality and in the Faith. It was educational, exhortational and sanctifying. It addressed an issue that needed to be properly addressed, in accordance with the Faith and morals. Removing it is a great shame – damaging to souls.
Monsignor Pope ought not to be intimidated into not speaking the truth, which is his solemn duty to the end of saving souls. I implore him to apologise for weakening in his duty against opposition to the truth. We are starved of bishops and priests who will not give in and stop teaching and sanctifying when intimidated and threatened. Think of all the souls a holy priest or bishop can save when they fearlessly refuse to desist from speaking the truth in accordance with the sacred deposit of Faith and the Divine Law. Is no priest prepared to suffer in order to remain faithful to the doctrine of the Faith and the moral law, thus saving many souls and refusing to endanger souls? Blessed Michael pray for us.
Dear Mr Verrechio, I support what you say in this post because it is clearly true and needs to be said. Respect of men valued over the fear of God. We need bishops and priests who will refuse to be bullied by superiors into not upholding the Faith and morals. If they are not upholding same, explicitly (and silence in the face of evil and endangered souls is not upholding), they are refusing to serve God in their Holy Orders and causing souls to tend towards perdition.
I hope everyone will please keep in mind that Msgr. Charles Pope and all of the clergy have taken a sacred vow of OBEDIENCE! And I assume that this vow is under pain of mortal sin.
We laity can express our opinions more or less freely and deal with it at a personal level, but for the clergy the situation is much more complicated and there is much more at stake from a moral perspective.
We cannot expect that a Monsignor is going to challenge the orders of an archbishop… nor should he in my opinion. The blame lies squarely with those in positions of authority.
As for the idea that Msgr. Pope could just casually decide to become a priest of the SSPX, I would say that this is an enormous decision for a priest. Even for a lay person to decide to leave their parish church in order to attend Mass at another church is something which requires a huge amount of thought and prayer.
It is not necessarily simply a matter of courage or fortitude. I have no doubt of the courage and fortitude of Msgr. Pope. I’m sure it took enormous amounts of fortitude to set aside his pride and right his apology. But this is what a good Catholic priest would be expected to do under normal circumstances.
Of course we don’t live under normal circumstances….
Dear Michael,
We agree, and although there are times when obeying God requires disobeying a superior, the circumstances of this situation didn’t appear to us to fit that description. For one thing, he wasn’t on his own website and he was therefore subject to Diocesan supervision. The exact objections of his superior are not known to us, nor are we privy to all Msgr Pope’s reasons for these decisions. Given his past boldness in proclaiming unpopular truth, we don’t see the reason for the degree of hostility towards him, and wonder if some of it isn’t the result of overall frustration with the politics involved. ..
Has Our Lord and the Saints left us totally without guidance on how the laity should respond to a situation where the Church hierarchy absolutely refuse to do the work of the Church? Where Cardinals forget the symbolic meaning of their red cassocks? Of course not. St. Paul, for example, provides guidance in 1 Timothy 5: 17 – 20:
———
“Let the priests that rule well, be esteemed worthy of double honour: especially they who labour in the word and doctrine:
For the scripture saith: Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn: and, The laborer is worthy of his reward.
Against a priest receive not an accusation, but under two or three witnesses.
Them that sin reprove before all: that the rest also may have fear.”
———
Rules derived from St. Paul:
1. Honor those prelates who rule well, and especially those who energetically defend the faith.
2. Provide those leaders who do the work of the Church faithfully material support.
3. Publicly denounce those leaders who fail to do the work of the Church to such an extent that other leaders will fear similar reproof.
———
It seems to me that Catholics are very good at 1, but terrible at both the negative implication of 2 (not supporting, e.g., public heretics) and 3.
———
Regarding 2, both Catholic religious leaders and the laity have forgotten the negative negative implication of St. Paul’s admonition to support those who do the work of the Church. Those religious leaders who DO NOT do the work of the Church are NOT worthy of support.
–
The Cardinals and Bishops have insulated themselves somewhat from this reality, though, by acting through local pastors many of whom avoid controversy. So the laity feel like they have no recourse against an erring Bishop or Cardinal because their financial support of the Church is funneled through their local parish. Faithful Catholics must come to the realization that nothing will change until they are willing to bite the bullet and stop supporting their local parishes until Bishops begin acting as faithful sons of the Church and defenders of the faith.
———
Regarding 3, when was the last time the laity rose up in a hue and cry against an erring Bishop or Cardinal to such an extent that he was publicly humiliated? Publicly humiliated in such a notorious manner that his brother Bishops would never risk being subjected to similar treatment? Can anyone think of even one recent example?
“have taken a sacred vow of OBEDIENCE!” To whom? The devil?
“the “parade” [ modernist ‘popes’, ‘bishops’, ‘priests’, protestant ‘mass’, error teaching council and its spirit] is devolving into a farcical and hateful ridicule of the faith.”
–
http://mostholytrinityseminary.org/Apostolicity,%20Qualities%20of%2006-29-97%20-%20Bp%20Sanborn.mp3
“When was the last time the laity rose up in a hue and cry against an erring Bishop or Cardinal to such an extent that he was publicly humiliated? Publicly humiliated in such a notorious manner that his brother Bishops would never risk being subjected to similar treatment? Can anyone think of even one recent example?”
–
Novus Ordo Watch does its best, but few seem to care/have the stomach for such unpleasant activities. The days of cabbages hurled at the fake-holders of croziers seem to dialogued into dissolution.
It’s terrible to watch the dissolution of nominal Catholicism that is happening now that the ‘legal’ hierarchy is but a husk, an error breeding husk (and those who bow to the error breeders). It can surely be nothing but blasphemous to see any of Christ’s authority in such breeders of evil.
–
‘Now that the political obstacle embodied by Christianity has been removed by the revolutionary surge, we are at the progressive suppression of the religious obstacle, that is, the Papacy, won over as it is by revolutionary ideas for more than a half-century. And this obstacle against the manifestation of the Man of Iniquity, this mysterious katejon [the restrainer] of whom Saint Paul speaks (2 Thess. 2:7), who delays his coming, seems to me to be precisely the Papacy, light of nations and master of truth. It is only when this obstacle will have disappeared that “the wicked one shall be revealed” (2 Thess. 2:8). And let no one say that these are only fantasies from some feverish imagination: those who have actively worked toward the aggiornamento of the Church, toward its adaptation to the modern world, which was the principal goal sought by Vatican II, its “guiding principle” do not hide it. Cardinal Suenens, who was one of the figureheads of the last council and one of the four moderators named by Paul VI, did not mince words when he insisted, “The Council, this is 1789 in the Church.”’
–
http://www.novusordowatch.org/mileschristi-francis-englis.pdf
Aquinas writes on this subject in ST, II-II, Q.104, Art. 5.
Referring specifically to the situation of religious, he replies to the following objection thus (emphases added):
“Objection 3. Further, just as religious in making their profession take vows of chastity and poverty, so do they also vow obedience. Now a religious is bound to observe chastity and poverty in all things. Therefore he is also bound to obey in all things….
Reply to Objection 3. Religious profess obedience as to the regular mode of life, in respect of which they are subject to their superiors: wherefore they are bound to obey in those matters only which may belong to the regular mode of life, and this obedience suffices for salvation. If they be willing to obey even in other matters, this will belong to the superabundance of perfection; provided, however, such things be not contrary to God or to the rule they profess, for obedience in this case would be unlawful.”
Let us not assume that Msgr. Pope did NOT object in the strongest terms with the decision to remove his original Blog post, or that he did NOT object in the strongest terms to the seeming false obedience he would perpetrate by seemingly consenting to pulling it. You got to read between the lines folks. He is definitely irked by what happened and is putting the best face on it, perhaps, because he is intelligent enought to realize that everyone will see the truth of it, as we do here…
@Roman Watcher: My point 3 was mainly about the laity. I did remember one such example – where the laity of Buenos Aires disrupted the latest Catholic hosting of a non-Catholic memorial in the cathedral of Buenos Aires. That is exactly the type of public humiliation that some among the hierarchy deserve. Where were the Catholics of Houston when the local Bishop lent out the Cathedral for the “installation service” of a heretical so-called woman “bishop”?
Where were the Catholics of Italy when the Pope visited so-called “evangelical christians” and apologized for the supposed “sins” of the Church? Where are the Catholics of New York when the laughing cow brags about the teaching of the religious practices of those who reject Christ to the children of his diocese?
Dear Salvemur,
With respect to Novus Ordo Watch, here are my thoughts. Besides, I’ve been wanting to write this for quite some time, so thanks for the opportunity.
________
Preface) Before I start, let me just say that they are a great source for information about what those “wild and crazy” novusordoites are up to. Having said that:
1) They (NOW – not to be confused with the other NOW) appear to have a very large chip on their shoulder. This bad attitude “pollutes” their text to the point that it undermines their credibility.
2) They possess certain “fixations”, especially with other Catholics who do not share their view. Let’s face it folks, this is really petty stuff.
3) They lack perspective- It’s easy to find “error” since the Holy Roman Catholic Church is living through a GREAT AGE OF APOSTACY. NovusOrdo land is one big error propped up by falsehoods on a foundation of a lie. It’s a new religion, and there is no way of getting around that. However, we as faithful Catholics need to “sift through the rubbish” (that word should ring a bell) since we were all given the capacity by God to think and reason, and make judgements. Now those judgements need to be made with a good dose of prudence. But the editorial line over at NOW appears to be obsessed with real petty stuff ( Is it really important that bp Sandborn answers bp Williamson..or better yet, the Cekada/Jenkins debate.?) , which diminishes the scale of importance of the real important stuff ( i.e. Bergoglio’s letters to Scalfari).
4) They also appear to lack Charity: If a person falls into sin, it is our OBLIGATION as Catholics to help that sinner repent and find his way back to the path of salvation. This surely must also be the case if the entire Church falls into apostasy. So the Christian response is to help that institution ( not to mention that is was established by God himself for our individual salvation), to help return it to the right path. But over at NOW, they separated themselves from the mess, and pretend that it is not their problem (pretending that Francis is not the pope). Kind of like “you made the mess, you clean it up”. Doesn’t sound too Christian, let alone Catholic to me.
5) And finally, the sheer WAIST of intellectual talent. There are some very intelligent people who the Holy Roman Catholic Church could use in its effort to battle the Evil One. Here I am thinking of bishops Dolan, Sandborn and Fr. Cekada. Massive intellects, awesome writing and presentational skill, encyclopedic knowledge of theology and totally marginalized. By separating themselves from the “fight”, they are of absolutely of no use in the present crusade undertaken by the forces of Tradition in “restoring all things to Christ”. PRIDE, pure and unadulterated.
I will leave it off here, but I can go on….
______
I would also like to say this. I pray for these people to return to the fold, since it would be a sin not to.
dear S. Armaticus,
Just some words of my own, put forth to provide a little balance, notwithstanding the fact that neither the site nor clergy you noted need my defense bc I am a nobody.
—-
Re: Novus Ordo Watch. The site is geared to a certain tough talking audience of the Trad community, as is Louie’s site-IMO. It is hard line in it’s language and makes a certain statement- that’s what NO Watch does. I myself find it quite glaring at times, and not at all representative of the sede privation/vacante position. That said, I do enjoy it for what it is.
—
Below I will link to a site which is more highly representative of the sede privation/vacante position held by Catholics.
—
If I may say, the pastoral care of the clergy you seem to denegrate is something that is outstanding, I can state from lived experience-especially during a time I’ve shared with you all here before, when I was a young abandoned , impoverished mother and no one but they would tell me the Truths by which I needed to live and raise my children. Your verbal portrayal of them seems unjust.
—
We sede privation/vacantists are Catholics. It’s our position that newchurch of Vatican II is an heretical sect, schismed from the Divine Authority given by Jesus Christ, from which we especially must protect our children. Much, much more could be said.
—
Out of respect for Mr. V.’s guidelines which include instruction for this topic to be discussed in forum , I’ll stop here. Friend, I’m quite sure you know that many of us who loved +Lefebvre feel that the above mentioned position is one he would have taken had he lived to see today, I being one. I do not claim to have known the Archbishop at all. I only had 3 conversations with him, totaling, all combined, less than 20 minutes. Nevertheless, those interractions certainly do affect my position today.
—
Here’s the site I referred to earlier.
Peace be to all you dear brethren here.
—
http://catholicharboroffaithandmorals.com/Index.htm
Catholic Harbor of Faith and Morals
Dear Dumb_ox. The burden of proof must be set very high in order to justify disobedience.
–
Does this matter “belong to the regular mode of life” OR does it belong to things “contrary to God or to the rule they profess”.
–
I would suggest that the normal assumption is that this issue of obedience with regards to a blog post belongs to “the regular mode of life”.
–
I would also suggest that raising this incident to the level which would call for dis-obedience reflect a very protestant attitude.
–
We are talking here about a parade which although it takes the name of St. Patrick is really just a secular “Irish Pride” parade. I don’t think it is the place of a priest to tell an archbishop whether he should or should not participate in such a parade.
–
Of course there is a larger issue. As Louie puts it: “Where is the voice of those churchmen who cannot but recognize the great apostasy being perpetrated from among their own ranks? Are there any prelates left who still think and feel with the Church?”
–
It is clear that Msgr. Charles Pope had no intention of addressing the larger issue of “the great apostasy” in his blog post. He was just addressing a small symptom of that disease. And he never suggested that underlying this symptom there is a “great apostasy” — even if we would like to read that into his statement.
–
Louie suggests that Msgr. Pope should “directly criticize the wolves who prowl about the sheepfold in clerical disguise”.
–
It’s not clear to me how Msgr. Pope would go about doing that. Should he contact some people in the press and air his grievances publicly? Should he start his own blog and use that to criticize his superiors?
–
Personally, I don’t see that Msgr. Pope had any viable options at this point. What difference would it make if he continued to speak out? Do you remember what happened in the case in New York regarding Holy Innocents when a priest ( Father Justin Wylie ) spoke out? Or for that matter what happened to the Franciscans of the Immaculate when they chose to embrace the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass as it has been practiced through the centuries prior to Vatican II?
–
What is needed is for some substantial number of bishops, archbishops and cardinals to speak out jointly and forcefully and publicly.
–
As Archbishop Lefebvre did….
Oh boy. I hope you’re not getting trapped in the same mistake as that of the last 60 years.
From the SSPX Asia site:
–
“Others, even after more than 20 years of being deceived “in the name of obedience,” still do not realize that “Satan’s masterstroke is to have succeeded in sowing disobedience to all Tradition through obedience.” (Archbishop Lefebvre) They have not yet learned by experience what St. Peter, the first Pope, said: “We ought to obey God rather than men.” St. Thomas teaches that obedience is a moral virtue, thus in between a default (disobedience) and an excess (servility); in two simple questions of his Summa Theologica, he masterfully exposes the solution to the dilemma of these souls: IIa IIæ Q.104, A.4: “Should we obey God in everything? Yes.” A.5:
Should the subjects obey their superiors in everything? Sed contra is what is said in the Acts of the Apostles, “we ought to obey God rather than man.” But sometimes the precepts of the prelates (sic) are against God. Therefore one must not obey the prelates in everything….Therefore, one can distinguish three kinds of obedience: one sufficient to salvation, by which one obeys in the things he is obliged to; a second one which is perfect, by which one obeys in all lawful things; a third one that is indiscreet (therefore sinful), by which one obeys even in the unlawful things.
He also teaches that there are many other virtues more important than obedience, such as faith, hope, charity, religion…Some have come to realize that obedience to the local bishop is not a theological virtue, but they still consider that obedience to the pope is a theological virtue (one against which there cannot be an excess). The history of the Church and the lives of the saints show that this is not true. Since the supreme authority has been given by Our Lord to Peter in order to transmit the deposit of Faith, the best obedience to the pope is to do what is necessary for the transmission of the Faith, especially when so many strive to distort this Faith.
–
http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/Archbishop_Lefebvre_and_the_Vatican/preface_first_edition.htm
Amen to that.
“Satan’s masterstroke is to have succeeded in sowing disobedience
to all Tradition through obedience.” ~ Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre
PS my comment above was directed to Michael Leon
dear salvemur,
thank you ever so much for reminding me of this talk. In past I found it hugely relevant in evangelizing protestants w/regard the esteemed Papacy. One Ave please?
May the Peace of His Majesty Our Lord Jesus Christ, a Peace not of this world, be to you and yours.
Dear In Hoc Signo Vinces.
–
I am very familiar with this letter regarding obedience by Archbishop Lefebvre. In fact I just re-read it last night.
–
Please see my comments above for more clarification.
–
What exactly do you think that Msgr. Charles Pope should have done in this situation? Please be very specific in your answer, because I would really like to know. Also, please specifically point out what you expect would be the outcome of these actions and how this would help the situation. And also please give us your opinion on what the repercussions would be for Msgr. Pope and specifically how that would help the situation.
–
And actually, I don’t see the SSPX speaking out in the way that you would have Msgr. Pope speak out. Do you?
–
Please provide links to the specific public statements where the SSPX leadership have criticized Cardinal Dolan for allowing homosexuals to march in the St. Patrick’s day parade.
–
More importantly please provide links of recent statements by the SSPX leadership publicly and strongly criticizing Pope Francis for his “great apostasy”. I would specifically like to see articles that point out the heresies and apostasy of this pope. I am very interested in these links because I have not seen anything like this.
–
Please educate me since you seem to know so much more about this subject than I do.
The effort to withhold Communion from pro-choice Catholic pols “is in the past,” [Cardinal Dolan] said. And he also said that Francis wants pastoral, social justice-focused bishops “who would not be associated with any one ideological camp.”
–
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/religion/are-catholic-conservatives-turning-on-cardinal-timothy-dolan/2014/09/05/712ddc9c-353b-11e4-9f4d-24103cb8b742_story.html
Archbishop Dolan is a disgrace to his Office and to Holy Orders. The so-called “social justice focus” is a false ideology that subverts the Faith and Divine Law. Pray that this enemy of the Faith, this cooperator with evil, will repent and that by God’s grace, people will not be led to Hell by him. Blessed Michael, defend us in battle . . .
Dear de Maria numquam satis:
You are absolutely correct that these clergy need no defense. From what I read in there various documents, top notch theologian each and every one of them. But that is to be expected from clergy formed at Econe.
_______
With respect to your situation, I am glad that you found support, and that you are showing gratitude for this help.
_______
It actually ties in with today’s gospel, (13th Sunday after Pentecost) where Our Lord healed 10 lepers, but only one of them came back to show his gratitude. And Our Lord told the grateful leper to “go away for thy faith has saved thee.”
_______
During the homily, our priest tied these words of our Lord to not only the lepers salvation, but to ours as well. And he asked (rhetorically of course) how it can be that a clown mass, where the participants jump up and down and clank their horns, can provide sanctifying grace. Next he mentioned that “extra ecclesiam nulla salus” but said that surely there must be more than just showing up in church and acting like a clown. And on the other side of this coin, are Catholics who are fully cognizant that outside the Church there is no salvation, claim they are catholic but despite this put themselves outside the Church. And this is got me thinking about what I actually wrote you above.
________
With respect to the position that the conciliar church is a sect, well, every sect says the the Church has lost it’s way. And they know exactly what Jesus meant by saying what he said, and how he wanted to organize His earthly means of salvation, i.e. the Catholic Church. I have those conversations with the Jehovah’s Witness’s every other month. Persistent buggers, they. So all of the 25,000 different Christian denominations that operate in the US basically say the same thing, i.e. they know better.
_________
The difference between the Catholic Church and the rest of them however, is the physical presence of the Catholic Church itself. Now, I agree wholeheartedly that the conciliar church is a entirely new religion. It is a sect in the truest sense of that term. I might even go farther and say that is exhibits the characteristics of an ideology rather than a religion. However, the one way by which it differs from the other sects is that it can convert back to the ONE TRUE FAITH. The rest of the sects CAN NOT.
________
So given the above, it would appear logical that since we have the Barque of St. Peter at our disposal, even though it might be in dry dock, not carrying any souls to heaven presently, it still can be refitted, fixed and made sea worthy again.
_______
And that is the responsibility of every serious person who truly cares about his salvation, to try and make the Barque of St. Peter sail again. It’s the only hope for us individuals and mankind.
______
It’s simple logic. 😉
_______
Rant over!
So Francis wants the bishops to resign from the Democratic Party but at the same time push the Democratic Party agenda.
_____
Clever boy! Now we see how he got to where he got to. 😉
Oh no, the church of Francis has another wayward son, this time it’s Cardinal George.
______
Link via Fr. Z here: http://wdtprs.com/blog/2014/09/what-was-once-a-request-to-live-and-let-live-has-now-become-a-demand-for-approval/
______
“Now I come to the second danger of these two marauders which threatens the cottage, the home, and the ordinary people – namely, tyranny. We cannot be blind to the fact that the liberties enjoyed by individual citizens throughout the British Empire are not valid in a considerable number of countries, some of which are very powerful. In these States control is enforced upon the common people by various kinds of all-embracing police governments. The power of the State is exercised without restraint, either by dictators or by compact oligarchies operating through a privileged party and a political police. It is not our duty at this time when difficulties are so numerous to interfere forcibly in the internal affairs of countries which we have not conquered in war. But we must never cease to proclaim in fearless tones the great principles of freedom and the rights of man which are the joint inheritance of the English-speaking world and which through Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights, the Habeas Corpus, trial by jury, and the English common law find their most famous expression in the American Declaration of Independence.”
Winston Churchill, Iron Curtain Speech, Fulton Missouri, March 5th 1946.
_______
I include this since it demonstrates the means by which tyranny deals with “FAILURE”, and how far we have come down this road.
_______
We need more ++George’s.
Dear S.Armaticus. Thanks for letting us know about this statement from Cardinal George of Chicago. The original text can be found here in a post of the “Cardinal’s Corner” on the website of the Archdiocese’s newspaper.
–
The article is titled “A tale of two churches”.
–
http://www.catholicnewworld.com/cnwonline/2014/0907/cardinal.aspx
–
The most interesting thing to me is that the Cardinal does not evoke “religious liberty” or “freedom of religion”.
–
He speaks of the young United States of America as a country “that promised to respect all religions because the State would not be confessional; it would not try to play the role of a religion.”
–
This language is in keeping with the Catholic teaching of TOLERANCE for different religions without calling for total FREEDOM of all religions. This language does however accept the false liberal concept of the separation of Church and State.
–
The main point the Cardinal makes is that the State has become a “fake Church”. He says, “the State basically kept its promise to protect all religions and not become a rival to them, a fake church. Until recent years.”
–
The problem is that in practice there is always an official state “religion”. There has to be in order to establish laws on some principles. Up until recently the laws of the U.S. were understood to be based on the principles of Christian morality.
–
Anyway, the wonderful thing about this statement is that the Cardinal does not appeal to man-made laws but appeals to the law of God.
–
Could this be a turning point? Is this perhaps a response to Cardinals Dolan and Wuerl?
–
I don’t think this post will be withdrawn due to some protest from Washington or New York.
–
If indeed this is a response (and I believe it it is in an indirect way) then this is just the sort of action that is required. The response should and must come from the bishops and cardinals as I have previously stated.
–
It will be interesting to see the reaction by the homo-fascists. Will they stage protests? Will they attack Cardinal George in the press? Will they attempt to destroy the St. Patrick’s Day celebrations in Chicago?
–
And then will Cardinals Dolan and Wuerl come to the defense of Cardinal George?
–
=====
More quotes from Cardinal George.
–
He speaks of coming white martyrdom:
–
“it also brings with it the worship of a false god…. all public institutions, no matter who owns or operates them, will be agents of the government and conform their activities to the demands of the official religion…. those who run businesses must conform their activities to the official religion or be fined”
–
He ends with this final “triumphal” statement:
–
“Catholics do know, with the certainty of faith, that, when Christ returns in glory to judge the living and the dead, the church, in some recognizable shape or form that is both Catholic and Apostolic, will be there to meet him. There is no such divine guarantee for any country, culture or society of this or any age.”
Dear ML:
Thanks for the commentary. I suspected that this was a rebuttal to the NY/DC axis.
______
The battle lines are being drawn, and we are in the “preparatory fire” stage. In a battlefield scenario, prep fire as it is called is where the artillery of the opposing sides lobs life rounds at the enemy lines to soften them up. We are witnessing “fire in anger” ladies and gentlemen. The next phase is the charge of the infantry. And that will be at the Synod.
______
And I love the last paragraph as well. Triumphalism at it’s best.
On a side note.
______
On another thread, I commented about the Muller/Fellay meeting later this month. The following link is an excellent rundown of all the conflicting statements made by Roman authorities regarding the SSPS’s canonical status.
________
Link here: http://www.onepeterfive.com/will-cardinal-muller-meet-sspx/
________
The logical inconsistencies and outright contradictions would make the mother of a modernist proud. 😉
Dear S.Armaticus. A word of caution. I realized afterwards that Cardinal George of Chicago is a former head of the USCCB. He seems to be an unlikely leader to head a fight against the Dolan’s and Wuerl’s. And the Chicago archdiocese is well known as being extremely liberal and the home of the “social justice” movement in the U.S.
–
Also the Chicago archdiocese is a huge recipient of public funds from the state and federal government which it uses for schools and social programs. So it seems that the archdiocese could be easily pressured and manipulated by political forces.
–
Then there is the sad news that Cardinal George is dying of cancer. Perhaps this explains to some degree his clarity in this article. Perhaps he is preparing himself for final judgement.
–
And of course this also means that bergoglio will have a chance to appoint a new archbishop of Chicago soon…. by the way it seems that Cardinal George supported bergoglio at the conclave.
–
http://www.religionnews.com/2013/03/15/the-story-behind-pope-francis-election/
–
On the other hand Cardinal George is often described as a “conservative”. And then there is this quote which I’m sure you have seen before.
–
“I expect to die in bed, my successor will die in prison and his successor will die a martyr in the public square. His successor will pick up the shards of a ruined society and slowly help rebuild civilization, as the church has done so often in human history.”
Michael Leon,
–
I’m not pretending to know any more than anyone here. I just cannot agree with the attitude shown by Msgr. Pope.
–
“I apologize if the language I used caused offense … I remain concerned … my intent is not to directly criticize any bishop or diocese.”
–
“Offense?…Apology..?” No Christian needs to apologize for speaking the truth. With this servile attitude Msgr Pope is giving reason for the hierarchy to believe that they were right in their evil actions. This attitude is as absurd as the three children of Fatima apologizing for telling the people of Portugal that they needed to pray the rosary and do penance for peace.
–
“My intent is not to critize..?” Huh? He never intended to critize the sodomite parade? According to St Thomas, prelates ought to rebuke their superiors in case where it presents a danger to faith and morals.
–
If Msgr Pope had stood his ground this would have been an example for other priests to follow that they should stand up to the apostate hierarchy, that they are together in this, and there are other priests that are willing to suffer for Christ, and this would be a great encouragement for them
The faithful would be encouraged and even edified by this brave attitude and would be fortified in the faith and fight against the anti-christs of this world.
–
As far as the repercussions of his actions, a brave soldier of Christ does what is correct for the sake of truth and the góspel. For the rest, he allows the “chips to fall as they may” (I think that’s how the expression goes) and lets Christ take care of the rest.
–
As far as the SSPX goes, I’m not an SSPXer. But I agree with you that they have remained almost completely silent on the Bergoglian scandal, and most egregiously, on the upcoming Oktober synod of apostasy.
Dear In Hoc Signo Vinces.
We will all be called to make similar decisions in our lives sooner rather than later. For instance, what will you do when (NOT if) your employer requires that you take a “sensitivity” training which includes how to treat homosexuals and transgenders at work. And then requires that you sign a paper saying that you agree that there is nothing “wrong” with homosexual acts. Are you going to try to refuse to sign on religious grounds because you are a Catholic? But then what will you do when your employer refuses to allow a religious exemption? Will you resign so as not to have to sign a statement that violates your Catholic faith?
This is NOT a hypothetical. This is already happening and will only get worse. Just look at what is happening with Obamacare and coverage for contraception. Would you be willing to pay fines or go to jail in order to not violate your Catholic faith?
These are the choices we will all be faced with — a pinch of incense to the gods of humanism. Just ask Louie the price he has paid.
Msgr. Charles Pope is a good and faithful Catholic priest and I am sure that he is praying and will follow the will of God. We should also pray for him. And we should pray to God to give us the strength and fortitude to respond to the challenges to our faith that lie ahead.
Michael,
—–
I like many of your posts here, and no offense, but some of the material you are seeking (seemingly sarcastically) does exist.
—–
Bishop Fellay has described Pope Francis as a “genuine modernist”. It doesn’t get much more blunt than that.
—–
On the other hand, of course the Society does not and cannot bother to comment publicly on every diocesan row here or there. That’s silly.
God bless Msgr. Pope. I would have guessed they would force him to take down the post. He has greater courage than I. This is why under the current persecution, we priests need to have pseudonyms to comment on websites and will probably soon have to have pseudoblogs. God save us from these politically correct blowhard senior churchmen. They have managed to destroy the Church in the USA and continue to keep their political games going round.
Bravo.
The anonymous folk(s) at novusordowatch are indeed astute at drawing attention to our modernist clerics – which is child’s play. They also constantly engage in ridiculous ad hominem attacks against the best leaders of Traditional Catholicism as well as regurgitate the illogical errors of dogmatic sedevacantism.
—–
http://www.acatholicthinker.net/a-response-to-novus-ordo-watch/
Oops – posted at the end by accident.
—–
The anonymous folk(s) at novusordowatch are indeed astute at drawing attention to our modernist clerics – which is child’s play. They also constantly engage in ridiculous ad hominem attacks against the best leaders of Traditional Catholicism as well as regurgitate the illogical errors of dogmatic sedevacantism.
—–
http://www.acatholicthinker.net/a-response-to-novus-ordo-watch/
S.Armaticus. I take it, therefore, you disagree strongly with Cyprian who suggests that we should poke fun at those who are doing the devil’s work? Not very Catholic – a long long history in the True Church of taking the P out of those who would thumb lead us astray. Charity – the most abused word in contemporary, ‘Catholicism’. Where is there a lack of charity when the flock of the authentic Faith never fail to point out the false in the face of the true?
–
Pope Pius XI said the greatest Charity, that which fulfills every command to love, is to bring someone to the True Faith. What you call the ‘fold’ is more rather like the prodigal son’s pig pen. It is surely the prodigals of the Novus Ordo who must return to the fold.
–
p.s. I can recommend William Dunbar – the Scottish priest (pre-reformation) for some real doozies on how to expose the bad – using satire to put to ‘flyte’ the evil people would have us consume if we confused stupidity with charity.
Aves for you and yours, de Maria. There is no admixture of lies with truth in these homilies, which is like striking gold in today’s Catholicism.
p.s. to be middling, or lukewarm, when it comes to the battle that is taking place in every moment doesn’t sit well. As in the article I gave a link to in one of the comments, when the ‘restrainer’ becomes the enabler, it is not the time to join the enablers.
Dear Michael,
I am under no illusion that ++George will lead anything. As you rightly point out, he is dying of cancer and is in no shape to lead anything.
______
With respect to his clarity of thought and word, ++George has always been “suspected” of that. The quote that you provided attests to that.
______
FYI, I am native Chicagoan, and have experienced the destruction of the Chicago archdiocese before my very eyes. I lived through Bernardin. Although I moved outside the archdioceses before ++George’s “reign”, my parents still live in the Chicago diocese. From what I have been told, when ++George came in, he had to clean up Bernardin’s mess. And the leftists that Bernardin left in place never liked him. Now this is no excuse, but from where I sit, I always had the impression that ++George tried to be faithful to the Church in a very brutal, ideological and frankly “catty” environment, and I think the epitaph for his tenure as Archbishop of Chicago would be ” primum non nocere”.
You speak of errors. Is there error in offering up to God Almighty the name of Bergoglio as a faithful servant of Truth?
–
If we were to liken the Church to a lodestone, or magnet, the purpose of which is to draw all things to Itself for those things (our souls) own good. The only Catholics who are holding that unadulterated gravity are those few sedevacantist Apostolic sons who see things True and offer up daily an adulterated propitiation to Our Father in Heaven, for the sake of the scattered and defiled flock, and that a true Peter stand once again in the True Barque. It seems, to put it mildly, odd, that we should be anything but grateful to these few soldiers of Christ.
I bring you more good news…..
_____
The Msgr Pope scandal picked up by Breitbart.
_____
Link here: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/09/07/DC-Priest-Punished-for-Calling-for-End-to-Gay-St-Pat-s-Parade-in-New-York-City
____
Can Drudge be next? 🙂
Was Saul a worthy “offering up to God Almighty the name of Bergoglio as a faithful servant of Truth?”
Yet God had Samuel pick him. Now was Saul therefore the rightful King of Israel anointed by God, or not?
David knew that Saul was the king. Yet resisted him without daring to overthrow him.
Likewise, God can indeed allow imbecile Popes to reign, who yet remain legitimate Popes.
Israel saw despicable times under Solomon that are pretty much a duplicate of what is occurring today before its schism and exile. The Sedes have no case. God isn’t going to magically give you a good Pope. The present one is a product of a generation’s stupidity. Good parents raise good children who will be the future good parents and priests and leaders. St. Joachim & Anne didn’t sprout out of the ground. Not everyone gets to be Immaculately conceived. God has always chosen to work through us from appointed holy men and women. Good priests, and bishops and a good Pope will come, just as soon as we quit shaking our hands wondering about what’s lawful and start willing to sacrifice ourselves and even physically and if necessarily, even violently deal with the problem. It’s time to put the fear of death and judgment into these idiotic prelates to remind them that we’re not the worst thing they have to deal with.
Dear Salvemur:
Not quite sure what you are referring to.
My reference to charity was in the context of the editors at NOW who use ad hominem attacks on people who are ” Mihi et bonum certamen” like Matt, Vennari, Ferrera.
_______
Why?
Amen!
I read Msgr. Pope’s response and found it perfectly balanced, to the point, and correct. As soon as I heard of the decision, my first thought was it should no longer be called the Saint Patrick’s Day Parade. The Archdiocese should have immediately petitioned the title to be removed. Rather, Cardinal Dolan not only supported it but accepted the Grand Marshall’s position. It is now a circus. I agree with Msgr. Pope. Just stay away! It is the best way to voice our opinion of the event. I am sure the entire gay world will be there to support it. This is not about gays, but about leftist activists. The Catholic Church remains the last bastion of civilization. “Salt of the earth.”
Michael Leon,
–
I wonder if there is not a hint of insinuation of the charge of hypocrisy leveled against me. In that, while I maintain that Msgr Pope should have “stuck to his guns” , if I was faced with an analogous situation to that of Msgr Pope sometime in the future where my faith was put to the test by godless forces I’d most likely act in some sort of cowardly fashion.
–
How I would act if and when such a test of my faith takes place I know not.
Let me first say that the duties and obligations of a priest are different than those of a layman. Indeed, they are called to higher degrees of perfection and purity than the rest of us. Furthermore, what could arguably be a legitimate course of action in cases of persecution for a layperson depending on his circumstances may not apply to a priest. Among other reasons, because his sole duty and obligation is to Christ and the Church, and he is not bound by earthly ties such as a family and spouse etc. Hence, your “what would you do if you had to sign…” argument is rather absurd.
–
I can only pray now for the graces necessary to act in a wise and courageous manner if and when I am placed in such a situation. I cannot say with certainty now that I would act with courage and stay steadfast in the faith. No one here can say that with certainty, for to do so would be the sin of presumption. What I CAN wish for now (and even possibly pray for) is that if and when I am faced with this challenge there will faithful catholics around me who will encourage me to remain steadfast, and if I should fail in my faith, that they should charitably rebuke me and pray that my faith shouldn’t fail.
–
In the same manner, while I do not judge the internals of Msgr Pope (a subjective judgment), objectively speaking it is clear that he should have been more courageous in being firm against the homo lobby in the hierarchy. In other words, we can, and indeed SHOULD ask our priests to stand firm against the forces of apostasy.
Another cardinal chooses sides, and comes down on the side of GOOD. 🙂
______
And you will never guess his country……
______
http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2014/09/cardinal-marx-affirms-indissolubility.html
_____
OK. the http gave it away.
_____
Can you say “fratricide”?
ehem I think you should have read the article a little more carefully before posting the link. What the cardinal says is depressing if anything:
“But there are “Other forms of recognition [???]” to be considered”
“…the question arises, what does the Church have to say about a second relationship, which also could have its “own moral quality [!!!]”
–
I think we will find scantily few cardinals and bishops on the good side come the Bergoglian Oktober revolution.
Dear Vinces:
You obviously do not follow the German church.
______
What ++Marx said is revolutionary (or rather the height of “reaction” is probably a better term) in present day Germany.
_______
Here is the full paragraph:
“We need to overcome silence in the face of failure,” Marx said. So the question arises, what does the Church have to say about a second relationship, which also could have its “own moral quality”. A sacramental recognition is, however, in the words of the Cardinal “excluded”. But probably there are “other forms of recognition” which have not yet been considered sufficient, says Marx. Further details were not mentioned by the Cardinal.
________
The key phrase is “A sacramental recognition is, however, in the words of the Cardinal “excluded”.
_______
What does this mean? Marx is saying that you can do whatever it is that is needed to capture the Kirchensteuer (church tax) but going down the “sacramental” route is VERBOTEN.
_______
At the end of the day, we are living in an age of apostasy. However, the Holy Ghost does appear to be protecting the Bride of Christ from doctrinal error. Note in one of the above posts the references by the “Hall of Fame popes” on VII only being a “pastoral council”. In other words, not binding and definitely not ex cathedra. And we can find other examples. Therefore, what is important is that a German cardinal (and the head of the German Bishop’s Conference) says nein to sacramental bigamy(polygamy). Therefore, if he says no (and he is not alone), Francis cannot pollute the Magisterium, but will have to find some sort of a pastoral arrangement.
_______
In other, other words, more novelty heaped on top of whole heap of NuChurch novelty.
_______
And I am beginning to think that this is the best of a bad situation (being the eternal optimist that I am). We need MORE NOVELTY masquerading as pastoral whatever. Why? Because at some point in the future, the sheer weight of the novelty will bring the entire contraption down. Just think of the Episcopalians and the Unitarians. 🙂
_______
In the mean time, recognize the small victories and pray that the future Council of Econe, that will “anethmatize” VII, comes sooner than later. 🙂 How’s that for a cheerful thought?
… and this…. over on Fr. Z’s site.
_______
The refutation of sacramental bigamy/polygamy, in book form. 😉
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2014/09/action-item-book-from-5-cardinals-in-defense-of-marriage-and-tradition/
_______
…. in cooperation with ++Muller and ++Brandmuller and ++Burke.
_______
Why are those 3 significant? Because that is where the Vatican gets its funding.
_______
Bring on the “War on Mercy”!
Voris came out with guns ablazin’ for Dolan but as is his MO, not a peep about the implication of “Who am I to judge”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0P7HXozdBns
Julie of Conn. Catholic Corner has a great response post to Longenecker, since he shut down his combox.
http://connecticutcatholiccorner.blogspot.com/2014/09/fr-longeneckers-church-of-nasty-vs.html
Happy Feast of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-l8nsyDvEX_0/Th4Rl6rs9OI/AAAAAAAAAVI/cUY2qQgTKbw/s1600/Blessed-Virgin-Mary.jpg
“Wicked Bishops” (title of Voris’ vortex episode)
lol
I guess Voris unwittingly included who-am-I-to-judge “Bishop of Rome” Francis into the heap then.
Yes, what his decrying of various bishops’ objectively erroneous acts applies even more forcefully to those of the first bishop of the Church.
“Is there error in offering up to God Almighty the name of Bergoglio as a faithful servant of Truth?” Seriously? The Society, and all non-dogmatic-sedevacantist Traditionalists, point out again & again that Pope Francis has some quite serious issues with serving the Truth. Nobody here is going to fall for some silly false dichotomy. You’re smarter than this.
—–
You should definitely check out Siscoe’s new article about dogmatic sede vacantism in the new CFN – there is some truly innovative material there. As well as his upcoming book.
—–
No theologian in the history of the Church, and least of all St. Bellarmine, ever advocated what the modern sede vacantists teach. A pope requires an official warning from the body that elected him before he is canonically guilty of pernicious heresy, subsequent to that there is a formal judgement, and subsequent to that a general council must declare him deposed (he is not judged – he has judged himself by obstinate heresy). That is what Bellermine – in the whole – taught.
To summarize the consensus here. Msgr. Charles Pope is a wimp and a coward with no fortitude and no testosterone. If he was a real man he would have disobeyed his superiors and defiantly re-posted his blog article. He should not have apologized instead he should have made a loud public statement for the press condemning not only Cardinal Dolan but Cardinal Wuerl as well and calling them out as apostates and accusing them of selling out to the homo lobby. This is exactly what any REAL Catholic priest would do in order to defend the faith. Did I miss anything?
The question was rhetorical – of course it is wrong to tell God during Mass that Francis is a servant of Truth – he is so blatantly not. I have to ask why sedevacantism so frightens people? It doesn’t mean the Church is defective. Qutie the opposite – it simply means the chair is empty – they are not saying that the sun rises in the west and sets in the east. And as for the ‘bellarmine principle’ – he conceded that indeed there could be heretical ‘popes’ who lose their authority ‘ipso facto’. That they lose their authority requires no fanfare – they are heretics they have no authority to represent Christ – simple. To say that Christ bestows His authority to teach in His name upon His enemies is blasphemy.
“In point of truth, however, the spread of heresy is an act of blasphemy against Our Lord, Who does not want the souls for whom He shed every single drop of His Most Precious Blood confused about Who He is and what He has revealed and How they are to be happy here in this life as a prelude to eternal happiness in Heaven.” T Droleskey.
–
Do you believe that uniting with hereitcs doesn’t go against the whole point of the Petrine Office? I do not understand this ‘need’ to abdicate Truth to a passing heretic in a white cassock.
–
In Christopher Ferrara’s latest Remnat piece he says this:”Thus, when [Bergoglio]—speaking, as always, off-the-cuff—says that Mary might have felt deceived by God, that Christ only pretended to be angry with His disciples, that Our Lord rebuked the Pharisees for their rigorist view of the marriage bond rather than their lax view of it, that Matthew clung to his money instead of following Our Lord’s call immediately, and that Jesus “had” a “Christian identity” when He was Christ Himself and the Word Incarnate, [add to the list that St Paul ‘boasts of his sins] we cannot be silent lest our silence be viewed as consent.” How is it not supporting and consenting to all these heresies if one continues to adulterate the Mass by calling Bergoglio a ‘faithful servant’ of God. No one on these comments, including Catholic Thinker addresses this. It is ignored.
p.s. you still haven’t addressed how the ‘una cum’ Mass is pleasing to God when the ‘una cum’ celebrates an enemy of Christ right in God’s face.
Michael,
–
Re comment on September 8, 2014 9:59 pm
–
Get a grip with yourself man. Stop making stuff up, taking things out of context, and blowing things out of all proportion. I’m not going to waste time arguing your puerile latest post.
–
In case you didn’t know, your opinion on this forum is worth no more than anyone else’s.
This indifference to presenting to God a liar and a heretic as ‘faithful’ and a ‘servant’ is strange, to say the least; especially since its not so much indifference as a vigorous defence of the lie. Indifference to the Truth is indifference to Christ. I guess its a short swim from Vatican II to this acceptance of outright lies during Mass. Religious indifference, modernism, the Vatican II anti-syllabus, is simply an unbelief in Christ, and defection from His Bride.
–
Our Lady, Mother of Truth, intercede for us that we receive, accept, the ‘love of Truth’.
–
Indifference to Truth is ‘institutionalized in the ecumenism of Vatican II…not only institutionalized but consecrated as if it were the true religion.’
–
http://mostholytrinityseminary.org/AntiChrist%20and%20End%20Times%204%20-%20Bp%20Sanborn.mp3
–
2 Thessalonians 2:3-11
Dear Salvemur:
You write:
“Do you believe that uniting with hereitcs doesn’t go against the whole point of the Petrine Office? I do not understand this ‘need’ to abdicate Truth to a passing heretic in a white cassock.”
_____
Unfortunately for us all, that ” passing heretic in a white cassock” is a pope. Yes?
_____
Now you might not like that, and I might not like that, but that is just the reality of the matter.
_____
You need to deal with it, and move on.
Some agitprop inspired by Msgr. Pope’s original post:
–
http://bit.ly/1ts9S2n
And did anyone else notice Msgr. Pope’s homily on Sept. 6th? It was titled: The Call to Fraternal Correction.
–
http://bit.ly/1tscwFm