According to a reliable report from the Italian News Agency, ANSA:
“The Pope would like to dedicate the next Synod of Bishops to the theme of peace.”
I suppose it only makes sense that as the 100th anniversary of the Fatima apparitions approaches, and grace perhaps pricks at the consciences of those in Rome who have ignored, downplayed, or lied about Our Lady’s requests, the theme of peace would come to the fore all the more.
In any case, what a relief, eh?
Rumor at one time had it that the next Synod might target priestly celibacy.
Whew, we dodged another bullet!
Not so fast…
What this tells me is that the blasphemous Argentinian heretic in white has other plans for addressing the idea of married priests; something no reasonable observer can believe he isn’t open to at least discussing, and, perhaps even more likely, promoting.
In fact, it would be downright foolish to imagine that clerical celibacy somehow isn’t in the Franciscan crosshairs.
For the past three and half years it has been made crystal clear that the entire focus of this alleged “pontificate” concerns matters temporal.
More specifically, we know very well that Francis’ vision of the priesthood is utterly earthbound; having nothing whatsoever to do with the salvation of souls, but rather with “service” such as that which anyone can render:
The ministerial priesthood is one means employed by Jesus for the service of his people, yet our great dignity derives from baptism, which is accessible to all. The configuration of the priest to Christ the head – namely, as the principal source of grace – does not imply an exaltation which would set him above others. (Evangelii Gaudium – 104)
Truly, there is no reason beyond sheer denial to believe that anything is ever really off-the-table with His Humbleness. The “God of Surprises” (aka Jorge Bergoglio), in other words, does whatever he pleases, and apparently, obliterating tradition pleases him much.
So, if not a Synod, what might those other plans be with respect to abandoning the discipline of clerical celibacy in the Roman rite?
How about a motu proprio making celibacy optional?
He has already demonstrated a willingness to issue rulings motu proprio in order to accomplish his goals, such as he did with respect to the annulment process. Is there any good reason to think that Francis wouldn’t do such a thing in this case as well?
Asked another way, does Francis himself have any reason whatsoever to fear a concerted pushback on the part of “faithful” cardinals and bishops (if you’ll excuse the contradiction in terms) should he move against practically any doctrine or venerable practice in the Church, including clerical celibacy?
Francis has pushed, and pushed, and pushed the modernist envelope to the very edge of outright apostasy, and yet there has been nary a meaningful peep from any of the Apostles’ successors.
He literally declared in Amoris Laetitia that adultery isn’t necessarily a mortal sin (and may even be God’s will!) and the most noteworthy episcopal response to date has been a call for deeper analysis!
As I write, it has been nearly three weeks since Archbishop Gänswein confirmed, in the starkest terms possible, that Benedict did not intend to abandon the Petrine ministry – the only way to render the See of Peter vacant for a successor – but rather simply to relinquish some portion thereof; a proposition that no serious Catholic considers even remotely possible.
And still, not one of the more than 5,000 bishops has stepped forward to address this gravely important matter publicly.
As it is, the naïve, the ignorant, and the confused, having been left fatherless, simply assume that the Keys to the Kingdom truly are in the hands of this madman who hates the Catholic faith. Furthermore, most appear prepared to follow wherever his whims may lead.
Long story short, the Devil seems well aware that time is running short. The crisis in the Church is now progressing at hyper-speed…
So brace yourself, my friends; barring divine intervention, I am convinced that we should expect clerical celibacy to be among the not-too-distant casualties of Francis’s unholy war on tradition.
I hope I’m wrong.
Archbishop Lefebvre:
“… what, in fact, is a good shepherd, if not he who walks before his sheep, before his lambs, and who leads them there where they can find good food? Now Our Lord says that He is the Good Shepherd. He is the Good Shepherd because it is He Who gives true nourishment to our intellects, to our wills, to our hearts: the nourishment of truth, the nourishment of charity, the nourishment of the desire to sanctify ourselves. This is the nourishment that Our Lord Jesus Christ came to bring us.
He Himself told us that He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. He is the Way: He walks on the way to draw us after Him, like the Good Shepherd. He is the Truth: He enlightens our intellects to show us where we are going and what God promises us if we follow Him. And finally, He is the Life: for He truly gives us the food of life, in giving us Himself, particularly in the Holy Eucharist. This is what the Good Shepherd is.
Now Our Lord Himself warned us . . . He took the trouble to warn us: There are also mercenaries. What, then, are these mercenaries? These mercenaries are those who assume power over the flock so as to lead it to death. Because at the least danger, these mercenaries flee and leave the flock abandoned. And the wolf comes and disperses the flock. Our Lord thus warned us that there would be times when the flock would be abandoned. . . abandoned because those who were supposed to lead it lost their bearings or at least did not want to fulfill the role of the true shepherd, and considering themselves as mere mercenaries, abandoned the flock.”
“So in the face of this danger which hems us in, more or less, and which threatens us every day, what should we do? What does the man do who has the instinct of preserving his life? He defends himself against the powers that want to destroy in him above all supernatural life, the life of God in him, the life of Our Lord Jesus Christ. That is why you are, I should say, as a remnant of this flock which is attacked, which is abandoned, which is dispersed; why you have found a priest who is a shepherd, who wants to give you the truth that Our Lord Jesus Christ has always taught us, that the Church has always taught; who really wants to give you the grace of Our Lord, which is desired for us and transmitted to us by Our Lord, by the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, by the Sacraments, by devotion to the Most Blessed Virgin. So you group yourselves around him. And that is what thousands upon thousands of Catholics are doing throughout the world. They group themselves around a shepherd whom they feel to be a true shepherd.
And this is very important because we have need of the supernatural life which God came to give us. God did not come to make us the sheep of His flock so that He could abandon us later. This is not possible. No doubt He foresaw extraordinary times, times in which the Church would seem eclipsed – the time of the great apostasy. Could we not be in a period of preparation for this great apostasy, when no one will believe in God any longer, when no one will believe in Our Lord Jesus Christ any longer, or in His divinity; when men will look only to one another.
Now that is indeed what is happening today. They would like in a way to separate us from God, to separate us from Our Lord Jesus Christ; to sever us from our roots, from the sources of life, from the sources of life which are given by Our Lord: Our Lord instituted them Himself. We ourselves do not have the right to choose the sources of our life. These sources Our Lord has given to us.” +Lefebvre
John Vennari:
“It is primarily the priest’s obligation to lead us in the battle to defend the Faith. Saint Thomas Aquinas did not leave it to the laity to combat the Manichees. St. Francis de Sales did not leave it the laity to combat Protestantism. We laity have our part, but it belongs to the nature of the priesthood to publicly defend the Faith.
This is why we loved Archbishop Lefebvre. He led us in the battle.”
Priestly celibacy is only a “problem” when priests do not honor their vow of celibacy. Also, the sex abuse crisis in the church was not caused by priestly celibacy. It was (in most cases) caused by homosexuality which led to pedophilia. Maybe, the next synod should address these issues, although I’m not holding my breath.
Its actually pederasty as opposed to pedophilia, and it will likely never end as homosexuality is such a prevalent and entrenched part of the vatican 2 clergy.
Just a point, Louie, in respect of October 2017 being the 100th anniversary of Our Lady of Fatima’s Miracle of the Sun. October 2017 is also the 100th anniversary of the Communist ‘October Revolution’.
Our Lady spoke of Russia so often in her apparitions in connection with world war and the ultimate Triumph of her Immaculate Heart following Russia’s consecration. I think the juxtaposition of these two centenaries in next October 2017 is worth reflection.
II Timothy 4:1-4 [1] I charge thee, before God and Jesus Christ, who shall judge the living and the dead, by his coming, and his kingdom: [2] Preach the word: be instant in season, out of season: reprove, entreat, rebuke in all patience and doctrine. [3] For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: [4] And will indeed turn away their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables.
Just an addendum to my post. Pope Leo XIII had a vision on October 13, 1884 where it was communicated to him that Satan would be given 100 years to destroy the Catholic Church. If the 100 years commenced with the October 1917 Miracle of the Sun at Fatima and the 1917 Communist October Revolution, then October 2017 seems (to me) portentious. And, if as you say Louie, Satan senses his time is short then we are in for a rough ride.
Here is a link to a CNA editorial of February 01, 2013 by Joe Tremblay which offers more detail:
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/column/the-100-year-test-2454/
Thanks, rich. That’s why I’m not holding my breath. After Vat 2, the doors of seminaries were open to men who were opening homosexual or had same-sex attraction. The book “Goodbye, Good Men” gives prime examples of this.
For what need he seek for, with whom God is present? or what shall suffice him, whom God sufficeth not?
St Augustine
It is indeed worth reflection, Bosco49.
This is also worth reflection:
http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/2127-apocalypse-now-another-great-sign-rises-in-the-heavens
Coming soon to a parish near you:
“Today there will be a third collection. My wife and I have been informed that our daughter needs orthodontist work.”
+Lefebvre:
“Celibacy is not demanded of the priest solely to facilitate his apostolate and make him more available to his people ; it is a supererogatory reason, but not the true cause.
I think the priest should be compared with the Blessed Virgin Mary. Why is the Blessed Virgin Mary a Virgin? By reason of her divine motherhood, because she is the Mother of Our Lord. She has thus been so closely united with the Word of God, with God Himself, that it was meet that she should be a virgin. Well, fundamentally the priest likewise re-enacts what the Virgin Mary was called upon to do. The Virgin Mary brought Our Lord down to the earth, in her womb, by her ” Fiat.” The priest, by his own words, brings Our Lord in the Holy Eucharist. Hence it is fitting that the priest should be a virgin because of his intimate relation to Our Lord, through which he has power over the physical body of Our Lord, over His divinity, over the whole Person of Our Lord. The priest is so close to Him, has such power over Him, that he ought properly to be a virgin…
But it is fitting and, I should say, in some ways and to some extent, that the priest should be a virgin, since it is he who speaks the words of Consecration. Therein lies the mystery, the great mystery of the priest, at once his greatness and his humility. Before the Sovereign Priest, the Supreme Pontiff, who is Our Lord, Jesus Christ, the priest is nothing. It is Christ who is the Priest, He Who is the Victim, He who offers Himself anew. The priest, of course, is only His minister and should therefore humble himself before Our Lord, but it is nevertheless that which makes his greatness, the greatness of the priesthood. We should always meditate on this. We shall never succeed in reaching the depths of the great mystery of the Mass.”
Celibacy has been a target of the Vatican II academics from the start. These sterile academics never were true fathers to a parish flock, so the priestly role of father was completely disregarded. The anti-celibacy missile is fueled and ready for launch, but it didn’t come out of nowhere. The path has been cleared by several means:
The priest’s sacred functions formerly reserved to consecrated hands have already been transferred and absorbed by the married laity. The theology of the priest was changed, and mandatory masculine celibacy doesn’t fit the new theology.
The establishment of a married permanent diaconate after Vatican II by John-Paul II put a married camel’s nose under the tent of Holy Orders.
This was followed by the novel exceptions given to protestant already-married converts being accepted into the priesthood ala Longenecker.
The establishment of a collaborative ministry handed over jobs like alcolyte, lector, reader and administer of communion to a phalanx of lay “ministers” who had no path at all to the celibate ordained priesthood. This put more un-consecrated busy-bodies fluttering about into the sanctuary, helping to desecrate the space also.
Lay “pastoral administrators” presiding over the orphaned priest-less parishes further undermined the role of parish priest as protector and teacher.
Lay lead priest-less “communion services” which are almost indistinguishable from the Novus Ordo “mass” or your typical protestant “service” have prepared minds of Catholic to accept lay married “presiders” as normal.
The non-ordained married laity have assumed almost all of the functions that have been reserved to the celibate priesthood. This has been the groundwork laid by the Modernists to destroy the celibate priesthood.
The liturgical tinkerers have made the celibate priest’s presence optional and/or redundant at the most intimate moment of holy communion between the faithful and their Lord. The majority of Catholics now receive the Eucharist from the hands of a lay person. The gateway drug to eliminate celibacy was Communion in the hand.
The priests role being limited only to consecration of the host has become as if he’s a only there to “fertilize the egg” so to speak, then his role is over and he can just leave or sit back and watch the show. The act of the priest “feeding” the faithful with the Bread of Life has been eliminated.
A true father is not just a source of fertilizer, a true father not only helps to create his children, but also guides them, nurtures them, teaches them and feeds them and defends them. He provides for them. The priest’s role as spiritual father is not confined to the sanctuary, he brings the Bread of Life out of the sanctuary to provide sustenance for his spiritual children.
In some ways, the celibate priest is the spiritual spouse, Christ-like, married to the Church already in his role as father. And, like natural marriage, there can be no sharing of the spouse. A lay man, even most pagan men, will not share his wife. So to ask a priest to give his role as a sacred spouse away to countless others breaks the most intimate character of a priest, it rips away his manhood and destroys his sacred marriage to the Church.
This is why celibacy is on the Modernist chopping block, because they have already divorced the priest from his fatherly role and his spiritual marriage.
Michael F Poulin
Is the wife a deaconess?
The so-called “Law of Gradualism” all over again…
Prisca ann, not this one. The first wife was a deaconess until he was granted the annulment.
This is what happens when you open the door to married priests–and much worse, no doubt.
I’m sure married priests are toward the top of the “to do list” for the Novus Ordo Sect.
At this point, nothing would surprise me, even if he insisted we start calling him Pope Francine.
Bergoglio will announce that he is marrying his old childhood flame (the story surfaced around the time of his election, but they hushed it up, clearly indicating that it wasn’t just puppy love stuff) and will invite his butt buddies Kasper and Kissy Rodriguez to do the same. Or maybe he, Rodriguez and the unfortunate woman will start a menage a trois. Nothing will surprise me about this Argentinian buffoon.
“Evil is the ultimate buffoonery” – Morris West
Married incontinent clergy scandalize the faithful and the faithful’s vision of who Christ is and their relationship to Christ because the priest CONFIGURES Christ who is celibate and faithful to His one Bride the Catholic Church. Our Lord does not have two brides. He is not an adulterer. Oh God please help people to wake up!
Is NOTHING SACRED in The World of “The God of Surprises”, such being the Sacrificing Priesthood(Holy Orders) in The Roman/Latin Rite?
Since the Primary Duty of The Priest is to offer The Holy Sacrifice of The Mass, and for The Priest, this is usually on a Daily Basis, Conjugal Love becomes IMPOSSIBLE.
In the case of Certain Eastern Catholic Churches, especially of Byzantine Rite, the Divine Liturgy is usually on Sundays & Holy Days of Obligation. However in two Ukrainian Catholic Parishes in Manhattan’s East Village & Astoria, Queens, both under the Order of St Basil The Great, Priestly Celibacy is Mandatory, because the Divine Liturgy is offered every day including Sunday. The Offering of The Holy Sacrifice of The Mass, as it involves The Sacerdotal Sacrifice, renders Conjugal Relations Null & Void.