In light of Bishop Athanasius Schneider’s recent essay, Amoris laetitia: a need for clarification in order to avoid a general confusion (translation from the Italian provided by Rorate Caeli), I have sent the following letter to His Excellency (with whom I have been honored to recently engage privately on another matter). I believe that the letter (and my decision to publish it here in full) speaks for itself. Should I receive a response along with His Excellency’s permission to publish it, I will do so.
Your Excellency,
At the risk of disrupting our recent cordial correspondence and perhaps guaranteeing that it continues no further (which I would very much regret), I feel compelled to offer the following response to your essay on Amoris Laetitia.
One of the points that I wish to raise concerns the necessity of offering straightforward public critiques of those things that endanger the Faith in a pubic way (like the exhortation in question). As such, I want you to know that I intend to publish this letter on the blog at akaCatholic.com for the edification of our readers.
I must admit to being rather disappointed by your essay. While it makes a number of good points, it fails to adequately oppose, with equal force, the grave offenses against truth contained in Amoris Laetitia.
Throughout the essay, you speak of ambiguities, interpretations and opinions regarding the text of the exhortation, as if therein lies the central problem. In point of fact, however, AL contains grave errors, heresy, and blasphemy.
For the sake of clarity (though I have little doubt that you are most fully aware already) I’ll offer just two examples:
“It can no longer simply be said that all those in any ‘irregular’ situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace.” (AL 301)
Given that “irregular” here refers to the very activities infallibly taught by the Council of Trent (Session VI, Chapter XV) as those that are properly called mortal sin, the same leading to the loss of sanctifying grace, AL 301 can be said to promote heresy.
With respect to those who persist in such sins knowingly, Amoris Laetitia states that such persons:
“… can also recognize with sincerity and honesty what for now is the most generous response which can be given to God, and come to see with a certain moral security that it is what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits…” (AL 303)
Since the Catholic faith teaches with dogmatic certainty that God in His Holiness never asks us to sin, this statement is not only heretical, but sheer, unadulterated blasphemy as well. Even so, your essay falls well short of expressing the kind of outrage that is warranted by such offenses.
You state:
“If we analyze certain statements of AL with intellectual honesty within their proper context, we find ourselves faced with difficulties when trying to interpret them in accordance with the traditional doctrine of the Church. This is due to the absence of the concrete and explicit affirmation of the doctrine and constant practice of the Church, founded on the Word of God.”
I must respectfully disagree. The difficulties you cite are more properly due to positive statements made in the exhortation that stand in stark contradiction to the doctrine of the Faith as infallibly taught.
The absence that truly matters with respect to Amoris Laetitia is the absence of the due goods of clarity of expression, freedom from error, and faithfulness to the immutable truth that every papal instrument should have by its very nature.
As such, is it not the case that Amoris Laetitia is therefore objectively evil?
Elsewhere you state:
“A verbal quote from Familiaris Consortio n. 84 and of some of the most significant affirmations in Veritatis splendor would render AL unassailable by heterodox interpretations.”
Would adding authentic doctrine serve to negate the erroneous statements, or would it only add to whatever confusion may already exist?
You speak very well of a need for intellectual honesty and respect for the law of non-contradiction. With this in mind, one may respectfully ask how it can be said that juxtaposing truth alongside error (i.e., contradictory statements) within one papal document is consistent with the law of non-contradiction?
While I am certain that you are attempting to be fair minded, I find it very troubling that you saw fit to temper your criticism of the document by saying:
“Amoris Laetitia, which contains a plethora of spiritual and pastoral riches with regard to life within marriage and the Christian family in our times…”
“Fortunately, there can be no doubt that AL contains theological affirmations, as well as spiritual and pastoral guidelines of great value.”
I fear that these are gravely dangerous statements in that they may lead certain of the faithful to believe that AL can be safely and fruitfully navigated, in spite of its errors, in order to harvest certain “riches.”
Does not the Biblical admonition regarding “a little leaven” apply?
In any case, the full truth concerning Christian marriage is taught without compromise in other readily available magisterial texts that are not compromised by error. As such, does Amoris Laetitia provide anything whatsoever of value to those who wish to know and remain in the truth?
You provided a lengthy list of “logical conclusions” to which certain possible “interpretations” of AL might lead; each one of them amounting to the tacit denial of immutable truth.
Again, with all due respect, is it not more intellectually honest to say that many of these possible “interpretations” of AL, and the regrettable consequences that they invite, are really nothing more than the exhortation’s practical application and the fruits thereof?
Some examples from your essay follow:
“To declare that the deliberate, free and habitual practice of sexual acts in an invalid marital union could, in individual cases, no longer constitute a grave sin is not the truth, but a serious lie, and will therefore never bring genuine joy in love.”
Would one be intellectually dishonest to say that Pope Francis plainly told just such a “lie” in AL 301? (I prefer to call it by its proper name; heresy.)
“Consequently, to grant permission to such persons to receive Holy Communion would be a bluffing, a hypocrisy and a lie. The Word of God in Scripture is still valid: ‘He who says ‘I know him’, but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him’ (1 John 2: 4).”
In spite of so much talk about the “confusion” AL invites, Pope Francis has made his desires plainly known; namely, that certain of those in so-called “irregular situations” be invited to the sacraments. Is it not intellectually honest to say, therefore, that Amoris Laetitia itself is tantamount to a bluffing, a hypocrisy and a lie?
“In the event of a person committing objectively sinful moral acts in full awareness of the sinfulness of such acts, freely and deliberately, and with the intention of repeating such acts in the future, it is impossible to apply the principle of imputability for a fault because of mitigating circumstances. The application of the principle of imputability to such divorced and remarried couples would constitute hypocrisy and a Gnostic sophism.”
Pope Francis did in fact propose the application of imputability in such cases (cf AL 302). Is it not intellectually honest to say that he is guilty, therefore, of fomenting hypocrisy and Gnostic sophism?
“If the Church were to admit such people to Holy Communion even in a single case, it would contradict its own doctrine, give public testimony against the indissolubility of marriage and thus contribute to the spreading of the ‘plague of divorce'” (II Vatican Council, Gaudium et spes, 47).
Intellectual honesty would seem to demand that we acknowledge that Pope Francis, in any number of ways, does in fact undermine the doctrine of indissolubility and thus contributes to the spreading of the “plague of divorce.” Can any good come from failing to warn the innocent of this danger?
“In order to avoid such an intolerable and scandalous contradiction, the Church, in its infallible interpretation of the divine truth of moral law and of the indissolubility of marriage…”
Is it not true that the Church does not so much interpret the divine truth of moral law and the indissolubility of marriage; rather, she teaches such things plainly and infallibly in the name of the Lord by His own authority?
Furthermore, is it not the case that she avoids scandalous contradictions by plainly condemning error, especially when it come from those who, by virtue of their ecclesial rank, give the appearance of credibility?
“When dealing with the observance of the express commands of God and the indissolubility of marriage, we cannot speak of opposing theological interpretations. If God says, “thou shalt not commit adultery”, no human authority could say “in some exceptional cases or for a good purpose you can commit adultery”.
Does not intellectual honesty force us to admit that Pope Francis has effectively, even if not verbatim, made just such a public statement in Amoris Laetitia?
If this be the case, is it not true that he must be held accountable in an equally public way for the good of souls?
“If the divorced and remarried say that their voluntary and deliberate acts against the sixth commandment of God are not always sinful or, at least, do not constitute major sins, they are deceiving themselves and the truth will not be in them…”
Pope Francis has plainly said as much (ibid.). Is it not intellectually honest to admit that he is, therefore, guilty of deceiving the faithful and the truth is not in him, even though this admission causes us great pain?
You made multiple calls for an authentic interpretation of AL:
“All members of the Church, and especially the bishops, as the fraternal collaborators of the Supreme Pontiff in effective collegiality, have a duty to report this [potential for danger] and respectfully request an authentic interpretation…”
“There is an urgent necessity for the Holy See to confirm and re-proclaim the citeds formula of Familiaris Consortio 84, perhaps in the form of an authentic interpretation of AL…”
“An authentic interpretation of AL by the Apostolic See would bring to the entire Church (“claritatis laetitia”) the joy in clarity.”
And yet, in spite of this, you state:
“However, realistically speaking, it is insufficient to say that AL should be interpreted according to the traditional doctrine and practice of the Church.”
If I may say, I suspect that this glaring contradiction concerning the usefulness of mere interpretations arises not out of any genuine confusion on your part about what really needs to be done, but out of a reluctance to do it.
You even cited the example of an appropriate, saintly, response on the part of a bishop:
“St. Hilary of Poitiers was the only bishop who dared to rebuke Pope Liberius severely for these ambiguous acts.”
It seems rather clear to me that Amoris Laetitia is best understood as a document that plainly suffers from grave error, a lack of due good, and as such it is therefore properly called evil. If Pope Liberius merited rebuke for endangering souls by virtue of certain “ambiguous acts,” how much more does Pope Francis merit severe rebuke, delivered in a manner equally as public as his offenses against truth?
In conclusion, Excellency, many of the faithful have been awaiting with great anticipation your response to this terrible scourge on the Catholic Church at the hands of Pope Francis.
In light of the points that I’ve raised here with respect to your essay, we are now left to wonder if any in the episcopate of today have the courage to follow the example of St. Hilary of Poitiers. At this historically tragic moment in the life of the Church that we love so much, I implore you, Excellency, for the salvation of souls, be that bishop!
Yours truly in Christ with Immaculate Mary,
Louie Verrecchio
Thank you so much for posting this!!!
The SSPX website unfortunately posts this essay as if it’s the final answer to Amoris. But the truth is that error must be opposed directly and forcefully. Not with modernist ambiguities, or effeminate soft language! Burke and co. always seem to be soft in their “criticisms”.
Amoris and Pope Francis are wrong. They are wrong because they oppose one of the Ten Commandments. They are wrong because they lead souls to Hellfire eternal through the sin of sacrilege. Just as Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI were wrong to break the 1st Commandment at Assisi. What they did is blasephemy, and unleashed even more modernist liberal demons from Hell onto this Earth.
We are reaping what these unfaithful shepherds have sown.
Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!
Let’s put this letter in the form of a petition and send it to the bishop! (The previous petition to end petitions notwithstanding :-))
“The SSPX website unfortunately posts this essay as if it’s the final answer to Amoris.”
Aside from some good articles from some of the SSPX priests, I am as disappointed in Bishop Fellay and the SSPX leadership as I am with Bishop Schneider.
I wonder if Bishop Schneider was that bishop if LV would follow him into exile any more than he has followed Fellay or Lefebvre into exile–or if he’d still be attending St. Alphonsus. There is a Catholic Church called St. Hilary’s in Baltimore that had its 25th anniversary in 2013 of priests and faithful that did exactly what LV is calling for BS to do–refused to go along w/the heresies and rotten fruit of VC2. It would be great to see LV there. Tough to be so jaded, but in my view BS will get the axe (like Vigano or Finn or Martino/Scranton) and all the bloggers like this one will remain in the Baltimore Archdiocese of Lori & Frances where sodomites are baptizing their “daughter” (that they bought like a slave). Why don’t you post that picture and then ask what am I and the Catholic faithful of Baltimore going to do?
http://www.outtraveler.com/2016/1/15/watch-gay-catholic-dads-baptize-their-daughter
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2007-07-02/news/0707020007_1_tridentine-rite-traditional-latin-mass-new-mass
Louie, Thanks for your letter of clarification to the good Bishop. Are there NO Shepherds worth their name, calling and duty who know the meaning and practice the exhortation given in Mt 5:37?
“Let your word be Yes for Yes, and No for No; whatever goes beyond this, comes of evil. ”
Really, what part of this chapter and verse is not clear?
One has to be spiritually sick and evil to take over 250+ pages to willfully deceive and disguise a load of “manure laced with cyanide”, as fertilizer just because you deliberately dumped it deep in a flower garden.
Once again the adage that..”The road to hell is paved with the skulls of Bishops”…is proven true.
Sadly I believe that until the 100th Anniversary of Fatima comes to pass, Pope Francis will be sticking around to complete the mystery of iniquity that God justly inflicts upon His Church thus preparing the way for the coming fiery chastisements.
Hoping for a bonfire, one can understandably be disappointed by a tiny flame.
Yet, how bright is that flame when all around is darkness…
“How great a forest is set ablaze by a small fire! ”
James 3:5
Mr. Verrecchio, I for one, at least, believe your comments regarding Bishop Athanasius Schneider to be generally uncharitable, unreasonable and unproductive. These are perilous times for the Church, indeed – and possibly apocalyptic. The analogy made by the Bishop, comparing our times to that of the period of the Arian heresy seems quite on point. However, after reading your recent blog above and letter to the Bishop, I cannot help but conclude that if you had been around back then that you would have been criticizing the one good guy there was – the original Athanasius – for not being critical enough of Pope Liberius, or not critical enough in precisely the way you wanted him to be. ‘Let not the perfect be the enemy of the good enough.’ Let us not throw tomatoes at the first, and only bishop to speak up, or engage in a circular firing squad, which wipes out the friendlies. The Bishop’s clear and courageous letter deserved far better than the reception it received from you. Brutta figura.
There can be absolutely no doubt amongst reasonable Catholics, lay or not, as to the import of Bishop Schneider’s devastating critique of AL. Both what the bishop wrote explicitly, as well as the clear implications which necessarily follow from what he wrote – even if not explicitly spelled out – will not be lost upon Pope Francis and those who inspired or promote AL (e.g., Cardinal Kaspar). If the pope does ever read beyond his positive press clippings, and happens upon the good Bishop’s critique, I have little doubt he will fly into one of his storied rages – precisely because he will understand immediately the full implications of Bishop Schneider’s critique, even if it is lost on others who need the picture drawn out for them. The pope will not need a picture drawn for him.
As to other prelates who have yet to be heard from, I would counsel patience and charity on your and our part. They (e.g., such as Cardinals Burke, Sarah, Muller, the bishops of Poland and Africa, et al) do not have the luxury of popping off like a blogger. Yes, they absolutely have a duty to speak up. But, as pastors of souls and princes of the Church, they instead must be prudent in how they proceed because what they do and say from this point forward will impact millions if not billions of souls. I fully suspect discussions and ‘things’ are in the works, even now – though we do not see it, and nor should we expect to. Personally, I do not believe we will have long to wait. In the meantime, Catholics should be writing our pastors, our bishops and to the pope to ‘manifest our views’ per Canon 212. Prayer. Prudence. Patience.
Frankly, I appreciate this letter to B S. BS has been more blunt than any other orthodox prelate to date as regards AL. Nonetheless ,I agree with Louie that the time is now here for sure for any and all orthodox prelates to confront this devil pope in Rome. In fairness to BS he has more to lose that any lay person. and while I think what Louie tells him in this letter is right on, what this letter urges him to do will be his martyrdom. If there is one thing good priests know it is to obey the pope, and while BS does have a clear picture of the poison of AL, it is mighty hard to do what must be done by all prelates loyal to Jesus Christ. If Bergoglio is not stopped he will continue to rampage through the treasure of the Church. Now that he has trashed Matrimony, he will start on the Mass and the Holy Eucharist. He has already taught priests how to create invalid confessions with his ‘false mercy’ campaign.
I believe BS is an authentic bishop and I think he will receive Louie’s letter well and he might even be prompted to act on it. I, for one, will be praying hard for BS that God give him the courage to do what must be done and done soon.
“And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of the testimony, and they loved not their lives unto death.”
Apocalypse of St. John, Chapter 12
“Tell me, tell me, pray – has such a situation ever existed in the Church? What are we to do, faced with such a reality? Weep, no doubt. Oh. weep, we do! Our heart is grieved, our heart is crushed by this situation! We would give our life, we would shed our blood to turn it around -but there it is.”
Archbishop Lefebvre
“You will denounce these scandals in order to prevent them from leading souls to hell. You will not be afraid to denounce all that which drags souls into sin.
In order to have this courage and this force, you will ask these graces particularly of the Blessed Virgin Mary. You know, my dear friends, Mary is our Mediatrix Mother. She is the Mediatrix of all graces.”
+Lefebvre
“That is what all Christian generations have understood: those generations of holy fathers and mothers of families who suffered, who suffered in a Christian manner; who accepted their sufferings, who accepted their difficulties with joy; who were examples to their children. In suffering and in pain, they knew how to support it with Our Lord Jesus Christ. These were the generations of Christian families which bore so many vocations. It was in that that vocations were born: in the example which their parents could give of knowing how to live with Our Lord Jesus Christ, to suffer with Our Lord Jesus Christ, to pray with Our Lord Jesus Christ; to assist at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass with such faith, with such piety, in the spirit of self-oblation as victims with Our Lord Jesus Christ.
How beautiful it is, this Christian, this Catholic doctrine! How completely it transforms our life! How completely it transforms our life here below! And it is that which prepares us for life eternal “O crux, ave, spes nostra!”
+Lefebvre
Dear maryiloveher: Thank you so very much for reminding us of these quotation of the holy Archbishop Lefebvre.
Loiue what your saying is true about Bishop S. He should say more i agree. I cant help think though how you feel the need to grill him (i think your right to do so) BUT Bishop Fellay you dont treat the same. ?? Please why wont you publicly criticise Bishop Fellay with only the same energy as you do Bishop S. Bishop Fellay has said practically nothing and wants to join with francis at a time when nearly everyone can see he has different idea of the catholic faith than the church herself has. I support you louie thank you for all your hard work just would like to see no favouritism (bad english) towards certain other Bishops. The bravest priest for me over this Exhortation is a novus ordo priest called Fr Shannon Collins who has in the past been on EWTN and is still within the concillar church. Hes sermon was posted here yesterday by my2cents and can be found here at this link http://www.reginaprophetarum.org/#/
i would suggest to listen to it all its only 17mins45sec but the last 8mins he speaks about francis. My point is im sure you would like to hear this loiue from Bishop S as would i and im sure many others would ,but i would also like to hear this from Bishop Fellay but how can he go tough on francis when he wants to join him. So for me its easy for sede’s and resistance to criticise francis but the real test is for priest Bishops and cardinals WITHIN the concillar church to talk plainly. Thankyou Fr Shannon Collins.
This certainly appears to be a throw down the gauntlet that you are proposing to the good Bishop. The reality of schism certainly seems to be hanging in the balance here…..Our Lady of Fatima, Ora Pro Nobis!
I fail to see how you can even remotely say that Louie’s “comments regarding Bishop Athanaius Schneider to be generally uncharitable, unreasonable and unproductive.” Louie is actually BEING charitable, reasonable and productive.
Keep up the good work Louie! We need more letters like this that not only warn others to raise the bar higher but that also encourage people like Bishop Schneider to pull harder in their attempts to pull the bar out from under the putrid cesspool it is now submersed in.
Schneider, Burke, Clovis, Pell:
A false right to keep Catholics on the Vatican II plantation.
Source: Tradition in Action
http://www.traditioninaction.org/bev/177bev04_27_2015.htm
I must say that I am in agreement with OSMatthew who suggests that, whilst we all share very deep anxiety that the current state of affairs, assailing Bishop Schneider with a public letter was unwise and uncharitable. I say this because it seems to me that Bishop Schneider is pretty much the best ally and defender of the faith from among the hierarchy that we have in these dark and confusing times and, despite some of the weaknesses in his response, he is clearly sticking his neck much further over the line than any of his supposed brothers. He is not a fool and it’s to be hoped that he has a strategy in mind and that this is merely the tip of the iceberg. Any of the others we may have had hopes in seem to be falling away like leaves. In conclusion: I believe a private letter to Bishop Schneider would have been more appropriate in the first instance. The points you raise are valid – my concern is merely with the approach you took to communicate them. Thank you for your blog and work.
John 6 said:
<>
Really? –
“In front of 4,000 SSPX pilgrims, he commented on his recent visits to Rome. Despite the new Exhortation Amoris Laetitiae which “bring us tears””
<>
Bishop Fellay doesn’t want to “join” Pope Francis, he wants recognition from Holy Mother Church for the SSPX and all Faithful Roman Catholics and yes, we are living in dangerous times for souls so he MUST be prudent for the good of the WHOLE Church.
John 6 said:
Bishop S. Bishop Fellay has said practically nothing
Really? –
“In front of 4,000 SSPX pilgrims, he commented on his recent visits to Rome. Despite the new Exhortation Amoris Laetitiae which “bring us tears””
John 6 said:
i would also like to hear this from Bishop Fellay but how can he go tough on francis when he wants to join him
Bishop Fellay doesn’t want to “join” Pope Francis, he wants recognition from Holy Mother Church for the SSPX and all Faithful Roman Catholics and yes, we are living in dangerous times for souls so he MUST be prudent for the good of the WHOLE Church.
Given Bishop Schneider’s experience in this battlefield, I really doubt he’s going to be crushed or even slightly harmed by such criticisms of his actions and inactions as are proposed here.
Much as I appreciate what he DID write against Amoris L, I hope he answers this open challenge, and explains why he didn’t fully denounce the document AS heretical, but chose to use a that less direct approach -citing areas where it directly contradicts Our Lord, the Commandments, Dogma, Dogmatic Councils -like Trent, and Sacred Scripture–which are in essence the very definition of heresy.
Mundabor’s latest blog seems to suggest the Bishop’s opening lines of praise were just a now familiar first part of a one-two punch. But in light of the souls being lost today, it seems we’re well beyond the time when that type of sugar-coating will not do more harm than good.
Let’s hope Louie’s tough language will evoke some good debate about things like that, and bring about some much-needed changes, or at least some further insights from the Bishop, himself.
.
The difference between Pope Liberius and Francis are that Pope Liberious signed an ambiguous creed while Pope Francis wrote an openly heretical and blasphemous document. Furthermore, Liberious cracked and have in under pressure, exile, and death. Pope Francis was not forced to do what he did and was even resisted……at least until he actually put forth the Kasper proposal. Pope Francis is a million times worse than Pope Liberious.
Let us always remember that prayer is our greatest weapon against evil. If our Lord is with us who can be against us. Christ has already won. Blessed be the Name of the Lord.
Catholic Dictionary (1943)
Heretic–One who professes a false doctrine;one who seeks the end of Christian truth but fails in the means because he refuses belief in one or more of the Articles of Faith;one who originates a sect based on false doctrine.
Sound like anyone we know? Are our bishops in denial?
On behalf of wife and eight children THANK YOU Louis for all that you do in defense of Holy Mother Church.
To be fair, I think Louie and others are giving Fellay more time and are expecting the SSPX to come out with a longer more thorough document. Obviously Schneider’s 6000 word treatise took a little while to release, not to mention longer for an English translation.
I would reasonably suspect the SSPX are likewise preparing a lengthy document and in multiple languages, so for now we extend to them the benefit of the doubt.
Oh I don’t think so… Louie’s letter is entirely charitable and hits home the points.
– AL contains explicit black and white HERESY.
– We are all sick of gratuitous offerings and pleasing verbiage praising the decorations on poison laced cakes.
– It is now far past time for the few Bishops left who still have their balls on them to get together, stand up and confront Francis openly, clearly and publicly. Rather than play nice and wait until he divides, demotes, kicks upstairs and moves them around to places where they’ll be less capable of doing a bloody thing.
Pope Francis and the writers of AL are now on paper in black and white clearly material heretics.
It’s time to call a Council to conduct an public Inquisition into the Pope.
Hopefully before many/all of us die in the coming chastisements from God which we can still turn around, but the clock is ticking. Even God’s incomprehensible Mercy has its limits and expiration date.
Look, Louie was as charitable as can be with the letter…more so than I could have been.
There is a grave danger to souls when a pope teaches heresy and blasphemy, and in an Apostolic Exhortation no less. The situation is critical. The time is now. The bishops need to speak and act. Pretending…..and that’s what the conservative bishops are doing is pretending….that Francis didn’t really mean what he wrote is a scandal on top of a scandal.
The danger with this thing is not that the exhortation will be misinterpreted….it’s that it will be interpreted correctly, that is, if it is interpreted as the author intends it to be interpreted.
The sooner anyone with a shred of faith left in Novus Ordo-land wakes up to the gravity of the situation and quits with the games, the niceties, and the constantly trying to give Francis plausible deniability, the better. Otherwise they’re just playing the role of useful idiots.
Really !
Long-skirts im afraid you may become short-skirts if you stick with francis.
“Bring us tears” = practically nothing
Totally OT but Pope Liberius’ name unfairly gets dragged through the mud constantly. Much of what is popularly believed about him is totally false (both that he sided with the Arians and ex-communicated St Athanasius).
Louie,
I read the entire response of Bishop Schneider and was impressed that he at least made the effort to give Pope Francis the opportunity to respond to specific areas of AL. I now hope that a response will be sent soon enough for the Pope to show his true hand in this matter. So much is done in huge generalities rather than nailing the points down. I asked myself, “who actually writes these documents?” On the plane returning from Greece, during the usual press event, the Pope seemed disturbed by a question about communion to the “irregular”. He spent some time discussing all the ills of mankind as to say that this point is minor compared to this one issue. When question about number #351 in AL, he actually said that he did not remember. I found that response really inadequate. “I do not remember that footnote, but surely if something of that sort is in a footnote it is because it was said in the Evangelii Gaudium. I don’t recall the number, but surely that is the case.” It seems like a case of plausible deniability. The passing of the buck of explanation to Cardinal Schönborn was totally inappropriate. What I am getting at is Bishop Schneider put the Pope on notice to respond clearly to his concerns. I await that document.
Excellent article!
“Archbishop” Victor Manuel Fernandez, the same person who wrote Evangelii Gaudium and Laudato Si, wrote Amoris Laetitia. Fernandez, back in 1995 while just a priest at the time. also wrote a book called “Heal me with your Mouth: The Art of kissing”. Yes, a “bishop” who as a priest wrote a book about the “art of kissing” is the member of the vatican 2 clergy who Francis hand-picked to pen all of his nonsense. Go figure.
I think it’s time to elect a new Italian Pope who will bust a few skulls, slap a couple faces and kick some heretic ass; preferably somebody having a name ending in a vowel. Do we know anybody like that?
Michael F Poulin
A little off topic but here is Archbishop Lefebvre commenting on Islam.
https://youtu.be/yVt0dnwZMCo
A true prophet if ever there was one.
…… as in “Sarto”?
–
“Pius X’s attitude toward the Modernists was uncompromising. Speaking of those who counseled compassion to the “culprits” he said: “They want them to be treated with oil, soap and caresses. But they should be beaten with fists. In a duel, you don’t count or measure the blows, you strike as you can.”
—
Oh, if only we had men like that today in our hierarchy.
I guess they are all gone, Michael.
A favorite article of mine, too, Gladstone …. in keeping me rooted in reality, I mean.
The pictures paint ten thousand words.
We only have 109 signers on Louie’s petition.
Aren’t there any more signers out there?
Sign here:
https://akacatholic.com/urgent-the-most-important-petition-youll-ever-sign/
Amen and amen and amen. How unusual is the truth in our sick Church and world! Such material diabolical disorientation as is manifested in the mental acrobatics of the good bishops – who claim to uphold the whole truth in Faith and morals but will not acknowledge nor condemn the egregious attacks on same by Francis and the many other heretical bishops. Lord, have mercy.
I was thinking more like Verrecchio … a name which seems awefully close to “True Church” in Italian : vera chiesa (an “o” on the chiesa would make it masculine)
Mea culpa.
Yes, Lynda.
If you believe Francis didn’t remember exactly the details of the footnote, I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell ya.
Giuseppe Melchiorre Sarto would love Louie Verrecchio,
I’m sure.
Great points, Louie. I thought that the good bishop went further than Bishop Fellay since so far I have not seen any official response from him (I know his sermon but that is not enough the SSPX faithful already know what is wrong with AL, it is the Pope that needs to be confronted publicly by bishops). What is going on with SSPX?
Could it be that Fellay is waiting to be “regularized” (unconditionally) before making a statement? If he makes the statement now, it would be coming from a Bishop not in full communion. It wouldn’t have the same impact. Just a thought.
It’s not about sticking “with francis”, he’s the Pope of the Roman Catholic Church and I stick with the Church of all times.
Bishop Fellay’s INITIAL response…d*mn good!!
(Ref: http://sspx.org/en/joy-mixed-crosses )
“the Supreme Pontiff cut a hole into the hull of the boat, beneath the flotation line, and you all know what happens then”
^^^ we are affirmed in where the buck stops.
“Our Lord Himself said not to change one iota”
“^^^ he continues with explaining in summary — again, this was an early response — what the core problem is…”
“The boat leaks”
“That is extremely serious. I think that we do not sufficiently appreciate the gravity of what has just been said.”
^^^ this “extremely serious” problem was at least directly attributed to… the “Supreme Pontiff”, himself.
Doesn’t that violate the moral principle of one can not do evil (keeping silent, failing his duty as Bishop) to achieve good?
Thats why we disagree i beleive he’s the false prophet of these end times not just a bad pope
LS: Fellay weeps, but he don’t preach and since he’s set himself up as a teacher Jesus Christ will hold him accountable (James 3:1): “Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers…For many walk, of whom I have told you often (and now tell you weeping), that they are enemies of the cross of Christ; Whose end is destruction; whose God is their belly; and whose glory is in their shame; who mind earthly things.” Phil 3
As for Francis being the pope of the Roman Catholic Church, Jesus Christ will hold YOU accountable for not knowing His voice. Jesus said: “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me.” John 14:6 A true pope, St. Peter “filled with the Holy Ghost, said to them… Be it known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God hath raised from the dead, even by him this man standeth here before you whole. This is the stone which was rejected by you the builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other. For there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved.” Acts 4:8-12
On 4/24 Francis said: “And in this humanity, we can get close to each other to work together … “But I belong to this religion, or to that one …” It doesn’t matter! Let’s all go forward to work together, respecting each other, respecting! I see this miracle: the miracle of a desert that becomes a forest. Thanks for everything YOU do!” [Religion doesn’t matter–YOU do miracles (my emphasis) – and this is but the latest of Francis heresies. A bad catholic is a member of the Catholic Church. A heretic (and an apostate) is cut off and CANNOT be pope.]
http://www.cruxnow.com/church/2016/04/24/pope-francis-on-earth-day-transform-deserts-into-forests/
Might be interested in doing an image search of “francis wind”
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/531993/Must-be-the-Holy-Gust-Pope-gets-caught-in-the-WIND
Sometimes can happen to skirts too.
“And if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into the pit.”
This is not the first horrific attack on the Faith, God’s Holy Law, even natural law, by Pope Francis. We’ve had four years of constant, egregious objectively-evil statements and pronouncements and acts by him, leading countless souls into evil and towards damnation. And, it is a sign of hope and deep respect for Bishop Schneider’s work as apostle and pastor to souls to date, that it is he to whom Louie is directing his heartfelt, honest, plea to lead a forthright fight against this unspeakable opposition to God, for the love and glory of God, His Holy Church, and the salvation of souls.
Danielpan–Like I said “Just a thought”. However, I am hoping and praying that Fellay will step up to the plate and say “Francis is a heretic. He must go!!” Please God—soon!
Thanks for your reply. I am not sure Bishop Fellay would have to go to that far to say “you have to go” like the petition at Remnant did. All he needs to say is AL is evil and “Your Holiness is the one to be blamed” so hopefully Francis would do what Peter did, repent and come back to Christ.