As I write, I’m at the Angelus Press Conference for Catholic Tradition in Kansas City (pictured above); a gathering under the auspices of the Society of St. Pius X.
Here, one will not hear clerics speaking of a supposed dichotomy between the immutable doctrines of the Holy Catholic faith and their “pastoral application,” as if to invite a situation wherein the latter is effectively allowed to undermine the former.
Also as I write, in Rome, an Extraordinary Synod is assembled to discuss matters concerning marriage and family, with an appreciable number of the bishops there present Hell bent on doing just that.
The interventions that have been made at the Synod thus far have been well circulated, and so it is not necessary to reiterate them here.
Let it suffice to say that Catholics of good will have every good reason to be concerned that the outcome will be a tragic assault on divine truths in the practical order even as official statements disingenuously pay lip service to the same.
Those bishops behind this assault have been labeled by some as “Kasperian” in their leanings, but let us not deceive ourselves for even a moment longer; such a label is entirely deficient in that it serves only to identify a figurehead, when indeed it is the humble pope himself who is driving the rebellion.
Many Catholics are praying that the Synod will, over and against the designs of the Bergoglian sect, ultimately reaffirm the doctrine of the faith with regard to such matters as the indissolubility of marriage, the inability of those who persist in manifest grave sin to approach the sacraments, and the recognition of the gravely disordered nature of homosexual acts.
I, however, am praying for the exact opposite.
To be more specific, my prayer is that the wolves who so craftily seek to destroy the Church from within by guile will, inspired in the knowledge that the pope himself is their ally, therefore shed all pretense; bringing undeniable clarity to the reality in which we presently live:
One may either accept the modernist ravings of the current Bishop of Rome, and in so doing objectively abandon the Faith that comes to us from the Apostles, or one may reject and denounce them; thus remaining true to what is authentically Catholic.
There is no in between. As Our Blessed Lord said, one is either with Him or against Him.
As it is, there are those in Catholic media who, knowingly, it would seem, play the middle as a means of self-preservation.
Such individuals have become adept at tap dancing around the bitter truth that Pope Francis represents perhaps the greatest obstacle to the mission of the Church in our day, with the preponderance of his public discourse daily leading souls to perdition, unworthy as it is of even a sincere heretic much less a faithful Catholic.
Others with a public voice are more aggressive in their profiteering.
In fact, one particularly carnivalesque cleric, adorned in liturgical finery no less, even goes so far as to make sport of the current crisis by attacking the few who have never wavered in upholding tradition; all in a transparent attempt to assuage the hate-filled insecurities of a bitter benefactor, the cha-ching of his shekels more pleasant to his egotistical ears than the dulcet tones of unadulterated truth.
In addition to such men as these who should most certainly know better is a large swath of the flock that is genuinely confused; sincere children of the Church who, in their innocence, still behave as if the Holy Father and those bishops who have joined his cause can be trusted to dispense only that which is nourishing for the soul.
Should the Synod succeed in crafting a highly nuanced message that in one breath reaffirms the faith whilst institutionalizing its practical denial in the other, the cancer that currently infects the Mystical Body of Christ on earth will continue to claim victims, a large portion of whom are being attacked unwittingly.
If, however, the Bergoglian actors at the Synod ultimately abandon the faith; howling their hatred of Christ in the full light of day, (and let us be honest, that is precisely the case for such men) the time of choosing on the part of all concerned will be at hand.
This means that priests, bishops and cardinals, if for no other reason than fear of eternal damnation, will be forced to stand up and say, No, we will not follow!
In truth, already we have arrived at the point where it is only with great difficulty that one of good will can deny that Pope Francis is not simply a ruthless proponent of the waste that flows from the mouth of Walter Kasper like so much vomit, he is, in a very real sense, its author.
Francis has been plainspoken about the degree to which he abhors the sure doctrine and discipline of the Church and those who love it almost from day one.
Speaking to Fr. Anthony Spadaro, S.J. in September of 2103, in his first of an ungodly number of soul-baring interviews, he said:
“The church sometimes has locked itself up in small things, in small-minded rules… There are ecclesiastical rules and precepts that were once effective, but now they have lost value or meaning. The view of the church’s teaching as a monolith to defend without nuance or different understandings is wrong.”
And what does he mean by nuance?
“The church’s pastoral ministry cannot be obsessed with the transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently.”
Clearly, he means to say that human beings cannot be held accountable to the eternal truths of the faith, for such would amount to “imposing” upon the lives of weak and sinful men; while “nuance,” meaning, the acceptance of sin, is the height of “pastoral” praxis.
Like most modernist prattle, the exact opposite of what Pope Francis is saying is true.
When the Church in her hierarchy fails to transmit the faith in such way as to “insist,” with the love and the patience of a true Mother, that the path of truth is the solitary means of attaining to one’s ultimate end and fulfilment, it is then that the doctrines of the Church become “disjointed;” removed as they are from the concrete reality of a life wherein each is called to “work out his salvation in fear and trembling.”
As it concerns marriage in particular, Pope Francis said some interesting things in this same interview:
“I also consider the situation of a woman with a failed marriage in her past and who also had an abortion. Then this woman remarries, and she is now happy and has five children. That abortion in her past weighs heavily on her conscience and she sincerely regrets it. She would like to move forward in her Christian life. What is the confessor to do?”
Can there be any doubt whatsoever that even as Francis spoke, his front man, Walter Kasper, was already busy about the task of preparing the intervention that he would give five months later at the Extraordinary Consistory in Rome; a proposal that he publicly affirmed was crafted “with the pope’s approval?”
In any event, look very closely at the pope’s words above about this “woman with a failed marriage.”
Notice how he so cavalierly states that “this woman remarries,” when in truth no such thing is possible apart from the death of her spouse or an annulment, in which case she doesn’t have a “failed marriage” in the first place.
Notice as well his reference to an abortion that “she sincerely regrets.”
One wonders why he feels compelled to introduce abortion into the picture? Are there women confessing the sin of abortion in the Church today who are somehow being prevented by dictatorial confessors from “moving forward in the Christian life”?
Of course not.
Perhaps this is just a case of an elderly man who lacks the mental acuity to stay on point. Then again, it would seem far more likely that these are the well measured words of a man who, knowingly or not, is doing the bidding of the Adversary who seeks to confuse.
One notes the rhetorical question that is raised, “What is the confessor to do?”
And yet, when the topic of marriage and family is floated, totally absent from the Bergoglian faction and their humblest of leaders is the call to return to the Church via the confessional; an act that would require a firm purpose of amendment to cease persisting in grave sin.
In other words, deliberate or not, this convoluted treatment is truly nothing more than an appeal to emotion; one that is in perfect keeping with the tenor of the Synod Fathers who also speak of doctrine and discipline as if the latter stands independent of the former.
Pope St. Pius X understood well that the modernists of his day were wont to deny the inextricable link between the divinely revealed doctrines of the Church and those disciplines that convey them.
In his landmark Encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis, this true Saint of Holy Church condemned their folly, saying:
Hence the triple authority in the Catholic Church, disciplinary, dogmatic, liturgical. The nature of this authority is to be gathered from its origin, and its rights and duties from its nature. In past times [according to the modernists] it was a common error that authority came to the Church from without, that is to say directly from God; and it was then rightly held to be autocratic. But this conception had now grown obsolete. For in the same way as the Church is a vital emanation of the collectivity of consciences, so too authority emanates vitally from the Church itself. Authority therefore, like the Church, has its origin in the religious conscience, and, that being so, is subject to it. Should it disown this dependence it becomes a tyranny.
Enter the Synod of 2014, wherein the Bergoglian offensive, predicated upon a false “mercy” that has not its origins in God, but rather in the religious conscience of the people themselves, is apparently poised to show the truly faithful what tyranny really is.
Excellent analysis. Thank you and God bless!
Thank you for the whole series of posts. Over these last six months I have moved on from simply accepting all the Holy Father says, to looking for charitable interpretations, to the point I am moved to pray earnestly for him.
I reflect on how Saul became St Paul, and pray that the Holy Spirit will work deeply at the level of his heart
Hello Mr. Verrecchio,
I just wanted to thank you proclaiming the truth about what’s going in the Church today. This Synod of the devil will have terrible consequences, make no mistake about it. I fear for the souls of these man. Rome is truly blessed to still be standing on its foundation.
I’ve written extensively about this Synod on my blog. The truth must be proclaimed. The world is going to hell for a lack of truth.
God bless you, Mr. Verrecchio! Pax. +
I echo the thanks of the previous commenters. I assume that there is much more interest in Piux X and other traditional apostolates since the Frances election. Is this the case, or are Catholics just closing their eyes and ears or leaving?
“What is the confessor to do?” He should jump for joy that a penitent woman has come forward to confess her sin of abortion so that Heaven is now possible for her. The next step would be to examine the “failure” of her first marriage and counsel her regarding the possibility of annulment. These situations are never easy, but a woman’s eternity is at stake and must be handled with prudence and mercy within the confines of true Catholic dogma.
Our Lord’s teachings and revelations to Peter and the Apostles were not merely for the world as it existed when Christ walked the earth. His teachings were for all times in every circumstance. Bergoglio and his henchmen do not know what Jesus did not know. The answers to the questions posed at the Synod must be founded on what Our Lord taught Peter, the first Pope and the Apostles, the first Bishops. Anything else is treachery!
Thank you, Louie, Matt, Vennari and all at this conference. God bless all of you and keep you safe.
I must correct my wording:
“Bergoglio and his henchman could not possibly know more than Jesus. What Our Lord taught is perfect and complete. Nothing could be added or taken away.”
Jesus said,] “For I came to set a man at variance against his father.. and a man’ s enemies shall be they of his own household.” [Mat. 10: 35-36]”
We were struck by how appropriate the Haydock footnote to this verse, seems for today: –“Not that this was the end or design of the coming of our Saviour; but that his coming and his doctrine would have this effect, by reason of the obstinate resistance that many would make, and of their persecuting all such as should adhere to him.”
Neither we nor our parents or grandparents expected any of this “persecuting” to come from fellow Catholics, much less those designated as shepherds by the Church such as we have experienced for the last 50 years; but we are thankful that it is now being much more clearly exposed to others who were blinded to this reality for a host of reasons.
So thanks Louie, for laying out the situation and the clear path– rejection of the “ravings”. Thanks also for your prayers- so like our own- that both the wolves and the good shepherds be clearly seen, and now. And most of all, thank you for your continued strong expressions of Faith in the promise of Jesus to remain with His Church to the end.
OT but am I wrong in thinking that the absolution of the sin of abortion was reserved to the Bishop? But then again with things changing right before our eyes this may have been changed.
I’m getting tired. Weary. Sad. Wanting all this to be over. Will this horrible business (to end in 2015 and beyond with a ‘decision’ by the Pope) split Holy Mother Church?
Do we dare even think the Pope might be a precursor to the Anti-Christ?
AFRICAN BISHOP RESPONDS TO SYNOD NEWS: (A Rorate-reader in Africa gave permission to post his letter anonymously. )
“.. Our bishop.. doesn’t like to be online.. so I ..print things.. to show him..news from the Synod .he was struck by this passage from Thursday’s meeting:
“With regard to cohabitation in certain regions, it was shown that this is often due to economic and social factors and not a form of refusal of the teachings of the Church. Often, moreover, these and other types of de facto unions are lived while conserving the wish for a Christian life, and therefore require suitable pastoral care. Similarly, while emphasising the impossibility of recognising same sex marriage, the need for a respectful and non-discriminatory approach with regard to homosexuals was in any case underlined.”
“He was in the office with the Vicar-General, and he stood up and then fell down on his chair, took his hands to his head and started to weep silently. He was obviously very shaken. He said to the Vicar-General: “Oh my God, what are they doing? The people will soon get hold of declarations like these and they’ll prefer to become evangelicals or even Muslims than remain Catholic! What are they doing in Rome? Oh my God, oh my God!”
-“He then looked at me, calmed down, and said, “I’m sorry you saw this, sorry.” It was shocking.”
“They were both extremely nervous with what will come out, Muslims and Evangelical missionaries will make great inroads if the Church is seen as soft on morals, a situation Africans hate, and make very difficult the work of priests to stop couples from just living together, very often one man and several women, but actually getting married in church.”
-” I’m not sure they understand the impact that even small things like these have in how Africans at least here- view the Church. The Vicar-General said something like, “What is this softness? Why ‘impossibility of recognising’ and not, this false marriage is a grave aberration and an abomination against God and against Creation? At least the Anglicans here can say decisions in Europe are not their responsibility, but how can we as Roman Catholics say that what happens in Rome has nothing to do with us?”
Re. your excerpt from Pascendii; from the opening of VII through today we’ve been experiencing what Pius X stated further down at the last sentence of the paragraph: “Such is the situation for the Modernists, and their one great anxiety is, in consequence, to find a way of conciliation between the authority of the Church and the liberty of believers.” It seems they’re now forcing the authority to yield to liberty.
As our Lord said to listen to the Pharisees but don’t do what they do, we need to listen to the doctrine & dogma but ignore the praxis.
Even that may not be doable in this particular situation.
The Jews were instructed by Jesus to keep God’s laws,’ but not to imitate their leaders’ behaviors when they saw them personally breaking them. If the currently-suggested “pastoral” practices are given the official go-ahead, we’re talking about fellow Catholics being encouraged to remain in sinful lifestyles, and to begin or continue committing sacrilegious communions. Aside from the fact that all our years of admonishing sinners will be viewed as erroneous or “inappropriate” , we will have moral obligations to protest, this further sin and scandal, for the sake of anyone who will listen to the truth.
By the way, today is the feast of Pope John XXIII where all of this formally began. I am still trying to work that into my understanding and acceptance.
“Today is the feast of St. John XXIII, pope from 1958-1963, best known for convening the Second Vatican Council. He was beatified by Pope John Paul II on September 3, 2000. His feast is assigned to the day on which the first session of Vatican II opened in 1962. His feast is not on the General Roman Calendar, but can be celebrated locally.”… http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/liturgicalyear/calendar/day.cfm?date=2014-10-11
Celebrating the opening of the Second Vatican Council??? That says it all!! The Catholic “church” celebrates its own destruction!! Beatifying Paul 6 is the icing on the cake. Canonizing him will be the cherry on top!!
I agree 100%…let them show their hand and take it as far as they really want it to go. I’ve got “conservative” friends and family who apparently will see the true nature of the crisis any other way.
As a side note…has anyone pointed out how even this present battle is a result of the de facto denial of EENS?
For if non-Catholic can he saved, if there is salvation for individuals who deny the indissolubility of marriage, then OF COURSE the vast majority of Catholics will take that route when faced with the choice between living the rest of their lives single after a failed marriage or getting married again outside the Church.
It takes supernatural Faith, and the fear of eternal damnation, to embrace that cross. But if it’s not a matter of salvation…if we all are going to heaven anyway…what’s the motivation for embracing such a painful cross?
It all goes back to EENS if you ask me. Hope that makes sense.
And one final thought regarding the popes recent call for “docility”, for “being docile” to the Holy Spirit as we are supposedly led “beyond the boundaries.” Well here’s an idea….how about we all be docile to the Holy Spirit as he spoke to us through His Church at the Council of Trent?!?! How about the synod father’s break out a copy of the canons and decrees of the Council of Trent and swear docile fidelity to the infallible and unchanging dogmas of the faith contained therein???
Amen to all you wrote above…EENS as the core issue makes a lot of sense; so does unwillingness to allow sinful mankind to bear the pain of crosses and do necessary penance; and being “led beyond the boundaries”–by the spirit tops them all. Which spirit is the question, and your suggestion about Trent is one of the answers. When we follow St. Paul’s admonition to “test every spirit” the surest method is comparing what it says to Divinely revealed truth. That’s where the novelties fail. That’s why they want the past buried. That’s what Cardinal Burke and company are using to refute them. God Bless You.
“Believing in the Church’s ultimate survival does not, however, answer the question: what will restore her now?”
– Go to the link and read the whole thing and feel better, (if you haven’t already). 😉
Too soon to celebrate but…..
Over at Rorate Caeli this headline:
“Cardinal Burke a pariah? Not for the Synod Fathers!
– Pope unexpectedly names 6 liberals, including Wuerl, to draft report”
LInk here: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/10/cardinal-burke-pariah-not-for-synod.html
Francis has lost. !
This round. 🙂
New Catholic writes:
“So, the Pope wants full and free debate, and free deliberations… except when he doesn’t. And when the secret ballot reveals a conservative majority — then he interferes against what had been settled beforehand to get what he wants.”
Folks, it was a clean sweep for the forces of good. Burke, Sarah, Bagnasco.
It don’t get better than that…. in the VII sect, that is.
“After the uprising of June 17th
The Secretary of the Authors’ Union
Had leaflets distributed in the Stalinallee
Which said that the people
Had forfeited the government’s confidence
And could only win it back
By redoubled labour. Wouldn’t it
Be simpler in that case if the government
Dissolved the people and
The revolutionaries have been de-masked.
It’s only a question of time.
Pray for a quick end to this papacy. 🙂
St. Michael Archangel, ora pro nobis.
Pardon my ignorance:
What is EENS?
At the revoution, bedlum reigns!
Via Pew Sitter: http://www.pewsitter.com/view_news_id_185170.php
“Vatican reporter John Thavis announces the addition of six Cardinals to help write the ‘relatio’ document which will summarize input and conclusions from this phase of the Synod on the Family.”
Those darned Catholics just can’t be trusted! 🙂
And the counter attack just keeps on getting better:
Cardinal Burke SPEAKS.
A lot of great insight. Turns out that “Die deutschen Bischöfe” letter to the SECRET SIN SYNOD where they supposedly unanimously signed it in support of the evil one Kasper’s position is another LIE.
Had a dream the other night. His Holiness Benedict XVII (Burke) installed Bishop Z as the archbishop of Chicago.
A Sunday Meditation
I BELIEVE IN ONE GOD
– “God does not exist: Do not be shocked!”
AND IN JESUS CHRIST HIS ONLY SON OUR LORD
– “Read the Koran”:
“Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son.” (Sura 4:171)
WHO WAS CONCEIVED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT, BORN OF THE VIRGIN MARY
– “Lies! I was deceived!”
SUFFERED UNDER PONTIUS PILATE, WAS CRUCIFIED, DIED AND WAS BURIED
– “Read the Koran”:
“That they said (in boast), ‘We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah’; – but they killed him not, nor crucified him” (Sura 4:157)
HE DESCENDED INTO HELL; THE THIRD DAY HE ROSE AGAIN FROM THE DEAD
– “Read the Koran”:
“…for of a surety they killed him not” (Sura 4:157)
HE ASCENDED INTO HEAVEN AND IS SEATED AT THE RIGHT HAND OF THE FATHER ALMIGHTY
– “Read the Koran”:
“And [beware the Day] when Allah will say, ‘O Jesus, Son of Mary, did you say to the people, ‘Take me and my mother as deities besides Allah ?” He will say, ‘Exalted are You! It was not for me to say that to which I have no right’. (Sura 5:117)
HE WILL COME AGAIN TO JUDGE THE LIVING AND THE DEAD
– “I could never imagine those hands giving us a slap. Never. Never.”
I BELIEVE IN THE HOLY SPIRIT
– “I also think with affection of those Muslim immigrants who this evening begin the fast of Ramadan, which I trust will bear abundant spiritual fruit.”
THE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH; THE COMMUNION OF SAINTS
– “There is no Catholic God”
THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS
– “I see that many times in the Church…people search for ‘sins from youth’, for example, and then publish them. They are not crimes, right?”
THE RESURRECTION OF THE BODY; AND LIFE EVERLASTING
– “I will not speak of ‘absolute truths’, even for believers”
From context we assumed EENS meant:
Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus
In the past, Louie’s reminded his readers of his awareness and concern for the many people who are just coming to understand what’s been going on in the Church for the last 50+ years, which is one reason he said he’s less restrictive than other blog-owners about who is allowed to participate here (hence the wide variety of opinions). You sound as though you’ve acquire a more balance outlook and openness to the truth over the past few months, and that’s no small achievement in these times, with all the confusion to wade through.
– We’re glad it didn’t take being knocked to the ground and blinded by a bright light–which seem to have been the more drastic measures used on St. Paul by Our Lord. 🙂 Please continue praying with all of us for both the Faithful and for all those in need of conversion-on any level, as we strive to love our neighbors as ourselves, in every way possible.
So apparently there are Bishops, besides Card. Burke, who are orthodox? I know their voices are being silenced by the powers that be who interpret the daily stuff coming out of the Synod. But none of them can speak afterwards? Are there no microphones? Is there no internet? Are there no reporters who would just love to hear an old traddie Bishop speak?
I think Card. Burke is being hung out to dry here. The orthodox Bishops seem very shy, tongue tied, and reticent to say the least. Now would be the time to stem the tide of garbage from Card. Kasper. Where are these guys??????
I guess the adage “evil comes about because good men do nothing” is appropriate. Most of them take a wait and see approach. Or are not used to speaking out on controversial subjects. Or don’t want to speak too soon – whatever. So the world as we know it goes to Hell in a hand-cart.
Our Bishop has not opened his mouth ONCE to say anything remotely interesting, let alone controversial. Yet he’s beloved by all. Cowards!!!
Dear Louie and all,
If we end up with more time in purgatory it wil be partly Mundabor’s fault for making us laugh so hard at what we normally would consider too irreverent, crude or cruel. We’re still chuckling at his memorable exclamation:
” I don’t give a Jesuit how much they “luv” each other”
…while soundly criticizing the now infamous line: “There can be more Christian love in an irregular pair than in one, which has been married in the church.”
http://mundabor.wordpress.com/ October 11, 2014 post [Look for the “Pothead Parking Only” sign] 🙂
Gotta love that dream… Thanks for this great video link.
…”It seems to me it’s clear they understand they are not doing what the Lord has commanded us.”
Q: Kasper said,[America Mag] ” We cannot simply take one phrase of the Gospel of Jesus and from that deduce everything…discipline can change, so I think we have here a theological fundamentalism that is not Catholic”
A: “If we don’t take seriously every word of Our Lord,..we’re certainly not the Church, we’re not His Mystical Body.” “To try to drive a wedge between discipline and doctrine is simply false in the Catholic Church because every discipline is at the service of a teaching or some Sacred reality to safeguard and promote it.” If it’s being fundamentalist to hold strictly to the teaching on Marriage, well then I’m happy to be a fundamentalist.”
We posted a few more of the best quotes from this on Louie’s next post (October 12, 2014) “Tyranny” Comment #4.
The faithful bishops seem to be so slow in responding to the attacks on the Faith and the moral law by the Holy See and countless bishops and cardinals. What strikes me about this particular story is that the bishop acts as if he is realising for the first time that this evil is afoot and actively pushed by the Holy See. How can bishops be so blind?
Dear Barbara, Well said!
It’s possible the answer in this case can be found in the initial comment made by the man providing the information to this Bishop-
-“Our bishop.. doesn’t like to be online.. so I ..print things.. to show him..news from the Synod”.
-With many newspapers going under, we don’t know how anyone who avoids the internet can stay informed. Also he may have been aware of the possibilities yet overwhelmed by the extremes to which the Cardinals have actually taken it all in freely speaking their heretical ideas and “pastoral plans”.