In a recent article at CatholicCulture.org, Phil Lawler highlights a review of Cardinal Walter Kasper’s, Mercy: The Essence of the Gospel and the Key to Christian Life, a book that Pope Francis has publicly praised.
According to the book’s reviewer, the contents are entirely consonant with the Faith.
Now, I wouldn’t suggest reading Kasper’s book either way, but the article itself is a gem if for no other reason than the way Lawler once again demonstrates just how content some folks are to hide behind a “conservative” Catholic blindfold in order to deny that the House of God is ablaze at the hands of clerical arsonists.
According to Lawler:
So one can be enthusiastic about the Kasper book, as Pope Francis is, without necessarily embracing the Kasper proposal; in fact one might even quote Mercy in an argument against the Kasper proposal.
“Kasper’s proposal,” of course, is a reference to the German cardinal’s presentation given at the Consistory of Cardinals in Rome in February during which he proposed the possibility of inviting the civilly divorced and remarried to Holy Communion, apart from a decree of nullity of a still valid marriage and without a vow of continence going forward.
Now don’t tell Phil (I mean, we wouldn’t want to disturb his slumber time in Cotton Candy Catholicland), but the Holy Father’s opinion of Cardinal Kasper’s ideas isn’t exactly the ecclesial version of the Malaysia Airlines mystery.
Everyone with eyes to see knows perfectly well what Pope Francis thinks of it.
On May 6th, Lawler pushed what appears to be the outer limits of his comfort zone when he said, “It’s incontrovertible that the Pope has encouraged discussion of the Kasper proposal.”
It is to laugh! Pope Francis did a hell of a lot more than simply “encourage discussion.”
After giving Kasper’s proposal a close rereading, the Holy Father offered his assessment to the Cardinals gathered in Consistory the following day, calling it an example of “profound and serene theology … a pleasure … theology done on one’s knees.”
This wasn’t merely an attaboy for an old friend, nor was it simply approval of the lively debate that ensued following Kasper’s presentation; it was effusive praise for the proposal itself.
Apparently, Lawler and his neighbors out in La La Land didn’t get that memo. On May 6th he wrote:
Some critics of Pope Francis (and some critics of yours truly) seem to think that it’s only a matter of time before Pope Francis endorses the Kasper proposal, and gives the green light for Catholics who are divorced and remarried to receive Communion.
To be clear, Lawler is actually addressing two separate matters.
On the one hand, the pope has not, and perhaps may not, give the “green light” mentioned.
On the other hand, Pope Francis has already offered what every reasonable observer recognizes as a glowing endorsement of the “Kasper proposal,” and you can be certain that the bishops of the world are well aware of it. You can also be reasonably certain that many of them are under considerable pressure, at the hands of those who agree with the pope, to open their own minds to it as well.
Pope Francis has also provided other, slightly more subtle, signs as to his thinking on the matter of civilly divorced and remarried Catholics.
For example, in his March 5th interview with the Italian daily, Corriere della Sera he said:
Orthodox theology is very rich. And I believe that they have great theologians at this moment. Their vision of the Church and of synodality is marvelous.
Furthermore, in his 50,000 word tome that Cardinal Burke still hasn’t quite figured out in his mind exactly how to describe, the Holy Father stated:
If we really believe in the abundantly free working of the Holy Spirit, we can learn so much from one another! It is not just about being better informed about others, but rather about reaping what the Spirit has sown in them, which is also meant to be a gift for us. To give but one example, in the dialogue with our Orthodox brothers and sisters, we Catholics have the opportunity to learn more about the meaning of episcopal collegiality and their experience of synodality. Through an exchange of gifts, the Spirit can lead us ever more fully into truth and goodness. (Evangelii Gaudium)
Taken with his over-the-top assessment of Cardinal Kasper’s blueprint for subverting the Church’s venerable practice relative to Holy Communion for recalcitrant adulterers, the math isn’t very difficult to do in this case.
One can well imagine the Holy Father, in addition to leaving the matter open to the various national episcopal conferences, generating a Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation that may very well include positive support for something similar to the schismatic Orthodox approach to marriage; one that allows what amounts to a couple of marital mulligans.
For those unaware, the Orthodox, not unlike Cardinal Kasper, speak out of both sides of their mouths on this topic:
While tolerating a second marriage and in certain cases a third, the Church completely forbids a fourth marital union…
The Church does not allow divorce any more than she allows sin; she does not permit something which the Lord Himself has specifically condemned…
The Church can and does practice mercy and forgiveness, and sympathizes with couples who must consider the grave alternative of divorce in order to salvage their lives from the tragic circumstances of a broken marriage. In such painful situations the Church offers the opportunity for repentance and forgiveness and the possibility for a new beginning, with final judgment resting in the hands of the Lord…
The permission to remarry according to the “Order of Second Marriage” may eventually be granted divorced persons…
A period of penance may be imposed on one or both partners of a marriage that has ended in divorce…
This is precisely the sort of duplicitous blather that one should expect from a “synodal” church comprised of schismatics who presume to operate apart from the Successors of St. Peter, but there’s also ample reason to believe that we may very well see a similar brand of nonsense adopted in various parts of the Catholic Church under a Successor who finds their ecclesiology simply “marvelous.”
Unless, of course, one prefers to simply hind behind a conservative Catholic blindfold.
”While tolerating a second marriage and in certain cases a third, the Church completely forbids a fourth marital union…”
Oh the intolerable fourth! Heaven forbid.
It was incredily shocking to read how similar is the “Orthodox” statement on the need to apply “mercy” while hypocritically claiming they do not condone sin, to Kasper’s and Francis’ own heretical theology. Further proof to me at least that Francis has indeed teared himself apart from the Mystical Body of Christ much like the “Orthodox” schismatics.
Allowing Holy Communion for remarried divorced Catholics is not a matter of “if”, it’s a matter of “when”. If Holy Communion is given to pro-abortion “catholic” politicians (in spite of Canon Law), why should we be shocked? Also, priestly celibacy is next in line for the chopping block. Where will it end? Remember Bergoglio is in the driver’s seat. Lord help us!
A union with the so called Orthodox? Let’s see now. They don’t believe in papal primacy, allow divorce and remarriage up to three times, and allow birth control. What’s wrong with this picture?
“the House of God is ablaze at the hands of clerical arsonists”; ain’t that the Truth. So when the rupture between the Churh and those who claim to represent Her is complete, what then?
–
Frankie said, “profound and serene theology … a pleasure … theology done on one’s knees.” I wonder exactly what kasper was doing on his knees when this serenology came upon him? in fact, I guess I don’t want to know.
–
here’s a quick run-down of kasper’s religion:
The Theses of Professor Walter Kasper
Sept. 11, 2004
From the IK (Initiativ Kreis) News of 8-9/2003
•”Faith does not mean a believing-to-be-true of wonderful facts and sets of beliefs that have authoritatively been put before us.”
•”Dogmas can certainly be one-sided, superficial, bossy, dumb, and rash.”
•Christ “presumably did not call himself either Messiah or Servant of God or Son of God and probably not Son of Man either.”
•The dogma that Jesus is “completely man and completely God” is able to be superceded.
•Kasper writes “that we must call the many miracle stories in the Gospels legendary.”
•Even when [if] Kasper admits Jesus performed healings: “On the other hand, with some probability one need not consider [the] so-called miracles of nature as historical.”
•The Resurrection of Jesus is “no objectively and neutrally ascertainable historical fact.”
•Regarding the oldest account of the Easter event (Mk 16:1-8), Kasper comments “that here we are not talking about historical characteristics but [linguistic] means of style which are to get people’s attention and create tension [suspense, excitement].” Other New Testament factual claims about the Easter and Ascension accounts, too, are mere “means of style” for Kasper.
•Statements about the immanent Trinity or about the pre-existence of Christ are, according to Kasper, “not direct statements of faith but theological statements of reflection.”
•Kasper also speaks of the “Resurrection of each individual in [at] death.” Hence “any talk of life after death is misleading.” In addition, any talk of heaven, hell, and purgatory is “a very inappropriate, indeed misleading way of speaking.”
•By the “not very fortunate expression ‘infallibility of the Church'” is meant “that the Church . . . cannot definitively fall back to the status of the Synagogue and cannot deny Christ definitively.”
•The dogma of the Church’s universal mediatorship of salvation, clothed in the words “extra ecclesiam nulla salus” [“no salvation outside the Church”], which is most important for ecumenical dialogue, Kasper calls a “most misunderstandable phrase.”
http://www.novusordowatch.org/wire/cardinal-walter-kasper.htm
p.s. check out the ‘decent of modernism’ cartoon at the bottom, it’s well worth it.
Dear Salvemur,
–
Just to make sure – what you have provided are ACTUAL QUOTES of Card Kasper?? Because if they are, the man has clearly crossed the path from open heresy into open apostasy. And this is the man Franky praises as having, “serene and profound theology”?
–
I think we have reached the point where an apostate “pope” is indeed sitting impiously in the throne of Peter (11:50).
–
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5TVHteYpSM
–
“In the world you shall have distress: but have confidence, I have overcome the world.”
–
~ John 16:33
What I don’t understand is why all the Faithful Bishops don’t get together and call something what it is – kasper and ‘others’ are heretics and poisoners – they are, by every proper definition, little anti-christs. I know some commentors on Catholic blogs say, ‘but freemasons have all the positions of power and so there’s nothing much to be done?’ Why should these Judas’ be permitted to keep their positions? Why can’t they be gotten rid of? St Paul booted out anyone who was an unrepentent traitor pretty quick.
p.s. he didn’t wait around for Peter to make up his mind, or ‘simon’ either.
There’s really only one answer on how to combat this insanity…and obviously that will never happen (even though it would have in a heartbeat in centuries past). We’ve long since passed the point where talking and praying is going to make any difference. God gives all of us free will…that includes the heretics. If nobody puts a stop to them, then they’ll continue to spread their word. Humanity is obviously naturally inclined towards evil so when good people do nothing but talk, evil will obviously keep winning.
Kasper, apostate : “… the old theory of substitution [that is, the theory of the New Covenant substituting for the Old] is gone since the Second Vatican Council… Therefore, the Church believes that Judaism, i.e., the faithful response of the Jewish people to God’s irrevocable covenant, is salvific for them, because God is faithful to his promises.”
(The Great Façade, Ferrara & Woods, 2002).
Kasper, front man for Bergoglio’s October revolution : “I told the pope, ‘Holy Father, there will be a controversy afterward,’” Kasper said. The pope laughed and told him: “That’s good, we should have that!”… “I do not know if my proposals will be acceptable,” the cardinal said with a shrug. “I made them in agreement with the pope, I did not do them just myself. I spoke beforehand with the pope, and he agreed.”
(http://www.religionnews.com/2014/05/15/cardinal-kasper-enjoying-spotlight-taking-heat-popes-theologian/)
I don’t apologize at all when I say that kasper, bergoglio, and the rest of the deviants in power need to be gone from this earth as soon as possible and face their punishment. All they are doing is leading souls to hell at this point. Their existence on this earth is totally detrimental.
Louis, you’ve a stronger constitution than I to read Phil Lawler, mr. ignatius press. I’m happy we have you to do the unpleasant work, and then to write about the experience so clearly 🙂 Thank you.
Just out of curiosity I looked up Phil Lawler on Google images to confirm my suspicion that he is the fellow in the blindfold in Louie’s picture…sure enough…good job Louie! Between you and Chris Ferrara perhaps this slobbering sycophant will go out of business.
“Where are the faithful bishops?”
Good question. The silence of those we typically think of as the “good ones” is more scandalous to me than the obvious modernists like Kasper who obviously have lost the faith. It tests our own faith to ponder the impossible…are there any bishops left with the faith?
As an aside…be ready for the papal trip to Israel. I have a gut feeling that we’re in for some real craziness.
Before I got married I actually considered the weight of responsibility that are my marriage vows, like most other sincere Catholics.
We choose to be bound by the vows that we take, therefore the view of Kasper and his ilk seek to undermine true and sincere Catholics like me and millions of others. We really do need to be better served than we are by the likes of Kasper.
I’m currently Catholic, but the utter lunacy of the last 50 years and this current pope have me seriously looking at Orthodoxy. While I am no fan of their policy on divorce, it is my understanding that a person who wants to divorce and remarry in the Orthodox Church has to go through an extensive period of penance and then is eventually remarried by a priest in a toned-down penitential service. IF the Catholic Church decides to allow civilly divorced and remarried people to receive Communion it will be saying in essence that sex outside of sacramental marriage is not mortally sinful since one cannot receive Communion in a state of mortal sin, right? What might that lead to from our “who am I to judge” pope? Suddenly, the Orthodox position doesn’t look so bad or at the very least it becomes the lesser evil…
no apologies necessary when it comes to Judases tearing down two millennia of the work of the Holy Ghost.
–
pr.14.1 – A wise woman buildeth her house: but the foolish will pull down with her hands that also which is built.
–
VII is ‘foolish’.
dear Peter,
this is for you:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjLIU5LI9dc&list=PLkU2iRDqusfn2hHmR5s21zaiuP4ozAn9c&index=8
This blog and those similar are discussing church men, not that holy group of people, the Mystical Body of Christ, the Catholic Church {not the institutional construction-} living in the State of Grace, those in the Church Militant, in Purgatory and in the Church Triumphant, against which the gates of Hell shall not prevail.
That Mystical Body follows the Life of His Majesty Our Lord Jesus Christ-we are now entering entombment. Stabat Mater-stand at the foot of the Cross with no doubts and at the ready. Do not hope for security nor comfort except that which is found in adoring the Wounds of Christ. for that is not thinking like a Catholic, with no disrespect meant. Do not chomp at the bit of the bait of the Enemy.
May the Peace of His Majesty Our Lord Jesus Christ, a Peace not of this World, be to you.
Kasper was interviewed at Fordham University recently about his “Mercy” book. Rorate Caeli has the scoop:
http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/05/cardinal-kasper-in-nyc-ghost-of-vatican.html
Kasper said “I esteem both Elizabeth Schussler-Fiorenza and Elizabeth Johnson”. I don’t know much about Elizabeth Johnson other than her writings have been officially censured by the Church. Just imagine how bad you have to be to get censured these days.
However, I immediately recognized Schussler-Fiorenza because I have written about her in the past:
http://publicvigil.blogspot.com/2011/08/kicking-habit.html
She supports women’s ordination and also is reported to have ties to witchcraft and neo-pagan organizations.
Here are the opening lines of her speech at a women’s ordination conference: “We are here this weekend because we have heard the call of Divine Wisdom and have been sent out as her wo/men ministers to proclaim her invitation…. We hereby proclaim: wo/men are the image of God and the representatives of Christ–Sophia.”
This is the kind of person that Kasper “esteems”.
God have mercy on us all.
Peter, far better that you should get yourself to an SSPX parish, if there is one near you, where you will happily find all the Church’s Traditions, disciplines, doctrines, sacraments and liturgies just as they were before the VII revolution.
dear Peter,
if I may further suggest, listen to the courageous council/advice of
GreatPretender51.
In addition,if you do not live near an SSPX parish or chapel, you can contact an SSPX priest by means of there website {s.} Therein you will find the Faith undefiled. While doing so, nourish yourself by refraining from the perusal of Catholic material published after 1955.
For your nourishment, brother in Christ, if I may offer-
http://www.traditionalcatholic.net/Tradition/Information/The_Douay_Catechism/index.html
dear Michael Leon,
I know.
Let us prepare for the canonization of Martin Luther in 2017, along with the celebration of the revolt, while the current occupant of the Chair of Peter, God forbid, ignores the centennial {if you will,} and warnings of the Mother of God at Fatima.
And the whole Christ as the ‘goddess’ Sofia movement comes to us via the Russian Orthodox (who went pretty crazy before the Marxists got rid of the Tsar) fueling a sort of mycsticism that ‘centering prayer’ people would recognise, and much that might make them go, ‘hmmm’. it was even considered that ‘wisdom’ might be a goddessie hypostasization – I guess there’s such a word – of the Holy Trinity. solovyev had visitations from this ‘goddess’.
brethren,
sit down, breathe, prepare yourselves and grab a brandy:
———–
“———-His warning was particularly welcomed by a representatives of the indigenous peoples of the world association ‘The spirit of the planet’, who attended the papal audience.——”
http://en.radiovaticana.va/articolo.asp?c=800909
an interesting aside – solovyov also wrote ‘a short story of the anti-christ’. his vision of the church is something like the ecumenism we see now. in his bid to validate heresy he describes Peter as Catholicism, Paul as the endless Protestantisms and John, the apostle, as the ‘orthodox’ (the lengths we will go to); yet even his ecumenism would not have allowed for such an absurd sound-bite as ‘abrahamic-faiths’, which is white-wash for, there’s the mosaic law (1st class) and the noahide law (no class) – as if the Word Incarnate never happened.
dear salvemur,
all I can say right now is– ! mama mia ! {and not in a good way !! }
will vodka do? ‘ And Frankie urged people to nurture and safeguard Creation as God’s greatest gift to us’.
–
gee, here I was thinking it was Christ’s sacrifice. also that when the old creation passes away our immortal souls will still be, either in the new creation or keeping company with endless misery in that old pit prepared for traitors.
quite honestly,
my dear salvemur,
I think this requires a really smooth cognac.
now, why does His Humbleness refer to us a sourpusses? I think we all here possess a robust sense of humor. {what is the plural of sourpuss–sour pie? humble pie ? }
‘pass the courvoisier’, as the sing goes, but voddie will have to do. does you think Frankie believes this stuff? or is he the contemporary papal equivalent of the old travelling swindler with his bottle of cure-all?
–
not one mention in his address about the fall. yes God proclaimed, it is good, when he created, but when our first parents fell, creation fell as well. God didn’t say ‘it is good’, then.
‘pass the courvoisier’, as the song goes, but voddie will have to do. do you think Frankie believes this stuff? or is he the contemporary papal equivalent of the old travelling swindler with his bottle of cure-all?
–
not one mention in his address about the fall. yes God proclaimed, ‘it is good’, when He created, but when our first parents fell, creation fell as well. God didn’t say ‘it is good’, then.
oops – ‘scuse the double up. I’m on a tablet which hates spelling and grammar correction and takes surreptitious coffee breaks while I’m still typing.
Peter,
–
Do you really have the faith? If you do, why are you so troubled? Didn’t St Paul prophesy (2 Thessalonians 2) that there must be a revolt – an apostasy – before the wicked one (THE Anti-Christ) appears on the world stage? This apostasy has also been foretold in numerous private revelations.
–
Why are you willing to abandon the Mystical Body of Christ to jump into a heretical and schismatic religious body – the “Orthodox” Christians? The conciliar heresies somehow nullify the heresies that the “Orthodox” adhere to?
–
“Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith; Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly…”
~ From the Athanasian Creed
PS The Catholic Church – the SPOTLESS BRIDE OF CHRIST – will NEVER allow public adulterers to receive the body, blood, soul and divinity of Our Blessed Lord Jesús Christ. Let that be very clear. Any such “decision” would only come from heretics/apostates outside of the Mystical Body of Christ – in other words people masquerading as true catholic hierarchy, bereft of any such authority. (Pope Paul IV “Cum ex apostolatus officio”)
De Maria,
–
Mr Bergoglio is FAR too much of a cunning snake to completely ignore the centennial of the Fatima apparitions. He will give some sort of half-hearted, apathetic speech in praise of Our Lady of Fatima (much like the “entrustment” ceremony of October 2013), whilst simultaneously providing some kind of effeminate, ecumenical meaning to the Fatima apparitions, never once warning souls of the danger they have of falling into the botomless pit if they follow the conciliar heresies.
God Bless.
You’ll notice that in today’s General Audience he also performs some innovative theology: “No, the Angels are beneath us! We are more than the Angels!” http://culbreath.wordpress.com/2014/05/21/more-than-the-angels/
Dear Mr. Culbreath,
I repeat–!! mama mia–!!!
I have to pass on the SSPX. I think one of if not the biggest reason why people join the SSPX or at least are sympathetic to them is the liturgy, right? We don’t like what has become of the Mass, it’s a sacrilegious disgrace and the SSPX celebrate the Mass the way it should be. In a perfect SSPX world, Vatican II would never have happened. Is that fair to say? But not Vatican I, they aren’t Old Catholics after all. So Pastor Aeternus is an infallibly true statement. But that document states:
“Both clergy and faithful, of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, are bound to submit to this power (that of the Roman Pontiff) by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world.”
And neither is the SSPX sedevacantist. A sedevacantist SSPX would make sense. But they say Francis is really Pope. So how do they explain their disobedience? Bp. Fellay says the Pope is a Modernist and the Novus Ordo is evil, while at the same time saying they want to reunite with Rome. Francis is Pope. Pastor Aeternus is infallible. Yet, we can disregard him when he says something we don’t like. It makes no sense.
I read how the SSPX tries to make more logical gymnastics regarding the canonizations of J23 and JP2. Others make comments like, since Francis is not making any kind of formal teaching they are just going to choose to ignore him. What?! Again, infallible Pastor Aeternus says we owe him obedience in all things. The same people who would criticize dissenters under a “good” pope have become the dissenters themselves under this “bad” one. It’s ridiculous.
And for those who are willing to just dismiss Francis, how is that really different from the Orthodox view for a thousand years since the split? He’s a bishop with his particular jurisdiction. He’s even first among equals, but he can’t force us to follow him down a road we deem ill-advised, wrong, or heretical. He can make mistakes which hopefully get fixed by a successor. He’s not infallible. His election wasn’t necessarily inspired by the Holy Spirit. The See isn’t empty when it is occupied by a liberal nut. Doesn’t that make sense? It makes a lot of sense to me at least. Plus you get a great liturgy…
dear Peter,
“—-I think one of if not the biggest reason why people join the SSPX or at least are sympathetic to them is the liturgy, right?—-”
Wrong.
Peter,
–
Before you jump out of the only ark of salvation, the Holy Catholic Church, as it seems you are considering doing based on your comments, I would only ask one thing:
–
Do the first Friday devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesús for nine consecutive months.
–
Or even easier (Our Lady always makes our salvation that much easier!): the First Saturday devotion to the Immaculate Heart for five consecutive months.
–
Ah, you would be missing such marvelous means of obtaining plentiful graces (and many more besides that!) in the heretical and schismatic “Orthodox Church”.
Peter,
–
PS One last thing – I seriously get the impression you don’t really understand what it means to be a catholic if you say you are seriously considering joining the “orthodox” schismatics. You either believe in all the catholic dogmas or you don’t. You are either in or you are out. A Catholic doesn’t get to pick and choose. Such is the nature of the Catholic religión. Do you believe in the dogma of the Immaculate Conception? The “orthodox” reject this dogma, so what part would you have with them?
–
Possibly you are a victim of the post-conciliar “catechesis” that is anything but that. But now that you have been informed by fellow catholics – beware! If you do defect from the Church your salvation will be that much more difficult because of the fraternal warnings.
–
Just thought I’d add this excerpt from Pius XII’s encyclical “Mystici Corporis Christi” which expounds crystal clear what separates a man from the Mystical Body of Christ:
–
23. “For not every sin, however grave it may be, is such as of its own nature to sever a man from the Body of the Church, as does schism or heresy or apostasy. Men may lose charity and divine grace through sin, thus becoming incapable of supernatural merit, and yet not be deprived of all life if they hold fast to faith and Christian hope, and if, illumined from above, they are spurred on by the interior promptings of the Holy Spirit to salutary fear and are moved to prayer and penance for their sins.”
Salvemur, that’s my biggest problem with my tablet—sometimes, if it isn’t double-posting—it drops a phrase or two that I was trying to correct. I’m not the most literate on this site, but my tablet is doing its best to put me in a lower category of literacy.
Also, I would like all to know that I approve of the brandy, or cognac, or vodka, or my own humble ‘light beer’ this evening. Slainte!
No, I do understand completely what it means to be Catholic. I’ve been Catholic all of my life, even spent 5 years in the seminary. No one though is addressing what I wrote about Pastor Aeternus. Since a Catholic doesn’t get to pick and choose as you say, then is the SSPX Catholic? Who decides what being Catholic is? Who sets the rules? Is it not the Pope and the Magisterium? One could say it’s Scripture and/or Tradition, but who does the Church say is their only valid interpreter? Again, it’s the Pope and the Magisterium. I assume then that as a faithful Catholic, completely obedient to Francis as you are required to be based on the teaching outlined in Pastor Aeternus above, that you are totally fine with everything from the Novus Ordo to the canonizations of J23 and JP2, not to mention the upcoming beatification of P6. Or are there times when you yourself are guilty of picking and choosing? If the Pope and synod do decide to change Church teaching to allow the civilly divorced and remarried to receive Communion will you dutifully fall in line and accept that as well…?? Based on what you wrote above, I assume the answer would be no, in which case what? Francis is a heretic whose not really pope, etc, etc? Sedevacantism can’t be the only answer.
Again, when we have a “good” pope, we look down on the evil dissenters, but when we have a “bad” pope suddenly the dissenters are the defenders of Tradition. It can’t be both ways. If Pastor Aeternus is an infallible, Holy Spirit inspired document then everyone, whether it’s the SSPX on the right or the nuns on the bus on the left, needs to smile and fall in line because again as you say there is no picking and choosing. On the other hand, if the pope is not the potentially infallible, Holy Spirit chosen, super universal bishop that must be obeyed, you’re ok in blowing off Francis. So a particular pope has mistresses and illegitimate children or say another pope digs up his predecessor, puts him on trial, cuts off his fingers and throws him in the Tiber with his successor then condemning the thrower, but then his successor reaffirming the condemnation of the throwee – you know what? It’s OK. They are men. Some will be liberal, some will be huge sinners, some will even be total nut jobs, and when they come I can reject them precisely because they aren’t the mythologized figure that the Church has made them out to be through centuries of doctrinal development crystallized at Vatican I and in Pastor Aeternus. I think that view makes more sense and I think that’s the view from the Orthodox side.
As far as the Immaculate Conception goes…plenty of great saints, even Aquinas, had their doubts about or flat out rejected the dogma, but as regards to the Orthodox they constantly refer to the Virgin as being all pure. The Orthodox have a different understanding of original sin wherein people inherit the effects of the sin like death but not the guilt. That’s why you can maintain the perpetual purity of the Virgin without resorting to a convoluted explanation of how God took the future graces attained by Christ on the Cross backwards in time applying them to the Virgin at her conception. It’s why you don’t need something like a Limbo in Orthodoxy for the poor, aborted baby. It’s also why the Orthodox would have had no problems refusing baptism to the child of that lesbian couple in Argentina in that scandalous episode a while back…again, it just makes sense, to me anyway…God gave us Faith and Reason and my reason is starting to tell me Orthodoxy, with all it’s imperfections, just makes more sense…but please do keep me in your prayers as I strive to discern what is right…
My friend,
–
Did you know that the “Orthodox” heretics attended in the past the scandalous and sacrilegious Assisi ecumenical events? You think that puts them in a higher moral position than the Catholic Church?
–
Sorry to say this, but if you doubt or reject the dogma of the Immaculate Conception you shouldn’t be referring to yourself as a “current Catholic”. Maybe as an Old Catholic, but not as a Roman Catholic.
–
It seems to me that you seriously need to strengthen your faith and believe that the Catholic Church IS the Mystical Body of Christ (“Mystici Corporis Christi” by Pius XII), otherwise the doors to heresy and schism remain wide open to you. Stick to the dogmas of the faith. Even if some remain a mystery not completely understood (eg Pastor Aeternus), ultimately believing and accepting the dogmas is what is need for salvation. Cut yourself off from these dogmas, and you cut yourself from the source of salvation, Christ and His Mystical Body.
–
May Our Lady intercede for you and strengthen you in the faith.
heh, heh, very good,dear marykpkj !
salute !!!
dear Edu,
agreed, of course.
I’m really not trying to belabor things here so let me just say this and then that will be it for me for now.
As far as Assisi goes, those scandalous and sacrilegious events as you rightly called them were organized by the pope. That the Orthodox had representatives there is admittedly unfortunate, but they weren’t the ones who set it up to begin with. Again it goes to the pope being able to do incredibly stupid, even heretical things without the sky falling and the See going vacant.
Regarding the Immaculate Conception, I absolutely accept the complete sinlessness of the Virgin Mary. The theology of the Orthodox regarding original sin makes that kind of official declaration though unnecessary, but it’s by no means a denial of the truth. As I said, the Orthodox refer to her as being all pure. Kallistos Ware, who has become sort of the unofficial spokesman regarding Orthodox theology, has stated that there is nothing incompatible with Orthodox theology and the dogma of the Immaculate Conception.
On Pastor Aeternus, you refer to it as a mystery not completely understood. What’s to understand? A document supposedly inspired by the Spirit and therefore free of error says Catholics owe complete obedience to the pope in all things – faith, morals, discipline, governance, everything – not just dogma. It’s a yes or no, all or nothing proposition. Is it true or isn’t it? If yes, how does any Catholic, be they SSPX or the nuns on the bus get around it? They had all better be at the Novus Ordo Mass on Blessed Paul VI’s feast day to receive Communion in the hand, perhaps including those who are civilly divorced and remarried. If it’s not true then maybe, just maybe, the Orthodox were right all along about the nature of the papacy. I mean look at the Filioque. History has proven them the winners there…
And thank you for your prayers, Lord knows I need them…God bless…
Peter: We only have to follow the Pope when he is faithful to the deposit of faith. It is the deposit of faith that helps us recognize when to follow him and when to fight. St. Robert Bellermine wrote on this. You need to flesh out the VI documents in light of other ordinary and universal infallible teachings. The Pope is not God. Read the story of St. Athanasius…he fought against the Pope and all the bishops and did not follow the Arian heresy at the time that they were all promoting. Our leader is Jesus Christ and we are His mystical body. You know you follow Him and that body by following the Deposit of Faith and acknowledging a legitimate Pope and hierarchy. God bless~
glad to know i’m not the only one with a ‘possessed’ tablet!
Dear Peter,
I only recently discovered this blog, which I enjoy very much. I spend time reading old posts and comments, because I find many to be very informative. Your comments, made nearly a year ago, caught my attention. I wonder what has happened to you since you made them? I wonder if you ended up joining the Orthodox? I imagine the chances of you reading my comment now are pretty slim, but who knows what the Holy Ghost might do?
You are clearly a sincere, religious young man seeking the Truth. I bet that 5 years in a NO seminary did your faith no good at all and the fact that you left does you credit. They don’t want upright, straight young men in their seminaries.
I get the impression that you started out with a good strong Catholic faith, which has become confused by your intense exposure to NO gobbledegook.
Lets limit ourselves to extracts from your own comments, in the light of Catholic Doctrine and Reason, which the Lord has given us:
1. ” … seriously looking at Orthodoxy.”
Well we both know very well that the Orthodox are schismatics and that by committing the sins of heresy, apostacy, or schism, one cuts oneself off from the Mystical Body and is no longer Catholic. Schism is not a reasonable solution to your problem.
2.” … a person who wants to divorce and remarry in the Orthodox Church has to go through an extensive period of penance and then is eventually remarried by a priest in a toned-down penitential service.”
Well, Our Lord said “What God has joined together, let no man put asunder.” So, divorce is not possible from a valid marriage – full stop. “Toned down penitential service”, or not. So the Orthodox are blessing adultery. What would you expect from schismatics? So lets forget that too.
3. “IF the Catholic Church decides to allow civilly divorced and remarried people to receive Communion it will be saying in essence that sex outside of sacramental marriage is not mortally sinful since one cannot receive Communion in a state of mortal sin, right? ”
Right! When the “catholic church” does that, (not if), it will be showing us, yet again, that it is not the Catholic Church, but the church of darkness which Our Lady warned us about – the NO apostacy. So, the reasonable thing to do is to get out of it altogether.
4. “Suddenly, the Orthodox position doesn’t look so bad or at the very least it becomes the lesser evil”
Evil, is evil. What has Christ to do with belial, or good with evil? We want Truth, not a lesser evil. So lets forget that one.
5. “I have to pass on the SSPX.”
Definitely! They are schismatics who pick and choose when they will obey the “pope” and offer the mass in union with him, a heretic. They blatantly flout Pastor Aeternus, which is teaching of the Infallible Magisterium. You say the SSPX make no sense. You are correct. They don’t. So no joy there.
6. “A sedevacantist SSPX would make sense. ”
It certainly would! Now you talking!
7. “And for those who are willing to just dismiss Francis, how is that really different from the Orthodox view for a thousand years since the split?”
Well, you already know the answer: If they recognise Francis as Pope, they can’t dismiss him (Pastor Aeternus.) The Orthodox don’t recognise the authority of any Pope – valid,or invalid. That’s the difference. That’s why they are schismatics.
8. ” … he can’t force us to follow him down a road we deem ill-advised, wrong, or heretical. He can make mistakes which hopefully get fixed by a successor. He’s not infallible. His election wasn’t necessarily inspired by the Holy Spirit. The See isn’t empty when it is occupied by a liberal nut. Doesn’t that make sense? ”
No, it doesn’t:
i. A true Pope cannot teach error. The Holy Ghost sees to that. The Catholic Church is indefectable. So, a “pope” who teaches error cannot be a true Pope. It is as simple and logical as that.
ii. The Bishop of Rome is infallible.
iii. The See is not empty when it is occupied by a liberal nut, but it is when it is occupied by a heretic, which this liberal nut is. (Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio.)
9. “No one though is addressing what I wrote about Pastor Aeternus. Since a Catholic doesn’t get to pick and choose as you say, then is the SSPX Catholic? Who decides what being Catholic is? Who sets the rules?”
i. I’m addressing what you wrote about Pastor Aeternus, but, sadly almost a year too late.
ii. No, the SSPX is not Catholic.
iii. Scripture, Sacred Tradition and The Infallible Magisterium set the rules. You got that right spot on.
10. “Sedevacantism can’t be the only answer.”
Why not? It would make perfect sense in terms of Catholic Doctrine. OK, sedeprivationism is a possibility. Remember this “Cassiciacum thesis” was put forward by a very respected theologian, the ghost writer of the Ottaviani Intervention. Drop Bishop Sanborn a line if you want to know more about it.
11. “So a particular pope has mistresses and illegitimate children or say another pope digs up his predecessor, puts him on trial, cuts off his fingers and throws him in the Tiber with his successor then condemning the thrower, but then his successor reaffirming the condemnation of the throwee – you know what? It’s OK.”
You must distinguish between a bad Pope and an heretical “pope”. A bad, sinful Pope remains a valid Pope. He has not cut himself off from the Catholic Church. He is just a sinful Catholic, as I am. There have been several very bad boy Popes, but not one of them ever taught heresies, or error through the Magisterium. That is a fact of History. A heretical “pope”, no matter how “nice, or “good”” he might seem, is not a true Pope. ( Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio.)
12. “As far as the Immaculate Conception goes…plenty of great saints, even Aquinas, had their doubts about or flat out rejected the dogma …”
Nothing funny about that. Many questions are discussed among theologians of differing opinions until the referee, the Pope, makes the final decision on the matter. If he then defines his decision ex Cathedra, it becomes Dogma. Discussion over.
13. Original sin is Catholic Dogma. Full stop. Who cares what schismatics may say?
14. Assisi – heresy plain and simple. (Iam Vos Omnes.)
15. Immaculate Conception – Catholic Dogma. Nothing to discuss.
So, you see? A bit of logic applied to Catholic Doctrine = sedevacantism!!! It is as simple as that. Sedevacantism is not a dirty word as many would make it out to be. It is a logical position for one to adopt in the current circumstances. At least it is consonant with the Catholic Doctrine of nearly 2000 years!!!
So, that’s your answer Pete – head for a sedevacantist seminary if you still have your vocation.
Here, in Detroit, the distribution of Communion to the divorced and remarried has been handled at the parish level for decades. And priestly celibacy, whether with the woman or man of one’s choice, has been ignored forever.
This Synod from hell is just bringing all out of the closet. The skunks have finally gotten the levers of power and are assuaging their own consciences at the expense of the Faithful.
Add divorce to abortion, contraception and a long line of doctrines which are too hard and need a relaxed “pastoral” solution.
Pax in Maria. Louie, I have been reflecting again just recently about how _late to the party_ all those who are only just becoming concerned _now_, truly are. (Irrespective of good reasons and good intentions, which I know exist in abundance.)
I refer specifically today to the concept of (Eucharistic) Hospitality, (erroneously) enshrined in none other than JPII’s 1983 Code of Canon Law itself. (ref: CIC 1983 Canon 844). What was gravely forbidden previously, including in the former 1917 Code (ref: CIC 1917 canon 731 §21), was suddenly to be opened and liberated, no doubt out of “mercy” then, as well! That is, reception of Holy Communion by the schismatic (heretical) Orthodox (etc.?) in Catholic parishes around the world.
Now, if we take this one step further… these “good” _Orthodox_ that can and do already routinely receive Holy Communion in your local Catholic parish (yes, including “in good standing” “Extraordinary Form” locations)… may already be on their own second or third “marriage”?? :-O
So … why in 2015 A.D. should we “discriminate” (negatively) against Catholics?! How can it be that third-“marriage” Orthodox can receive Holy Communion in a Catholic parish, but not a third-“marriage” Catholic?! Let that sink in for a moment, shall we?
… Goodness! For the sake of “mercy”, … of course we must be happy little Kasperites, no?!
… The proverbial Freemasonic-Modernist genie has long since left the bottle (St. Pius X prison), it seems to me. If the Revolutionaries could _already_ _successfully_ sell us the Vatican II deception, false collegiality, false ecumenism, false religious liberty, the near total destruction of the Sacred Liturgy worldwide, inverted ends of marriage, inverted priorities for the priesthood, _and_ the _error-laden_ CIC 1983 with Eucharistic Hospitality for Schismatics and Heretics (!!)…. Hey, why _not_ Kasper-flavo(u)r “Pastoralism” and “Regionalism”?
When one looks at the past 50+ years… who really stuck their flag in the sand, remained _authentically_ obedient (to God and Sacred Doctrine), decried and _really_ rallied against these aforementioned _horrors_, and who did so, at the _time_ they were being unleashed upon the confused and disoriented sheep by “saint” JXXIII, “blessed” Paul VI, and “saint” JPII-the-Great?? The answer to _this_ question speaketh voumes for those who still have half an ear to hear, and half an eye to see.
For those new to realizing that we _are_ in an unavoidable _war_ — against God, His Kingship, and the salvation of previous and irreplaceable souls — …. this is the _SAME_ Revolutionary War now, as 30, 50, years ago. It is _merely_ a novel new chapter, replete with some further incremental depravity.
The _same_ prayer and penance is required today, as good Catholic folks (yes, those who are “schismatic”, “reactionary”, “purveyers of ecclesiastical porn”, “not in full communion”, “not in good standing”, “neo-Pelagian”, …) have been doing for the past 50+ years. We need the Consecration and Conversion of Russia. We need to cease being, collectively, a wicked and perverse generation, who gets the leaders (or lack thereof) that we deserve.
Kyrie eleison.
Ref re CIC 1983: http://www.holycrossseminary.com/Most_Asked_Questions_Question_8.htm