Over the last several weeks alone I’ve been given any number of concrete reasons to believe that God is assembling His forces; setting in motion circumstances that are opening up new opportunities for collaboration in defense of the true faith, and establishing pathways for mutual support among those who seek to embrace it.
The converse, of course, is equally as tangible. The Evil One, it seems, is working overtime in an effort to incite division; even among those once united as Catholic brothers-in-arms.
The “battlefield” where this struggle is most notably taking place concerns Fatima.
There have always been varying approaches to promoting the authentic message given by Our Lady at Fatima among those committed to the effort. Today, however, the Agitator seems to be succeeding in creating dissension in the ranks as never before.
Where once there was a willingness to assume good will on the part of all concerned, I have reason to say that this no longer seems to be so.
Case in point: How do we react to statements such as those given by Cardinal Burke (and others, like Fr. Linus Clovis, for example) that clearly indicate that his eyes are being opened to truths that he once rejected; even as it is equally as clear from his statements that he remains intent on promoting certain dangerous falsehoods?
This is an important debate.
As a wise friend recently said to me, it seems that the truth is setting itself free; becoming more and more discernible to those of good will.
In other words, we might expect to see some who had once been deceived come around to the truth as the aforementioned spiritual battle intensifies.
Though the will may be good, however, such persons may also remain gravely mistaken in certain critically important ways; even as they journey, hopefully, toward embracing the full truth about the present crisis.
With one foot in each world, so to speak, how should we react when influential persons give public statements containing both important truths and dangerous errors?
For my part, I take very seriously the warning given to us in Sacred Scripture about “a little leaven” spoiling the entire lump.
I believe that poison is poison even when it is mixed with good food; in fact, I am convinced that it is all the more likely to be ingested by the naïve when it is so mixed.
As such, while I am pleased to point to that which is true, I also intend to call attention to error everywhere that I see it – not to embarrass or humiliate anyone, much less for the sake of being provocative or scoring points to some ill-defined end (as I’ve been accused) – but simply because the poison under discussion can kill.
Others whom I respect think differently, preferring instead to take a more tactical approach; one that accentuates the positive in the hope of achieving some greater good.
To them I would propose that we revisit a topic about which all of us are in complete agreement; ecumenism.
What is the problem with the modern ecumenical movement?
It seeks to downplay, if not overlook entirely, important doctrinal differences in favor of shining a spotlight on what we have in common with our so-called “separated brethren.”
As John Vennari, (buon’ anima!) once put it:
“At face value, how could any true Catholic subscribe to the absurd notion that a religious unity according to God’s will is possible by playing down any aspect whatsoever of God’s revelation concerning Himself, His Church, and our salvation only to magnify what is believed ‘in common?’”
Not one single solitary participant in the common cause of promoting the message of Fatima disagrees with the point that John was making; we simply cannot ascribe to the absurd notion that God’s will is done by magnifying truths held in common while downplaying grave errors.
This is the false ecumenism of modern day Rome; a central feature of Vatican Council II – the same that Our Blessed Lady came to warn us about at Fatima – and we reject it and its commitment to abstain from condemning error.
Speaking of false ecumenism, there has never been one so illustrious among the ranks of its practitioners as John Paul the Great Ecumenist of whom Cardinal Burke said during his talk given at the recent Roman Life Forum:
“The pontificate of Pope Saint John Paul II, in fact, may be rightly described as a tireless call to recognize the Church’s challenge to be faithful to her divinely given mission…”
Do any of us really believe this?
Certainly not! We recognize the pontificate of John Paul II as a monumental disaster; precisely in part because he failed to act on Our Lady’s requests and to heed the warnings that she issued at Fatima.
Remember, this is the same pope who apparently thought that the Assisi events were a better way to achieve world peace than the plan presented by Our Lady!
Even so, Cardinal Burke made it a point to hold John Paul II up as a model to be followed by those who wish to embrace the message of Fatima.
Cardinal Burke also called attention to the Council by quoting the Polish pope who said of himself during his visit to Fatima on May 13, 1982:
“Today John Paul II, successor of Peter, continuer of the work of Pius, John, and Paul, and particular heir of the Second Vatican Council, presents himself before the Mother of the Son of God in her Shrine at Fatima.” [Emphasis in text provided by Voice of the Family, host of the Roman Life Forum.]
Do any of us believe that the Second Vatican Council is in any way compatible with the pontificate of Pope Pius XII, much less the message of Fatima?
Of course not; we know that Our Lady came to preempt the “suicide of altering the Faith” of which the future Pope Pius XII spoke – the same that took place at the Council.
If Cardinal Burke’s commingling of truth and error as demonstrated thus far isn’t cause enough for concern, know that he even saw fit to hold up Paul VI of most bitter memory as a model of insight:
“Blessed Pope Paul VI and Pope Saint John Paul II addressed the increasing gravity of the incursion of an atheistic materialism, secularism and relativism in the Church with the call for a new evangelization. For Blessed Pope Paul VI, a new evangelization is the fundamental form of proclaiming the truth of Christ in our time.”
Do any of us believe that one does well to look to Paul VI for guidance in understanding, much less carrying out, the mission of the Church in our time?
It is to laugh! This is the pope who relinquished the Triregnum thus symbolically making it clear that the Kingship of Christ and thus the mission that He gave to His Church was no longer Rome’s concern.
With all of this in mind, I will ask but one final question:
Is it enough to magnify Cardinal Burke’s call for the consecration of Russia and his acknowledgement that the Third Secret contains a warning about diabolical forces entering the Church, while overlooking his promotion of things entirely contrary to the Fatima message, or is doing so as untenable as the approach taken by modern day ecumenists and for the very same reasons?