A recent article by Cindy Wooden of Catholic News Service on the upcoming canonizations (May God in His mercy forbid them!) aptly describes what the Masons and other assorted enemies of the Church would have considered an unattainable Utopian ideal just sixty short years ago.
Blesseds John XXIII and John Paul II left lasting marks on the way the Catholic Church understands other religions and the way it interacts with believers of other faith communities.
Ya think?
While most readers, traditional and otherwise, may feel compelled to breeze right past this apparent understatement of the century, one must be very careful to note that what Wooden appropriates to “the Catholic Church” is really nothing more than the flawed “understanding” (or more properly, misunderstanding) of sinful men who have departed from the Faith in word and deed.
The Catholic Church, the Mystical Body of Christ that is the Divinely endowed bulwark of truth, can never fail to recognize “other religions” as necessarily false, and their adherents as being in desperate need of conversion to the one true Faith, and therefore to interact with each accordingly.
Individual Catholics, even popes, by contrast, can sometimes falter in such matters, as in the cases of John XXIII and John Paul II; all of which underscores the sheer magnitude of their proposed canonizations (May God in His mercy forbid them!) and the ramifications such would promise for the Church and for the world.
While the gravity of the situation appears to be lost on many Catholics, that certainly doesn’t appear to be the case for those outside the Church.
Case in point, Wooden offered a number of quotes from Rabbi David Rosen, director of interreligious relations for the American Jewish Committee (AJC). Among his observations:
– “In Jewish eyes, there is a total logic to these two being canonized together; in fact, many Jews probably think it’s because of the Jews that they’re being canonized together.”
– John XXIII holds “the copyright” for the modern Catholic Church’s respectful approach to other religions.
– “John XXIII’s recognition that the church had to reassess its whole relationship with the Jewish people, which was the inspiration for ‘Nostra Aetate’ was what led the church to begin to look at its relationship with all other religions.”
– The Catholic Church “came to a more universal approach to dialogue out of its ‘rehabilitation,’ if you like, of its relationship with Judaism and the Jewish people.”
– John XXIII “is the revolutionary,” the rabbi said, and everything later popes did built on his groundbreaking moves.
– “I think it’s quite striking: John XXIII starts the process and John Paul II takes it to new heights.”
Just in case you’re not ready to vomit just yet, consider that Rosen represents a people who, in the AJC’s own words, “often disagree vigorously over the interpretation of tradition,” and who differ over such “fundamental issues” as “who is a Jew, what does it mean to be a Jew, the meaning of a Jewish state, and the future agenda of the Jewish people.”
And yet, if one were to identify the solitary point of doctrinal unity that practically every self-proclaimed Jew readily affirms as endemic to his or her identity, it is the rejection of Jesus Christ, their long-awaited Messiah who said, “He who rejects me rejects Him who sent me.”
If nothing else, Rabbi Rosen’s reaction to the upcoming canonizations (May God in His mercy forbid them!) hammers the point home that John XXIII and John Paul II, more than anything else, represent the neo-modernist’s own rejection of Jesus Christ as evidenced in their utter failure to embrace the mission that He gave to His Church.
In addition to adding glowing praise for John Paul II from a Muslim theologian who teaches at Rome’s Pontifical Institute for Arabic and Islamic Studies (and why such a thing even exists is beyond me), Wooden offers:
Blessed John began the process that led to the Second Vatican Council’s recognition that the seeds of truth and even God’s presence could be seen at work in other religions; Blessed John Paul showed the world how seriously the church believes that by inviting representatives of all the world’s major religions – and several local indigenous religions – to Assisi, Italy, in 1986 to pray for peace.
Based on the behavior of these popes, they apparently believed that the “seeds” are as good as the tree, and the Divine presence is such in these false religions as to render the call to conversion to the Catholic faith entirely unnecessary; a shameful deviation from the Divine mandate that has been carried on by every pope in between and since right up to Pope Francis.
No wonder those who reject Christ are so delighted with the prospect of the upcoming canonizations (May God in His mercy forbid them!) as such will deceive a great many innocents into believing that this is the “new normal.”
Make no mistake, it is not, and the Lord in His thirst for souls will endure the deception for only so long.
I really think we all need to pray that God stops these canonizations. Somehow, someway, He should stop them in their tracks. I know a lot of traditionalists will consider sedevacantism.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HvmQvNVHg0
This video interview of Father Gregory Hesse is very good. Around the 1:44 minute mark he is asked about canonizing Martin Luther. He gives a lot of food for thought concerning this upcoming potential disaster.
It is instructive to review exactly what Our Lord said about the jews and His preachers in Matthew 10:
“These twelve Jesus sent: commanding them, saying: Go ye not into the way of the Gentiles, and into the city of the Samaritans enter ye not. But go ye rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And going, preach, saying: The kingdom of heaven is at hand. Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out devils: freely have you received, freely give . . . And into whatsoever city or town you shall enter, inquire who in it is worthy, and there abide till you go thence. And when you come into the house, salute it, saying: Peace be to this house. And if that house be worthy, your peace shall come upon it; but if it be not worthy, your peace shall return to you. And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words: going forth out of that house or city shake off the dust from your feet. Amen I say to you, it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment, than for that city . . .
The disciple is not above the master, nor the servant above his lord. It is enough for the disciple that he be as his master, and the servant as his lord. If they have called the goodman of the house Beelzebub, how much more them of his household? . . .
Every one therefore that shall confess me before men, I will also confess him before my Father who is in heaven. But he that shall deny me before men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven . . .
Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword . . .
He that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than me, is not worthy of me. And he that taketh not up his cross, and followeth me, is not worthy of me. He that findeth his life, shall lose it: and he that shall lose his life for me, shall find it . . .”
Several points:
1. Our Lord here describes the first commission, which was to his contemporary jews. Note Our Lord indicated that they were obligated to accept Him as the Messiah under penalty of damnation if they did not do so. They were not unique in this regard since everyone – jew and gentile alike – is under the same obligation to accept Our Lord as Messiah and God Almighty. How could JP II possibly give the impression that the old covenant is still in place and a means of salvation in view of Our Lord’s stark warning directed to those jews who hear the Gospel and refuse to accept Him? Did JP II think this demand and warning had an expiration date? Did JP II think he had the authority to alter them?
2. Our Lord reminds his apostles who the model and master is – the most they are to strive for is to be like Him. If they are mistreated so what – are they better than the Master who was mistreated before them? It also goes without saying that to be different from Our Lord by, e.g., taking it upon ones self to “correct” his Gospel or to remit his condemnations is the height of effrontery. That would be to imply that the servant is above the Master. JP II seemed to lose sight of exactly whose Church it was and the fact that he was servant and not master.
3. Our Lord indicates that his Gospel itself would be a source of enmity between men – so be it. Again, it is effrontery for any one of His servants here on earth to take it upon himself to de-emphasize the stark demands Our Lord places on all those who hear His Gospel. JP II apparently didn’t like the fact that the Gospel itself was a source of enmity and was constantly downplaying the “hard sayings” (like the need to convert to the true faith) that were, in part, the source of that enmity.
4. Our Lord further indicates to whom a believer’s primary allegiance should be – Him. Did JP II really honor this demand? In this regard, JP II apparently had some jewish friends from childhood and because JP II was a faithful fried he thought he could change the Church’s immemorial teaching with regard to the jews. Again, JP II must have had a very high opinion of himself in comparison to Our Lord to believe he was at liberty to attempt such a thing.
Well, if God does not forbid the canonizations, at least they will go to show that popes can ride around in Mercedes and still get to Heaven.
Which kind of makes the Bergoglio exercise a little futile, don’t you think?
P.S.: Pius X is still a saint.
Dumb_ox,
–
You don’t believe canonizations are papal acts wherein the canonized candidate is shown to have performed HEROIC virtues and is a MODEL to be followed by the members of the Church militant? Do you think JP II fits in with these two categories? And if the answer is as I would imagine a resounding NO, why would anyone accept the legitimacy of the “canonization”? The Church DOES NOT merely state that the canonized soul is in Heaven, She, as a Mother, tells Her faithful: this faithful soul has by the grace of God reached such a degree of holiness that We deign it prudent, for the greater glory of God and for the good of the faithful, that he/she should be held as a model of virtue and holiness by all believers.
–
Now, I will repeat the question lest it was missed:
IS JP II A MODEL TO BE FOLLOWED BY THE FAITHFUL (i.e. should the faithful for their sanctification now start attending Assisi like gatherings and kissing Korans among many other such grievous actions) AND DID HE SHOW DURING HIS LIFE HEROIC LEVELS OF SANCTITY (i.e. was he faithful to the main duty of his office, to protect and safeguard in all its purity the sacred deposit of faith from heretics, did he perform heroic acts of charity during his life, as in protecting the many sexually abused children from the likes of the legionaries of Christ founder Fr Marcial Degollado, who was enthusiastically supported by JP II right up to the latter’s death.)
Thank you, Dumb _ox,
In time of deepest trouble a sense of humour is a gift from heaven!
Great post. the mob must be seething. As Christ said, don’t resist evil (that is don’t put truth and error on the same foot), destroy it. I have come to think there is no such thing as judeo-christianity. I think judeo-islam is more apt. I think they share far more – they both reject Christ, they both reject sacred scripture, the both re-write sacred scripture in the worst ways.
–
at any rate, re the canonizations – it’s time for the nine hour novena:
–
http://www.cfnews.org/page88/files/cfe6846532eb7222b220bf01f05d55de-179.html
p.s. and what’s more, rabbinical judaism and islam can NEVER EVER have a legitimate sacrificial priesthood – JPII and JXXIII had to right to go undermining Christ’s Church with this sleeping with the ‘enemy’ business.
had NO right, that is. Just like Francis has no right to be pot-planting with Christ’s enemies – does he ever pot-plant with Christ’s friends. I must have missed that.
On the Jews and Nostra Aetate: http://www.fisheaters.com/jewsvaticanii.html
There is much comment here about ‘the Jews’. Would any commentators like to expound on the following:
Jesus was born of a Jewish mother
He was presented in the Temple and was circumcised as a Jew
He was so esteemed as a Jew to be allowed to preach in the synagogue
He lived as a Jew
He followed Jewish traditions including the Passover Feast…..
ALL his disciples were Jews
He died as a Jew
He was resurrected as a Jew (I am the root and the Son of David – Rev 22:16)
Catholics worship a Jewish man who is God.
Irrelevant, as the “Jews” mentioned are the descenants of the ones who rejected Christ and stated “His blood be upon us and on our children!”
And BTW, the Talmudic traditions being passed off as traditions Our Lord practiced is unfeasible, since the time of the destruction of the Temple, the service was changed to suit their prejudices against Christ!