Over the past few days, I’ve received some feedback to the Msgr. Pope post from people I respect suggesting that his veritable retraction should be lauded as an act of obedience to superiors, rather than viewed as evidence of a lack of fortitude.
There are a number of flaws in such arguments; foremost among them is the implication that every course of action taken by those with legitimate authority is necessarily a legitimate expression of said authority, as if any and all demands therein are therefore binding upon their subordinates.
This isn’t true even with regard to the pope!
At certain times, it can most certainly be laudable to obey a superior even when one suspects that he is ill-informed or even perhaps in error. Even so, one is never obliged to equivocate in such way as to lend credibility to those who tacitly support a moral evil, thereby leading souls to perdition.
In the present case, Msgr. Pope’s post was deleted. The blog doesn’t belong to him, therefore, over this particular action, he had no choice.
He did, however, have any number of choices relative to his response going forward, and unfortunately he took what looks an awful lot like the course of least resistance; by choice, not by obedience properly understood.
Is there any among us who sincerely believe that Msgr. Pope was somehow obliged to proactively suggest, as he did, that an awareness of the “many prudential decisions involved” in deciding how “Catholics can effectively engage a culture” might somehow mitigate the offensiveness of Cardinal Timothy Dolan’s complicity in the St. Patrick’s Day Homoganza?
Furthermore, is there any among us so naïve as to believe for even a moment that Msgr. Pope actually believes that garbage?
Surely he could have simply remained silent regarding the disappearance of his excellent post, at additional cost to be sure, but let’s be clear, he was not obligated in any real sense of the word to make excuses for actions that are plainly inexcusable.
Rest assured, certain misguided Catholic commentators are already using Msgr. Pope’s retraction statement as justification for labeling Dolan’s detractors “Pharisees.”
In other words, what began as an admirable defense of the truth for the good of souls has been turned into a tool that the Devil will not fail to use in order to tempt the weak to compromise with evil.
Even without knowing the details, it is obvious to all what happened: Monsignor Pope was pressured in some form or fashion by the tag team of Dolan and Weurl, even if perhaps via equally faithless surrogates, to write that mea culpa post in violation of his conscience.
In violation of his well-formed Catholic conscience. Did you get that?
Can one even imagine the gall it takes for these magnificent hypocrites in cardinalatial finery to so force Monsignor Pope’s hand; even as they go about whining like a couple of menstruating eleven years olds over Barack Obama’s hubris for daring to press upon the collective Catholic conscience via the HHS mandate?
These men are what they are; quasi-protestants posing as princes. This much has been evident to people of authentic faith for years on end. Sure, we should pray for their conversion, of course, but let’s be real; barring a bolt of lightning to the backside, it’s not very likely.
In the end, disobedience to their demands would not have been sinful; in fact, it wouldn’t have been disobedience at all, but rather obedience to a Higher Authority.
Humility of Heart
Fr. Cajetan Mary da Bergamo
33. Humility is not a sickly virtue, timid and feeble as some imagine; on the contrary, it is strong, magnanimous, generous and constant, because it is founded on truth and justice. The truth consists in knowing What God is and what we are. Justice consists in our recognizing that God as our Creator has a right to command us, and that we as His creatures are bound to obey Him.
All the Martyrs were perfectly humble because they preferred to die suffering the most terrible torments rather than abandon truth and justice. How great their endurance and courage in resisting those who tried to force them to deny Jesus Christ!
To contradict others is an effect of pride whenever we contradict them in order to follow our own unjust and mistaken will; but when our opposition to the creature proceeds from a determination to fulfill the will of the Creator it is dictated by humility; for by this we confess our indispensable obligation to be subject and obedient to the Divine will.
It is for this reason that the proud man is always timid because his pride is only sustained by the weakness of human nature. And he who is humble is always brave in the exercise of his submission to the Divine Majesty because he receives his strength through grace.
The humble obey men, when in so doing they also obey God; but they refuse obedience to men, when by obeying them they would disobey their God. Reflect upon that answer, as modest as it was magnanimous, given before the elders of Jerusalem by St. Peter and St. John: “If it be just in the sight of God to hear you rather than God, judge ye.” [Acts iv, 19]
The humble man is above all human respect, and there is no danger that he will become a slave to the opinions, fashions or customs of the world; he knows his failings and that he is capable of every evil even though he does not commit it. If he sees others doing wrong he compassionates them, but is never scandalized or induced to follow the bad examples of others; because all his intentions are directed towards God, and he has no other desire than that of pleasing God and of being directed by God alone. “He clings to God alone;” hence, as the angelic St. Thomas says so well: “No matter how much he sees others acting inordinately in word or deed, he himself will not depart from his uprightness of conduct.” [22, qu. xxxiii, art. 5]
I read Msgr Pope’s commentary and did not see within it any overt criticism of Card. Dolan.
It spoke about the facts and the simple dangers involved.
I wonder if/when Card. Burke will be made to heel.
P^3
Louie,
–
I agree 100% with your assessment. It amazes me that people could defend such a retraction.
–
By the way, you design some of the most hilarious and humorous (but entirely truthful) satirical pictures about the current insane situation in the Church that I have seen. Maybe you should include a link on your site collecting all the pictures from previous articles ; )
–
God Bless & keep up the good fight
LEAP SHEEP
“The knock-out blow of Satan
has been to cause disobedience
in the name of obedience.”
(Fr. Cyprian, OSB, Prior of Our Lady of Guadalupe Monastery)
Litto froggy cross da pond
Hope some fairy’s got a wand
Hit you hard up-side yo head
Shed some light…yo brains is bread.
You ain’t got sense no nuffin’
Brains is made of bran-flake muffin.
Wolfy-sheep done called you near
Ups you hopped ran like a deer.
Him brother froggies followed too
And jumped right in wolf-sheepy’s stew.
Then there you be all puffed with pride
And one by one them froggies died.
Then wolfy-sheep he called, “My sons?”
And wolfy-sheep him meal all dones
Says, “Litto frog get outa’ hea’
Tomorrow bring yo sistas dea’.”
And litto frog him hop away
‘Cause litto frog him do obey.
And litto froggy hopped, hopped, hop
Tumbled, tripped into Frog Pop.
And froggy Pop asked, “What you say?”
Said litto frog, “I do obey
And all my litto brothers too
They helped the wolf make sheepy stew.”
Then froggy Pop him hung him head
And took him son away and led
Him hoppin’ down the woodsy lane
And put in froggy’s hand his cane
All shiney white to help him see…
…nuffin’.
How many of Hitler’s willing executioners claimed “obedience” to excuse their horrific crimes? Obedience belongs to God alone. Obedience does not belong to the Princes of the Church or even to the Vicar of Christ when their errors insult Our Lord and His Church. The true “Francis effect” is the “Who am I to judge?” mentality. I’m OK;Your OK–when, in fact, nothing is OK!
Lou, we have no idea of what kind of pressure or threats were used to make Msgr Pope change his point of view so radically….suspension, divulgence of his confessions, ecc….denial of salary, of pension, of job…etc….
At the same time, a priest has a duty to defend the sacred hierarchy in anything good they do, and to maintain ecclesiastical order. So It is easy to see how a priest can be lead to change his views. Why, what kind of men have been let in and through the seminaries these many years, certainly no on of the caliber found on this blog….so, what seems obvious to the normal, seems very different to those forced to live in a mad house of liberalism, which is nearly every diocese in the Church right now…
This is not to excuse the matter, but only to shed some light on the circumstances….you’d be kicked out of every seminary in the world today, just for saying the things we say on this blog; imagine what goes on in dioceses filled with seminary graduates. Priests are told from day 1 never to divulge their personal believes or opinions with any friend, because anyone can turn or be turned against you from one moment to another. Men who wont turn or who cannot be turned are never ordained or allowed to take monastic vows…so what can we expect?
Dear Louie,
We’re not trying to contradict all the other views here, many of which make good sense–just adding another possibility for consideration.
–Msgr Pope’s statement said “I removed the post upon further reflection, due to the strong nature of the language I had used in parts of it.”
Although It seems it’s considered naive or foolish to simply take him at his word, our initial read of his piece left us with this strong impression: It’s first three paragraphs made his points well, but used language usually not found on official Church websites; and it seemed extremely repetitive, like it was impulsively written and quickly published. When we then read his statement, it seemed to go right along with that, as ample reason for second- thought and removal, without any coercion being necessary. On that one short page for example, he mentioned. Patrick eight times:
========
“The St. Patrick’s Parade..””St. Patrick’s Day nationally.” “St. Paddy’s Day has become..” “..St. Patrick preached.” “..on St. Patrick’s Day” “.. As for St. Patrick’s
day, it’s time to stop wearin’ the green””..It’s time to cancel the St. Patrick’s Day Parade..” “End the St. Patrick’s Day Parade..”.” We don’t need parades”. ..
..”don’t don’t go to the parade..”
=========
he generally described St. P’s-day parades and celebrations as:
disorder, chaos, fake unity, disgraceful display of drunkenness; foolishness (1stX); embarassment to the memory of St. Patrick, a farcical and hateful ridicule of the Faith; foolishness (2ndX), stupidity, frivolity, drunkenness (2ndX), foolishness (3rdX)
=========
That doesn’t include how many times he interspersed the “dinner” with the parade, which seems to be why he lost track of his repetition.
Isn’t it possible he just re-read it after posting, thought it was too strong for the web-site, too generalized, too impulsive, badly written and embarassing, and pulled it?
Absolutely. “Even so, one is never obliged to equivocate in such way as to lend credibility to those who tacitly support a moral evil, thereby leading souls to perdition.” To ‘equivocate’ with lies is to consent to iniquity…
–
2 Thessalonians 3 “…because they receive not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the OPERATION OF ERROR, to believe lying: That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, BUT HAVE CONSENTED TO INIQUITY.”
–
The Church has taught for a long time that there will be ‘prophets’ (people to make straight paths crooked) to usher in antichrist. (the Council of Trent teaches us that three conditions must be met before the ‘end of the world’ none of which had been fulfilled at the time of Trent: 1 – the Gospel must be preached to all the earth. 2 – there must be a great apostasy. 3 – the ‘reign of antichrist’. 1 and 2 are done and dusted.) The Church has taught that these anti-prophets would likely from ‘within’ the Church. I don’t think it’s a huge leap to see Vatican II as the anti-prophets’ church. It’s fake-popes being the ‘prophets of antichrist’. The devil always mocks true revelation: There were six major prophets of Israel. There have now been six anti-popes of anti-church. There were twelve minor prophets – will we have to go through another twelve ‘minor’ fake-popes. By the year’s end, in total, three of the anti-prophets will have been hailed as anti-saints (jpi is in the works apparently). The ‘concilliar’ church is a golem (in the proper rabbinical sense). There is still admixture between what ‘was’ Church and what is antichurch (unless one has utterly refused antichurch and ‘kept watch’ (yes I’m talking about those much hated sedevacantists). The theory of the seven ages of the Church regarding the Seven Churches in the Apocalypse would place us in the ‘church of Sardis’: ‘Be watchful and strengthen the things that remain, which are ready to die (in the hands of anti-prophets and their ‘not-watching’ priests and parishoners). For I find not thy works full before my God. Have in mind therefore in what manner thou hast received and heard: and observe (the unadulterated Faith), and do penance. If then thou shalt not watch, I will come to thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know at what hour I will come to thee. But thou hast a few names in Sardis, which have not defiled their garments: and they shall walk with me in white, because they are worthy…’ Just saying.
Louie, while I may be willing to respect Msgr. Pope’s retraction due to his vow of obedience, I would not think it laudable. (As I hadn’t replied earlier, I’m not trying to horn in as a respected poster either 😉 ). Not being familiar with him except by reputation and a few tidbits here and there, when I read his first posting, it seemed to me more of a repetitive rant which had been sent off without a cool-headed re-read. Whereas I sympathize with the emotion caused by the subject, it seemed more suited to a tweet than a piece on the site of such a major archdiocesan website. I would think that alone would be reason for him to pull it. Also his language used could have been more presentable. As much as the LGBT and their lapdogs in the MSM shove it in our face, do we need that on diocesan websites too?
— There is a need for him to continue this discussion as to how far we should “go along to keep the peace” in our communities, our parishes, at work, with friends and most near and dear – in our families, and when to take a stand. The best way to be loving and true to our faith may differ greatly depending on the place and one’s responsibility. As it may not be prudent to insist on your rights when an officer gives a command, neither are we all called to spit in the caliph’s face, (see St. George, July 27th). Given Msgr. Pope’s long history, do Traditional Catholics really want to rail on him, especially after our experiences with those who (“Neo-Catholics”) have turned on us and shut us out because we question the “hermeneutic of continuity”, and wisdom of “we’re all one big happy subsisting family”?
— As a final note, to paraphrase a writer I respect taken from his blog of 2/26/14: At some point in time, barring Divine intervention, I suspect that there’s a good chance [Msgr. Pope] will be forced by circumstances to publicly address the [Archbishop’s] shortcomings. In the meantime, why not cut the guy some slack on his […] silence?
These are not “normal” times in the life of the Church. People of goodwill, like [Msgr. Pope], who are far more brothers-in-arms than adversaries, are sincerely struggling to figure out how best to respond to the crisis at hand in the most constructive way possible. Obviously, we’re not always going to get it right and we’re going to have disagreements, sometimes even on things that are crucially important. We can thank the Devil for that.
https://akacatholic.com/cmtvs-mystery-manifesto/
— God love you Louie. Keep up the good work.
Right – it was entirely mild! There wasn’t even an oblique reference to Dolan himself.
—–
If the rumors of Burke exhorting Voris to adopt his hypocritical and nonsensical stance regarding papal criticism are true, he may actually be able to live a double life himself more or less indefinitely.
—–
What a sad, sad state of affairs we are in.
Louie, in this post you get RIGHT TO THE HEART OF THE MATTER: True vs. false obedience. That is what the crisis is really about. So many good clergy and faithful never would have swallowed the pig feces dressed up as the Faith of All Time they’ve been being fed since Vatican II if it were not for this fundamental confusion over the virtue of obedience.
—–
The saintly (and one day, Saint) Archbishop Lefebvre understood this: he understood the crucial difference between true and false obedience, and thus he continued the faith as it had been given him – he “faithfully handed down that we he received from the Apostles”.
—–
This crisis is satan’s master-stroke.
Dear salvemur,
Jacinta of Fatima saw a future holy Father, sitting in a room, very upset,-with his hands up over his face, while people outside were throwing rocks in the street–which hasn’t yet come to pass. She was always asking people to pray and make sacrifices for the Holy Father-whom she made her main concern for the rest of her short life after Fatima.
___
Both our Lord and Our Lady told Sister Lucia that the “Holy Father” will consecrate Russia, but it will be “late”,and Sister Lucia, also repeatedly asked for prayers for him– year after year, in between speaking with them. Jesus called them His ministers. She was also the one who informed us about the diabolical disorientation in the hierarchy-and not to expect the call for penance to come from the chancellery
___
After 1975, Our Lady of Akita repeated that information and also asked for prayers and sacrifices for the “Holy Father”. There seems to be too much heavenly confirmation of the ongoing legitimacy of the Papacy while at the same time warnings of our Popes being in dire need of prayer and personal sacrifices, for your theory to be true, or do you have another explanation for this?
You’d be kicked-out of every novus ordo seminary (probably, eventually), yes, but not out of an SSPX seminary, where the Apostolic faith is preserved whole & complete, its priests and bishops forever cleaving to Eternal Rome and also always negotiating in good faith with the legitimate rulers.
More Intimidation and Silence in the Church/Media?
According to Mike Voris, Pat Archbold’s article (below) NCR was the only major Catholic Media to report on the Dolan -St. Patrick’s Day story.
http://www.ncregister.com/blog/pat-archbold/cardinal-dolan-and-the-nyc-st.-patricks-gay-parade
Cardinal Dolan and the Shameful NYC St. Patrick’s Gay Parade
by Pat Archbold Wednesday, September 03, 2014 10:32 AM Comments
” NBC, the long-time broadcast home of the St. Patrick’s Day parade, was prepared to drop its coverage unless a compromise that resulted in the inclusion of a gay group was brokered.”
___
“If news of the compromise is true, Cardinal Dolan must publicly reject the offer to be Grand Marshal and encourage the organizers to cancel the parade rather that accede to the demands of NBC. This is an incredible chance to witness that the Church still actually believes what it is supposed to believe.”
UPDATE: ” All confirmed.”
=======
It’s incredible to listen to Voris rant about this –with genuine anger–calling the media hypocrites for their silence, while every word he utters about Dolan could be equally applied to Pope Francis, and he says not one word about that.
It was my understanding they saw someone who they thought was the Holy Father (he certainly was a Bishop) big difference – and from what time was this vision to have come to pass? I wouldn’t dare to contradict Church teaching against the prophecies of Fatima which have also been approved – the fact is, the Church has taught that Rome could become the seat of the antichrist. Will this happen in our lifetime, who can say? But the Church also teaches that there will be prophets of antichrist (it was my understanding La Salette teaches the same).
–
These times are unprecedented. The Second World War afforded an infiltration of the sanctuary in which Peter resided by all manner of representatives of the father of lies. Poor Pius XII invited into his sanctuary the enemies of Christ out of the goodness of his heart. Even before his death the freemasonic ‘fruits’ of WWII – the ‘Americanist ethos’/UN was beginning to be accepted by Pius. After his death however, it was complicitly, actively and diabolically promoted – witness montini’s ‘abdication’ of the Papal Tiara to the devil’s order – the papal tiara represents the authority of the Church. No Vicar of Christ could possibly be capable of doing such a thing. (it’s not for nothing that at certain levels of freemasonry they thrust a sword through a tiara). Now the world and its religions hail this ethos and its institutions as the ‘antidote’ to pesky things like Christ’s Kingship (it was supposed to be an antidote to communism and fascism – yet what ‘democratic’ state on the planet is not functionally on the marxist/antichrist continuum?)
–
Cardinal Newman wrote about antichrist. He saw a precursor of antichrist in Antiochus, governor of Juda at the time of the Maccabees. He also saw these precursory evils in Julian the Apostate. And in Mohamet. All were feeders of heresy and utter deceivers promoting an infernal impurity (Mohamet even promoting this impurity as THE ‘heavenly reward’!?!) – attempting to attack the very heart of truth with their lies by whatever means – all attacked true worship and purity (how is the homoganzas happening in Bergoglio approved ‘church’ not fall into this category?)
–
Christ or Chaos is Michael Matt’s latest Remnant blog – right on the money. He makes an important point, that it is the moral authority of the Catholic Church that is being attacked – yes the heart of that is True Worship because worshipping God is really what a human being was made for – but that stems from the ‘highest moral authority’ given to the world – the Holy Catholic Church and her head. That ‘moral authority’ cannot be shaken from the True Church by anyone, including a fake-pope (it’s too late for that since Truth has been squarely and clearly taught and recorded and is an immovable part of God’s work in time in His Bride, so we can know what the moral authority of the Catholic Church by her teaching, disciplines and worship – clear, rock-like and there for any seeker to find and stand upon). Matt says, ‘we don’t have any one [authority] who can speak morally for society…there is chaos all over the world since the Catholic church has ceased to be a moral authority’. Michael Matt is saying the truth – thing is, if this isn’t an inadvertant admission of sedevacantism I don’t know what is.
“Wolfy-sheep done called you near
Ups you hopped ran like a deer.”
–
Keep up the good work Long-skirts.
–
p.s. brilliant Fr Cyprian quote.
p.s. when I said, ‘it was my understanding La Salette teaches the same’, I meant regarding ‘Rome’ (of course not the True Church however ‘eclipsed’ by a false-church She might be) could become the playground of the agenda of antichrist and eventually the unfortunate creature so-called.
Dear salvemur,
The part of the “third secret” you refer to regarding the “bishop in white was released by the Vatican and is not the two visions of a future “Holy Father” which Jacinta alone was given, as recorded in Sister Lucia’s memoirs–After July 13, 1917. [from: “The Whole Truth about Fatima” p.115-116. By Frere Michel de la Saine Trinite]:
___
“Jacinta was willing to offer her dying suffering for the Holy Father. This consoled her; that she could mitigate the Holy Father’s sufferings by offering her own sufferings and prayers to help the Holy Father in the crisis she was shown by Our Lady which was to take place at some future time, as well as what was revealed to her in the Third Secret.”
1 Jacinta:. “..I saw the Holy Father in a very big house, kneeling by a table with his head buried in his hands, and he was weeping. Outside were many people..some throwing stones, others cursing him and using very bad language. Poor Holy Father, we must pray very much for him.”
2. “In her second vision of the Pope, Jacinta sees highways and roads full of people, crying with hunger and nothing to eat–and the Holy Father praying before a statue of the Immaculate Heart of Mary with many people. Both of these were understood to be visions of the future.”
============
Regarding La Salette many sources agree: “A controversy exitsts as to whether the secret published in 1879 was identical with that communicated to Pius IX in 1851, or in its second form it was not merely a work of the imagination. It was said …that a distinction must be made between the two Mélanies, between the innocent and simple voyante of 1846 and the visionary of 1879, whose mind had been disturbed by reading apocalyptic books and the lives of illuminati. As Rome uttered no decision the strife was prolonged between the disputants. Most of the defenders of the text of 1879 suffered censure from their bishops.” So these are not reliable .
Since Fatima was approved, we rely on those.
============
Two ‘La Salettes’ and two Fatima stories. when you say ‘Vatican released’ – are you talking about the story released under Wojtyla? The same Wojtyla that profaned the name of Assisi?
–
As an aside, the first organized idolatry in human history was fire-worship – Wojtyla invited this worship at Assisi (please consider the implications of this for at least five seconds). If there had only ever been one commandment, the first commandment, rather than ten, Wojtyla publicly flouted it, never making a public penance for it. Instead he made a public ‘confession’ of the ‘sins’ of the Church – nameless, placeless utterances against truth. Why does anyone deny or ‘modify’ their Faith? To accommodate sin. There is no honesty in those scores of people who remained ‘within’ the church in order to change/pervert it. The concilliar take on Fatima is the only ‘official’ commentary, given that the Church (pre-vatican II) who approved the visions, made absolutely no official exegesis of it. The ingredients of Chatreuse has more integrity than the ‘concillar church’ so the Fatima of Wojtyla is not to be trusted, much like the second ‘sister Lucy’s’ new world view. Again – the visions were to be placed in what time?
–
So – which Fatima which La Salette which ‘church’? It needs to be said over and over – the rotten rotten thing is, we still have evil, we still have satan, we still have errors (including Russia’s I presume), we still have original and actual sin – but New church has extinguished for the most True Church and Her graces through the works of those inebriated with the ‘operation of error’. You’d think if people really believed in the Fatima visions they would be dedicated to getting rid of anti-catholic-popes who cannot consecrate a thing.
Dear salvemur, you wrote:
“Two ‘La Salettes’ and two Fatima stories. when you say ‘Vatican released’ – are you talking about the story released under Wojtyla? The same Wojtyla that profaned the name of Assisi?”
=======
That was the whole point of our quoting Jacinta’s visions which -were part of the approved Fatima apparitions and in Sister Lucia’s memoirs which disclosed the first two secrets and part of the third, before the Vatican claimed to release the part never heard before–which you can ignore if you so choose.
–Jacinta’s visions of “The Holy Father”, in a future time (which very much sounds like what’s going on right now)and her being told to pray for him, are very pertinent to our discussions here. Few people trust the Vatican’s “Bishop in white” release, for many other reasons than those you listed, and it is unwise to trust various competing versions of LaSalette , simply because there are more than one that claim to be authentic.
But Sister Lucia’s memoirs have always been received as her own voice in what really happened. . She confirmed and gave the details of these visions which Jacinta had mentioned in general to others at the time, and been cautioned by Lucia to keep secret..
— So while the “released third secret is in question” -as you pointed out, these visions are not.
And all the talk of there being “no real Pope”, just 6 anti-popes, is what makes no sense in the light of that little 6 year old girl, who went to her death sacrificing and begging others to sacrifice for “The Holy Father” because he would have so much to suffer, as her visions showed her. No rock throwing and cursing was going on as far as we know in the times prior to John XXIII’s pontificate. But it certainly is part of the landscape today all over the middle East. Jesus Himself told Sister Lucia, that His ministers would have much to suffer–like the Kings of France, because they disobeyed Him by ignoring the Fatima request to Consecrate Russia. He referred to the Popes –who were asked to lead the Consecration, without whom it can never be done. Why would God ask for something to be done, and then make it impossible to do because we have no Pope, yet tell us it would be done and “late”?
Simple logic tells us we have a Pope. All your evidence and ours, tells us we have “bad” Popes, leading sheep astray by their bad ideas. All the reasons add up to sins of mankind, deserving chastisement. Yet you continue to claim that God doesn’t act in the way He obviously has acted, as presented here.
–We call you to re-consider, not because we dis-respect you, which we don’t–but because we see in you a person wishing to know and do God’s will, like ourselves. We pursue truth, whether it confirms or denies our own ideas. And in this time of great confusion, Fatima’s little children still lead to it. Our Lady had to tell Jacinta to stop tying rope tightly around her waist, (to suffer more), and she still offered all her sufferings -even the open wound from which she died.. So great was her love for God and Our Lady, that she wanted to do all she could for the Holy Father–totally unaware of any politics or personal faults in him, but knowing it was important for the Church.
“You’d think if people really believed in the Fatima visions they would be dedicated to getting rid of anti-catholic-popes who cannot consecrate a thing.”
Maybe you need to get rid of the idea that these Popes couldn’t consecrate a thing, and pray really hard that they turn around and do as Our Lord says one of them shall do. Do you not believe Sister Lucia heard Him say that at Tuy in 1929?
If Voris undermines the authority of local bishops and upholds that of Bergoglio, then he is actively preparing to lead the faithful to follow Bergoglio whereever the latter might lead them, even into a new religion.
Voris is thus preparing the way for the Anticrist…
I thought it seemed like a quick-thought or a rough draft when I first read it, also.
Amen. The truth is unchanging. There is a positive moral duty to oppose evil even (or especially?) if it comes from legitimate authority. How blind have so many become!
Amen!
The inherent contradiction of on the one hand rightly condemning evil acts by various bishops while on the other ignoring those done by the Pope to the point of praising him, pretending he is not doing anything wrong, is very terrible. I cannot understand how a sane person of goodwill can hold to such a glaringly contradictory position. Lord have mercy.
Dear Sister Lucy. What a weighted life – how satan must have brainstormed to get around that.
–
It seems obvious as the disneylandisation of Venice, that there have been satanic creeps pretending to speak for Christ for five decades or so now. How could they possibly get away with it? Because we care more about who the world thinks speaks for ‘christ’ than who Chist’s Church tells us speaks for Christ. I appreciate your responses indignus. But I lose no sleep over pointing out fake ‘popes’; only over the dear souls of my own generation whom such leaves shepherdless. Trust me, people care what a ‘pope’ says and does even if they have little clue of Christ; and the ‘popes’ of newchurch are less than ‘tinkling cymbals’; in fact would they were ‘sounding brass’ rather than plain satan’s stooges.