I have to disagree with those who, after watching the video below, (like our friend Mundabor whose work I admire) have said that Michael Voris is beginning to see the light.
Michael Voris is a lot of things, stupid isn’t one of them.
In spite of whatever his thoughts may be about me, I have no doubts about the man’s Catholic wherewithal; he has never been a fan of Pope Francis. The reality of the dreadful situation in the Church under this pope has been plain to him practically from day one, and that is what makes his unwillingness to directly address the havoc this pope is deliberately creating so entirely frustrating, especially in light of his gratuitous (albeit forced by a quasi-internal menace) attacks upon those who are willing to take the bullets that come from doing so.
(For the record, when Michael extends the apology that is due, I am certain said persons will quickly accept it!)
All of this said, the video below contains nothing more than a report detailing what Cardinal Burke said. That’s it. Michael Voris didn’t endorse His Eminence’s sentiments and make them his own (even though I have no doubt that they are in concert with his own).
In short, Michael Voris has done, and is doing, some great work. There is much for which he deserves credit. The video below, while well done enough, isn’t one of them. ABC News could issue the same exact report.
As for the Cardinal’s words, don’t get me wrong, I’m delighted to hear them, but I see little reason to focus on the last two weeks alone when in truth this pope has been doing great damage to the Church almost from the very moment he hit the balcony at St. Peter’s. He’s a veritable one man wrecking ball squarely aimed at the fundamental doctrines of the Holy Catholic faith, and the longer those with a public voice, be that person a Prince of the Church or a regular guy with a notable apostolate, the more souls will be deceived and the worse off all of us will be.
Many of us would like to say what we feel in the open, but there will be retribution. We priests will be removed, bishops will be exiled and cardinals, who knows what he will do to them.
Christ wil overcome! I think what we are going through now will make the results of next Conclave much different than the Francis Conclave.
i agree with your last paragraph. As for Voris, will wait and see, as obviously more damage to come from this papacy.
– “a veritable one man wrecking ball squarely aimed at the fundamental doctrines of the Holy Catholic faith”
Thankfully, the twelve Articles of the Creed are always available for rapid restoration work. Take the following swing of the wrecking-ball as an example:
“The Mother of God. This is the first and most important title of Our Lady. It refers to a quality, a role which the faith of the Christian people, in its tender and genuine devotion to our heavenly Mother, has understood from the beginning.”
(Jorge Bergoglio, Solemnity of Mary, Mother of God, January 1, 2014)
The damage here may be restored as follows:
“How is the Blessed Virgin Mother of God?
The Blessed Virgin is Mother of God because Jesus Christ, her son, who was born of her as man, is not only man, but is also truly God.”
(Second and Third Article of the Creed, as explained in The Penny Catechism)
Sorry, the link above is incorrect. It should be this one:
Off topic, but reports from Poland are coming in.
The narrative is: a huge win for the bishops, a huge loss for the leftist (ex-communist) media.
Nothing about Francis’ involvement, but naming names of the radicals in his camp.
Goes to show you, you don’t mess with … the JPII sect. 🙂
Send an email to Voris and let him know that you are attending Mass at an SSPX Church. Ask him what he thinks about that. Watch the venom fly!!!
In some ways both Michael Voris and the SSPX do not see the light.They are both part of the problem.
SSPX is still part of the problem : communique on the Beatification of Pope Paul VI.
COMMUNIQUE OF THE SSPX’S GENERAL HOUSE ON THE BEATIFICATION OF POPE PAUL VI (WITH COMMENTS)
On October 19, 2014, at the close of the Extraordinary Synod on the family, Pope Francis will go forward with the beatification of Pope Paul VI. The Society of St. Pius X wishes to express serious reservations concerning beatifications and canonizations of recent popes, whose rushed proceedings dispense with the wisdom of the Church’s centuries-old rules.
It is true that Paul VI was responsible for the encyclical Humanae Vitae, which letter instructed and consoled the Catholic family at a time when the most basic principles of marriage were under bitter attack. So they are again, and in a scandalous fashion, by certain members of the present Synod.
But Paul VI is also the Pope who saw Vatican II to its conclusion, thereby introducing in the Church a doctrinal liberalism manifested especially in errors such as religious liberty, collegiality, and ecumenism.
In the books and on line articles of the SSPX there is no reference to Ad Gentes 7 which says all need faith and baptism. Ad Gentes 7 is placed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church 846 under the title Outside the Church there is no salvation. Since Ad Gentes 7 is in agreement with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus there is no change expressed in Vatican Council II on other religions and ecumenism.
So for me Vatican Council II is not a break with the tradiitonal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as taught over the centuries by the Church Councils, the popes ,saints and Fr.Leonard Feeney of Boston. I do not assume that LG 16,LG 8,UR 3,NA 2 etc are exceptions to the dogma.The SSPX makes this error and so the Council is a break with the past.
So one cannot blame Pope Paul VI, who also gave us Evangelii Nuntiandi, for the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.The fault is with those who use an irrational premise in the interpretation.They include the SSPX and the Vatican Curia.
Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, Michael Davis and other leaders of the traditionalist movement were not aware that an objective errror was made in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which changed the Catholic Church’s traditional teaching on ecumenism and other religions. The Letter wrongly assumed that the baptism of desire was an explicit exception to the literal interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney. The baptism of desire has nothing to do with extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
This modernist error was adopted by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre long before Vatican Council II . He was not aware that invincible ignorance (LG 16 ), being saved in imperfect communion with the Church (UR 3) etc, were not visible exceptions to the dogma .
The same error was made by Bishop Bernard Fellay in his last Communique to Friends and Benefactors.The error was repeated at the Angelus and other conferences.It is there in the writings of the SSPX bishops.
The result was an upheaval which he himself admitted on December 7, 1968, in the following words: “The Church is now confronted with uncertainty, self-criticism, one might almost say self-destruction. As if the Church were doing violence to Herself.”
Yes,since Vatican Council II was being interpreted with an irrational premise on such a big scale.
The following year he conceded: “In many areas the Council has not yet put us at peace; it has rather stirred up trouble and difficulties which are useless for reinforcing the Kingdom of God in the Church and in souls.”
An irrational premise was being used in the interpretation of the Council and so it emerged as a break with the Syllabus of Errors, the Catechism of Pope Pius X and extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
He went so far as to give this dire warning on July 29, 1972: “The smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God through some crack: doubt, incertitude, dissension, worry, discontent, and conflict are plain to see…”
Yes it was plain to see but the exact cause was subtle and seemed unknown to him, as, it was unknown to the leaders of the traditionalist movement.
But he was merely stating a fact, while failing to take those measures capable of stopping the self-destruction.
Paul VI is the pope who imposed a liturgical reform of the rites of Mass and other sacraments for reasons inspired by ecumenism.
In the 1960s it was being taught that there is salvation outside the Church as if these cases were known to them. It was as if they knew the names of the persons saved outside the visible boundaries of the Church.It was being taught that every one did not have to be an explicit member of the Catholic Church to be saved. In other words they knew non Catholics who were saved without the baptism of water.This was part of the text of the Letter of the Holy Office which was accepted by the SSPX and most people in the Church . The exceptions were the communities of Fr.Leonard Feeney, the St.Benedict Centers, and their supporters, who were disparagingly called ‘Feeneyites’.They are still criticized on the SSPX (USA ) website.
Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci denounced this new Mass because it departed “significantly, on the whole and in its details, from Catholic theology of the holy Mass as formulated during the 22nd session of the Council of Trent.”
Catholic theology! Exactly!The new theology is built upon there being visible cases of the deceased who are now in Heaven. These dead persons allegedly saved with the baptism of desire etc and without the baptism of water, were known exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. So since there was known salvation outside the Church, (they could see the dead on earth) theology had been changed in general.
Along the same lines Archbishop Lefebvre said that the new Mass was “infused with a Protestant spirit” which is a “poison inimical to the Faith.”
I have attended the Novos Ordo Mass offered by priests of the Franciscans of the Immaculate when the Mass was sacred and Catholic.The Novus Ordo Mass is still the Sacrifice of Jesus.It could also be offered by a priest without using a heretical and irrational inference in the interpretation of magisterial documents.
Under his pontificate many priests and religious were persecuted, and even condemned, for their fidelity to the Tridentine Mass. The Priestly Society of St. Pius X remembers with great sorrow the condemnation of 1976 whereby Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre found himself suspens a divinis because of his attachment to that Mass and his categorical refusal of the reforms. Only in 2007, with the issuance of Pope Benedict XVI’s motu proprio, was it finally admitted that the Tridentine Mass had never been abrogated.
The Tridentine Mass is still being prohibited today since it is assumed that Vatican Council II ( with the premise) is a break with the old ecclesiology of the Traditional Latin Mass.The fault is not with the TLM but with traditionalists who still continue to interpret Vatican Council II with a false premise resulting in a break with the old ecclesiology.
Following in the footsteps of its founder, the Society of St. Pius X declares yet again its attachment to the Church’s 2000 year-old Tradition,
Sorry.Inferring that the dead are visible to us is not the 2000 year -old Tradition. It has come into the Catholic Church since 1949.
Also Vatican Council II without the irrational inference does not contradict the 2000 year- old Tradition.The SSPX ‘s position is the same as the liberals and heretics on this issue.
convinced that such fidelity, far from vain nostalgia, in fact provides an apt remedy to the Church’s self-destruction.
The SSPX is using the same irrationality to interpret Vatican Council II as those who are the enemies of the Church.They are still part of the problem.
The report that MV made was just a quoting of what Cdl. Burke said. Voris didn’t praise or endorse Burke’s words. Due to MV’s don’t publically criticize the Pope stance, how could Mikey approve of Burke’s words? But, he can’t say anything against Burke either, because Burke is one of his big hero’s. So, unless he decides to stab Burk in the back, he’s in quite a quandary. Hopefully, this latest development will force him to re-think his no pope criticism policy and his attack on people like Louie as ‘spiritual pornographers’.
You sure had a lot to say about my little comment! Just let me say in response: SSPX is NOT part of the problem—SSPX is the solution to the problem. Bergoglio and his henchmen have no jurisdiction over SSPX. That is why they are in a position to hold their ground and speak the truth without fear of retaliation from the Modernists currently in control. SSPX is a safe haven for those who want to be really Catholic. The other Traditional priestly fraternities are sitting ducks.
SSPX part of the problem?
He he he
Good one Lionel. 😉
After first read, Mundabor likes.
Link here: http://mundabor.wordpress.com/2014/10/18/relatio-synodi-first-impressions/
My first impressions:
1. It reflects a different religion than the Relatio post disceptationem. Whatever religion that text reflected, it wasn’t Catholicism. This one is. Yes, you can buy a good bottle.
2. What comes out of this document is, as it was to be expected, bad Catholicism. But it is not “Francis-bad”, merely “pre-Francis-bad”. I could not detect any quotation from Papal documents before V II, which tells you all.
3. Some paragraphs are weak, or, in my eyes, nonsensical. But they are never subversive. They have the V-II-disease, not the much more aggressive, deadly Francis-disease.
4. As already reported, the most unChristian paragraphs have been simply suppressed. Dead. Gone. Make it two bottles, then…
It is a great day. Bergoglism has been almost completely excised from this text, with the only exception of the tosh of par. 46, which to me sounds like a token tribute. Speakin gof par. 46, one should take away his sandals and give them to him, straight on the teeth. A great help to his salvation. Alas, this is not allowed.
Last remark: Kasper and Forte should be defrocked.
They aren’t Catholics, at all.
Me too. 🙂
And if Kasper and Forte are to be defrocked, what do you do with a guy like Baldisseri?
@Lionel, I’m having trouble following your line of reasoning. What is the irrational premise you reference? Is the irrational premise a denial of the teaching expressed by Pope Pius IX in Quanto confidiamur moerore (10 August 1863) “they who labor in invincible ignorance of our most holy religion and who, zealously keeping the natural law and its precepts engraved in the hearts of all by God, and being ready to obey God, live an honest and upright life, can, by the operating power of divine light and grace, attain eternal life.”
Though a Pope should be treated with more deference for his position than others, we think it should be obvious that one who publicly teaches falsehoods or misleading ideas about the Faith, creates a need to have his ideas denounced publicly to prevent people from following him to their perdition.
Instead, Michael Voris made the choice last February to go beyond restraining himself and his associates out of respect, to denigrating the good work of others-like Chris Ferrara and John Vennari- to the point of trashing it. In our opinion, he showed remarkably poor judgment as a journalist even, regarding himself; but when he took those extra steps to prevent the public from appreciating the serious, informative research and hard work of other journalists- comparing its alleged damage to that of porn, he lost our respect for his ability to think clearly. It will take far more than this video to restore that, but we were delighted to see him come openly out with a piece that directly criticized the Pope, because it demonstrated something changed in his mind which allowed him to go far beyond anythng else he’s said or done in the last 8 months, and apparently to the point of breaking his “manifesto” in spirit.
Last February he was upset about “Chris Ferrara’s prayer that “Our Lady deliver her Church at long last from the clutches of these innovators….” and Chris’s “documentation for numerous confusing, disturbing and even doctrinally questionable statements of Pope Francis” –and John Vennari’s writings which “demonstrate numerous reasons why Pope Francis ought to make traditional Catholics very nervous given his past history, recent statements, and apparent respect for..Martini..a noted “progressive” and for writing “I would never allow Pope Francis to teach religion to my children.”
Michael wrote: “almost without exception, those things are harmful to one’s spiritual life.”…” only feeding anxieties and worries and doubts about our Lord’s promise to be with His Church.”
He’ can’t credibly now claim he did not intend to join in those same kinds of endeavors at last, since even repeating what Cardinal Burke has said not only includes “disturbing” behaviors of Pope Francis”, but demonstrates the same reasons listed by Chris and John listed above-for which Catholics should be far more than “nervous” about this Pope. Michael can’t still believe that his latest video report will “cause people to lose Faith in our Lord’s promise to be with His Church.” Even if that is all that has changed, then Michael has begun to “see the light”, and our many prayers have been of use to him, because he is open to God’s Grace.
His “manifesto” is available at http://www.churchmilitant.tv/faq/papalcriticism.php
..and also @ Lionel: If you choose to respond to crawler, could you enter it in a Forum and link it here, or link to one of the other places you’ve explained the nulla salus/V II agreement instead of posting such a long piece in the blog comment? I, for one, would greatly appreciate it. 🙂
I don’t think you can see Baldesseri, he’s on the other side of Forte.
The comment means so much more with the right link—
Yeah, Voris sounded almost hysterical in his first ‘Pope Bad’ report. But in the second one just out he sounds so relieved it’s almost funny…it’s all over, folks, the Pope is ok after all..no nasty bits left in the final document!!! We can all breathe easier now.
The Pope’s statement at the end of today’s bean-fest is a miss-mash of nothing – but he says some scary things in there too. This man is so devious he’s difficult to criticize because he speaks out of both sides of his mouth at the same time – do they call that a ‘forked-tongue’? I can’t believe I’m saying these things!!
So that’s the way I feel too. Exhaustion will set in and those of us who can still smell the smell will be seen as rad-trad nit-pickers until the next bit of crap hits the fan.
Tomorrow will be tough to take. Imagine! We are expected to believe that Paul VI is smiling down from heaven at the mess he made! I for one will state right here and now I don’t believe it, and I never will, that Paul VI, or John Paul II, or poor old Ratzinger when his turn comes (and it will), are truly saints.
It cannot be. This is part of the chastisement – that there will be a false church set up – that is the evil mirror image of the real Church. That’s what is happening right before our eyes. The Evil One is very clever to use mercy in this way – the upside-down mercy we’re being told is real Mercy.
I wish I drank I’d go get drunk.
I know I’m universally loathed around here but for whatever reason Louie allows me to post so I’ll keep posting until he decides otherwise.
Here’s something from the Catechism of the Catholic Church that was published over 20 years ago.
By masturbation is to be understood the deliberate stimulation of the genital organs in order to derive sexual pleasure. “Both the Magisterium of the Church, in the course of a constant tradition, and the moral sense of the faithful have been in no doubt and have firmly maintained that masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action.”138 “The deliberate use of the sexual faculty, for whatever reason, outside of marriage is essentially contrary to its purpose.” For here sexual pleasure is sought outside of “the sexual relationship which is demanded by the moral order and in which the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love is achieved.”139
To form an equitable judgment about the subjects’ moral responsibility and to guide pastoral action, one must take into account the affective immaturity, force of acquired habit, conditions of anxiety or other psychological or social factors that lessen, if not even reduce to a minimum, moral culpability.
Two questions come to mind. First, does anybody remember any hue and cry about this unbelievable watering down of the teaching on masturbation. I mean really, anxiety can reduce moral culpability to a minimum?
Second, is there anyone out there that would defend this watering down of doctrine but not be ok with giving communion to the divorced and civilly remarried?
You must have a different Baldisseri in ming.
The Baldisseri I was referring to is this one:
” That was the hour when the uprising began against the man carefully chosen by Francis, his own first Cardinal, Lorenzo Baldisseri – dearly prized by Bergoglio for the inestimable services rendered before and during the 2013 Conclave – picked over a year before the Synod to orchestrate both assemblies, in 2014 and 2015, so that they could reach the results willed by the Pope without any dissension. It was a hard task, but Baldisseri dedicated himself strenuously to it, and the essential datum was the media operation. As long as the Synod workings remained secret, the media operation would proceed in fast movements of faits accomplis impossible to be stopped by any force, so that the end result would have been a revolutionary final relatio that would work as the great acclamation of Pope Francis by the world episcopate, almost in a guru-like fashion, as the glorious leader whose mastery of events cannot be denied or stopped.”
Link here: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/10/important-backlash-against-manipulated.html
Maybe this is the mysterious “pianist” that New Catholic was referring to. 🙂
The shoe definitely fits. 😉
Dispatches from the front. POLAND 🙂
It would appear to have been a sleepless night for many Polish churchmen both in Warsaw and in Rome. 😉
Polish episcopate is coming out of it’s state of “synodal” shock.
Anger is setting in.
Biggest gripe centers around the total expunging of JP II’s Familiaris Consortio from the proceedings docs, and not only the conscious false interpretation of “graduality”, but laying this false definition at the feet of JPII. It is unforgivable, and the full blame is now rightly being laid at Francis’ feet.
And yes, names are now being named. Francis is the villain and Burke is the hero.
Next, Francis is seen as betraying not only the legacy of JP II, but subversion of the Polish church’s status in it’s present “death match” with the ex-communist media. The cause celebre among the ex communists is ” legalization of incest” and the spread of gender ideology. Francis has undermined the Polish church’s position and the hierarchy is pissed. It got to the point where the local ex communists were ridiculing the Polish hierarchy using Francis’s words post Ralatio Monday.
The leftist church circles are also getting bashed by the Polish episcopate. The “ring leaders” are being named. I have heard it from a couple of sources that Blue Thursday is beginning to be seen as the product of an intervention by JP II. (One of the RC writers in Rome also picked this up. Link here: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/10/important-backlash-against-manipulated.html)
They say that timing is the key to everything. Francis has picked the worst possible time to launch his assault against the Catholic faith w/r to Poland. Poland is observing the 30th anniversary of the murder of Fr. Jerzy Popieluszko, who is a martyr for the Faith. He was brutally murdered by the communist regime and this incident is still fresh in the episcopate mind. What Francis did is nothing short of “giving aid and comfort” to the enemy, and the Poles will not forget.
Cardinal Burke is the hero, followed secondly by bishop of Poznan Stanislaw Gadecki, the president of the bishops conference.
And lastly, something that we need to thank Francis for. Through his deceitfulness, hubris and scheming, he has exposed not only himself, but the rest of the “leftist” church for all to see. His rehabilitation of the liberation theologists was not talked about, but was seen as a slap in the face of JPII. But after this Secret Synod fiasco, it has now become “personal”.
The next conclave should be very interesting. 😉
And this from Argentina.
“When Silence is Shame — When Will Benedict XVI Say Something?”
Link via EF blog here: http://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2014/10/when-silence-is-shame-when-will.html
Giuseppe Nardi writes:
“For 17 months a confusing rant about the people of God has been going down: attempts to abolish sin, destroy the understanding of sin, the idea of good and evil leading to absurdity and uplifting the autonomous conscience to be the last instance. A few days ago the Pope called out to the people: “There is no God.” The intention of the statement could be awkward to explain. The question of what benefits it is supposed to have, this confusing, yes destructive, statement by the head of the Church, however, is not being answered.”
And it only gets better. 🙂
My favorite sentence: “The end of a great shepherd as remote-controlled sheep is unworthy of Benedict XVI.”
“Nowhere is it written that Benedict XVI. must not raise his voice. No ecclesiastical provision forbids him.”
“The claim that one message from Benedict XVI. would involve the danger of a schism in itself, is without any foundation. The truth can never be the cause of a schism, only the error and therefore the deviation from the truth.”
On an aside:
” It was just Cardinal Kasper, who a few days after his resignation and a few days before the start of the conclave against Benedict XVI, uttered a warning which he himself described as “advice”. He warned the newly resigned Pope from the pages of the daily newspaper, La Repubblica, who himself would play shortly thereafter an important and controversial role for Pope Francis, not to “interfere in matters of Church government and Church politics” in any way.”
“The abdicated Pope will sacrifice in secret for the Church and pray. But it is also not clear that he truly serves the Church with his silent appearances in public, nor to bring help for the salvation of millions of more or less disoriented people . No authority in the world could disincentive Benedict XVI. from entering into his present position in the Church by other gestures than in the past few months and especially by statements in defense of the truth of the Church’s doctrine and maintenance of order. Nobody, except he himself, could also prevent him from celebrating the Immemorial Mass of All Ages in the Vatican or outside.”
A must read.
I especially love the idea of Benedict offering a public Mass of All Ages. With the SP anniversary coming up, this would be the best gift that Benedict to bestow on the true Faithful. 🙂
Post away, Brother, post away. The truth is always welcome.
What you say is very timely. We must ask ourselves how we differ from people who lived 2,000 years ago. Truth is we’re no different.
What St. Paul said to his readers and listeners applies to us. The only difference between our world and the world of his time is technology.
What St. Paul said about the spiritual condition of the pagans, and how this infected the newly created Christians is exactly the same now. He warned his listeners not to mix with pagans. He warned them to watch and pray.
When the Apostles were given the Gifts of The Holy Ghost at Pentecost, they rushed out and began preaching everything Our Lord had taught them. And they kept on doing this until their deaths. One other difference between their time and ours: the successors of those Apostles have stopped preaching, for the most part, what has been passed down. The message is the same. But it has to be preached.
We’re told endlessly that we are different, more sophisticated and that our world is so much more ‘complicated’ than theirs. This is pure crap. Technology does not make us different as MAN. Were they all stupid? No. Were their propensities different from ours? No. Were they tempted in the same ways as we are tempted? No. Did they resist more than we do? No.
The truth is no longer preached. The Bishops have allowed the world to infect their souls. So what do we do? Go back to Bishops who really did tell the truth. The internet is full of links to good books, and good sermons. Feed yourselves if your Bishop won’t feed you.
I meant to say “yes, they were tempted in the same way we are”
Anyone who looks to Benedict XVI for help is going to be disappointed. He resigned. Period. Was he forced? Who cares! Did he go to the wall to fulfil his mandate? No. He’s history.
And to appeal to John Paul II is laughable. He was Pope for 25 years for heaven sake! What happened on his watch he is responsible for. All Popes from John XXIII to Francis have been infected with the heresy of Modernism. What we see are “fruits” from this heresy.
And I hate to say it but to look to the next conclave is a very faint hope. Should Francis die in the next few years who do you think will make up the conclave? The same faithless men who elected him.
Our Lady has been telling us for 200 years that bad times are coming. Get ready.
If that paragraph indeed confirms BOD and I.I. as means of Salvation, logic dictates EENS is absolutely meaningless and NOT a dogma.
Only a rotten modernist heretic can hold two opposite views at the same time:
“Yes, Catholic Faith is ABSOLUTELY necessary to Salvation… but then again not really!”
This is a larger quote from QCM:
“7. Here, too, our beloved sons and venerable brothers, it is again necessary to mention and censure a very grave error entrapping some Catholics who believe that it is possible to arrive at eternal salvation although living in error and alienated from the true faith and Catholic unity. Such belief is certainly opposed to Catholic teaching. There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments.
8. Also well known is the Catholic teaching that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church. Eternal salvation cannot be obtained by those who oppose the authority and statements of the same Church and are stubbornly separated from the unity of the Church and also from the successor of Peter, the Roman Pontiff, to whom “the custody of the vineyard has been committed by the Savior.” ”
As you can see your beloved paragraph is directly preceded AND followed by citations on EENS, the former in the form of a condamnation , the latter as yet another re-stating of EENS proper.
So, it stands to reason Pius IX means the Invincibly Ignorant will be saved supernaturally for divine intervention or naturally by conversion before they meet their Maker.
I renew my counsel on reading up on the innumerable abhominable heresies of Benedict, in the myriad of books he wrote before his election.
While analyzing the Latin text of QCM, I realized, the key is in the following:
“by divine light and grace”.
It doesn’t say “by their very Invincible Ignorance”.
So what are divine light and divine grace? How can they be obtained?
Especially how can they be obtained without the Church?
One needs to answer these simple questions to be able to comprehend the meaning of QCM.
Well said, Barbara. Thank you.
It is indeed peculiar to consider JPII’s catechism valid, considering who produced it, when, and how horrible it is.
Thank God someone has noticed that Bergoglio said “God does not exist”!
The Church’s current standards of reasonable suspicion are apparently so high that, if applied by the police, it would not be considered worthy of investigation even if someone confessed in writing, “I killed him. Do not be shocked!”.
With respect as to the identity of “the pianist”, looks like “great minds think alike”.
Link here: http://mundabor.wordpress.com/2014/10/19/synod-remember-the-pianist/
“The pianist was booed. His mediocre Impresario was exposed.
Don’t play it again, Lorenzo.
Definitely off key! 😉
Dear Barbara, Bert, Sean:
Unfortunately, the times are such, the we do not have the luxury to choose our friends.
I would suggest reading the following posts by Joseph Shaw, over at the LMS Chairman blog. Link here: http://www.lmschairman.org/2014/10/why-liberals-are-united-and.html
Kwasniewski, via LMS blog:
Speaking of Bugnini and his colleagues, he (Kwasniewski) writes:
They were men who seized their opportunities and did not sit on their hands wondering when other people would do the job for them, or worse, waste their time on endless bickering and hairsplitting. Like our political liberals, they could lay aside small differences for the sake of gaining major objectives.
Therefore, if the Polish episcopate thinks that it was an intervention of JP II that saved the Synod from going horribly wrong, ….
“who am I to judge?” 😉
Francis is cracking:
“The presence of the Pope is the guarantee of it all!”
Seen this earlier, but didn’t make too much out of it.
But now, I changed my mind.
Father Z has the scoop:
Fr. Z has the closing address to the Secret Synod:
Bergoglio: “And, as I have dared to tell you , [as] I told you from the beginning of the Synod, it was necessary to live through all this with tranquillity, and with interior peace, so that the Synod would take place cum Petro and sub Petro (with Peter and under Peter), and the presence of the Pope is the guarantee of it all.
To which Fr. Z comments:
” [I don’t think the mere presence of the Pope that guarantees anything. The Pope also has to act and speak. No?]”
What Francis is saying to the bishops is: “You need me”.
I understand that as a veiled threat, of a man terrified of losing his grip on the institution that he is controlling.
On an aside:
In a book that I read about the Third Reich some years ago, I came across a most interesting passage. Can’t remember who the author was unfortunately. But he made a most prescient observation. He said that individuals who work in the administration under a dictatorship think and act differently from those who operate in the administration under a democratic system. Keep in mind that the Vatican is, if just by definition alone, the former, since it is ruled by an absolute sovereign. He went on to observe that the mindset in a dictatorial “setting” is more concerned with survival whereas the democratic “setting” is more concerned with advancement. It is amazing how closely the behavior pattern of the Vatican apparatus resembles the mindset of the first group as opposed to the second group. The stories about how prelates, once appearing to be loyal to Benedict were changing sides. Here I am thinking of cd. Bagnasco as a good case in point.
Going forward, and if I am correct that is, I suspect that after Blue Thursday, …. there should be an “uptick” in the amount of new Immemorial Masses of All Ages being offered. 😉
And I would not be surprised if we see a surprise at the upcoming Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage in Rome in a weeks time. 😉
Barbara, this is indeed a scary time. Regarding a false Church being set up, it will at least appear to be as such, when Francis is done with his agenda. He is devious, as you say, and it will be difficult for those Orthodox bishops to counter this, because they aren’t devious. God bless Cardinal Burke for standing up to and protesting against the evil agenda, but he and the other bishops will have to be even tougher if they are to defeat the Modernists.
I think that Michael Voris will be more open about the terrible things that the Pope is saying and doing when there comes a time when it is more obvious to all that the Pope is going against Church teaching. It’s good that Michael Voris is speaking out against the bishops who are traitors to Our Lord and His Church, since there aren’t enough Catholics speaking out about these things.
Could you elaborate on Cardinal Bagnasco? Despite the scandal he was involved in this last year, he has always seemed very orthodox. I wish that we could hear his thoughts on the Synod disaster, but he’s probably not given any interviews in English.
Regarding the recent posts of Fr. Z: Fr. Z is not a friend of tradtion, though he will make it seem, at times, that he is (just my opinion).
In addition to the above, I count 18 paragraphs in Francis’s Secret Synod closing speech, and 3 are dedicated to the papacy (13, 14 and 15) . The second of the three paragraph (the longest of the speech) is exclusively quoting Benedict.
Folks, that’s approximately 20% of the speech (excluding closing remarks) dedicated to “‘splaining to the bishops that he is the big boss man”.
And at the end of the speech! I’m assuming for emphasis.
The panic must be setting in. 😉
W/r/t cd. Bagnasco, here you go, via Mundabor: http://mundabor.wordpress.com/?s=bagnasco.
Hint, “She’s” not a lady, and the good cardinal knows it.
As to Fr. Z. you have to understand that the rules are different for priests. Having said that however, he does have great sources. And if you want to understand the “inside baseball” of what is going on, his blog is indispensable.
More post Secret Synod analysis. From the left this time. 🙂
“For Francis, a resounding defeat: Traditionalists have won a huge victory.” | “Even in 2015, it’s hard for Francis to go much beyond this without risking schism.”
Link here: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/10/for-francis-resounding-defeat.html#more
“Francis, on the other hand, played with fire and brought the church to the brink of the precipice, her most serious division in five centuries, in order to implement what even his nominee and friend Cardinal Pell called “the secular agenda”; not even in a Synod whose members were chosen by him and steered by Cardinal Baldisseri under his command was he able to achieve even 2/3 of the votes on the issues close to his heart. Compare and contrast this to both Vatican I and Vatican II where not even the most controversial issues reached this level of disagreement from the clear will of the Pope — and even when there was a much smaller proportion of “non placet” votes (even fewer than 10%), the texts were changed to achieve agreements as close to unanimity as possible. And instead of gracefully accepting the blocking of the rejected paragraphs, he proceeded to include the rejected passages in the text, which makes the whole synodal process lose meaning… Despite all this, as Vallet says, he is “cunning” enough to move forward in his attempt, regardless of the serious and extremely high risks to the unity of the Church involved in it. May Our Lord and Our Lady protect the Church.”
Most incompetent pope…. evahhhh. ! 🙂
A danger to not only the Church, but also to himself. 😉
On a PS. In the UK, there is a custom for when a Prime Minister loses the backing of his party. The party sends representatives to the PM known as “men in grey suits”, to tell the PM that his time is up. Wonder if the College of Cardinals has a similar mechanism. 🙂
The ultimate compliment.. for Cd. Burke. 🙂
“Wherein Card. Burke is compared to Archbp. Lefebvre”
The leftists have Archbishop Lefebvre living in their minds… rent free. 🙂
“For Francis, a resounding defeat…..”
Nonsense. Anynone who thinks that Francis has somehow been defeated hasn’t really been paying attention, and doesn’t realize the powerful force behind Franics (satan). Evil does not give up that easily. We have to pray hard and offer sacrifices if we hope to have a real effect. It does help, though, to get the word out as to how serious the situation is.
The homo lobby is not happy.
The Vatican cancels its earthquake. This is not Pope Francis’s finest hour
Link here: http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/10/vatican-synod-ends-in-confusion-this-is-not-pope-franciss-finest-hour/
Standard everyday homo promotional gibberish.
What’s important is that Francis is blamed directly.
Money quote is:
“‘Pope suffers synod setback on gays’ was the BBC headline this evening – a misleading and meaningless verdict. But I’m afraid he asked for it.”
For a guy who lives and dies by the “optics”, and the post Secret Synod optics for Francis are really bad. 🙂
Francis’s “god of surprises” has pulled a fast one. 🙂
Thank you very much for that link. Lots of good stuff there, as well as some posts (and the audio) of talks given at their conferences.
I’m still working on “There is no god!” But the ‘god of surprises’ is clear enough. Poor Pope Francis. It’s obvious he’s not studied St. Thomas. There cannot be ‘surprises’ from God. The Almighty and Everlasting God is ORDER itself. No surprises! The whole of science is based on the absolutely sure base of ORDER, given to us from Himself. This Pope shows a sad lack of intellect.
We must take heart that the secular media won’t stay on this story very long. After all ISIS and Ebola are still out there. We’ll get the usual garbage from Cupich and Dolan, and a few others, but for the most part now that the Synod is over it’s boring – especially since ‘those with a sexual attraction to someone of their own sex’ did not get what they expected. Move along, nothing to see here!
Denise @ 12:37: WELL said! You and Barbara have the intuitive insight of women warriors. Francis is arrogant and has the propaganda support of the international press and the financial support of Freemasonry — and some of our good commenteriat think Francis has been defeated?! Sometimes I just get so depressed at the naivete of our own.
Thank you kindly, Sean. We do indeed have to be warriors in this battle. Francis does, as you say, have the support of the international press and freemasonry, and I agree about the naivete of our own, in thinking that Francis has been defeated. We want so much for this long battle to finally end, and I can’t really blame anyone for wanting this, but we still haven’t seen the worst of it yet, IMO. The Modernists/Illuminati/Luciferians will just regroup, reconnoiter, reassess, and strike again. But we have the power of the goodness of God, and integrity on our side, and we can’t forget that.
Hey, I wonder if the knights of Malta still do any sort of military campaigns….? (I’d add a smiley face here, if I could).
I already know all about that situation with the transvestite obtaining communion from Cardinal Bagnasco. IMO, the cardinal was set up. He had been an openly outspoken critic of the homosexual agenda, and it was payback time. IMO.
All that the Pope says and does, doesn’t say and doesn’t do is strongly suggestive of his not believing in the God of the One True Faith.
Of course, Pope Francis will not give up his battle to destroy the Faith. It will take a miracle for this man’s heart to be converted. Lord, have mercy.
God has revealed all that is necessary for our salvation, all that is the Church’s mission. The Pope’s idea of “surprises” is his own nasty modernist agenda that he has the hubris and wickedness to ascribe to Our Lord God. Reparation. Reparation. Reparation.
Dear Lionel Andrades,
If the SSPX is saying that Humanae Vitae was one of the only great things that PaulVI gave to the Church concerning sexual morals in regards to contraception then it only further confirms to me that no matter how traditional a group might appear, it would be most naive and imprudent of us to believe that there is one such group that exists that has no modernists infection whatsoever. To believe that Humanae Vitae remained faithful to our Lord’s teaching against contraception and it’s utter sinfulness is wrong. And I am using utter sinfulness because I realize how the high jackers of the Church go from using different softer adjectives to downplay mortal sin just as they did from going with sodomy being a sin that cries out to heaven for vengeance to saying it is now only a disorder to now sodomy is something that just may bring value to our Church.
Humanae Vitae contradicts PiusXI Casti Connubii when in it’s writings it goes against the primary purpose of marriage of procreation and education of children for God’s glory and when it endorses that planning to have recourse exclusively to the infertile period in order to avoid having children is not a sin. And to think PaulVI didn’t even bother to say for grave reasons this time. Which by the way there are no grave reasons because one has the option to abstain or to approach the sacrament of confession to give us the grace to grow in holiness and to fight the lifelong battle of concupiscence.
Humanae Vitae was a rubber stamp of the redefining of the primary purpose of marriage which began publicly during PiusXII’s pontificate in his private letters to the Italian midwives.
I am grateful for what the SSPX has done in the battle to preserve the liturgy but I don’t believe they are all squeaky clean on Church doctrine. I was told that not all who attend the SSPX agree to their stand on accepting the false teachings of NFP but it’s the best they can find for now until we all clean up our understanding of the liturgy and Church doctrine and dogmas.
I have been following your comments re: NFP for awhile now, and I concur with you completely. Many years ago I received the Human Life International newsletter with an article by a medical doctor. He stated that God had kept NFP a secret from us for thousands of years and was just now revealing it to the Church. I was shocked! Even as brainwashed by V2 as I was, I knew this doctor was stating something that was absolute heresy. And gnostic to its core. I sent the article to Solange Hertz with whom I was corresponding at the time. I believe she referenced it in a later article.
I am so happy to read your comments and know that I am not a lone wolf when telling my children that NFP is from the devil. The protestant husband of a Catholic woman I know remarked that NFP is “nothing but birth control.” How come prods can see it and Catholics can’t?
May Our Lady continue to enlighten us. Let us pray for one another.
Dear Lake Erie,
Thank you for your encouraging comments. You are right, you are not a lone wolf and yes I will pray for you and I will be so grateful for any prayers you can give for me.
May the Divine Assistance remain always with us.
The Archbishop of Dublin has welcomed the publication of the final text at the closing of the Synod of Bishops in Rome this evening. Archbishop Diarmuid Martin said the text must be read in the context of Pope Francis’ extraordinary final remarks to the Synod, after which the Pope received a five minute standing ovation from those present.
Pope Francis warned Bishops of the temptation to a hostile rigidity that forces people to lock themselves into the letter of the law, he also criticised the temptation to “come down from the cross to please people and disregard the deposit of faith.” However he said there cannot be a “false sense of mercy which wants to bind up wounds without really caring for them”
Archbishop Martin said tonight “ The Pope from the very beginning wanted openness he trusted those present at the synod to take the discussions as far as they could and in all honesty. Sometimes people in the face of these challenges tended to overlook the Holy Spirit, the guarantor of the process. The biggest challenge remains; as to how in today’s complex cultural situation the church can open a dialogue with men and women and young people where they are and lead them to a better idea of the Christian understanding of marriage ; this will involve a radical rethinking of the churches pastoral care for marriage and catechises among young people.”
Archbishop Martin said Pope Francis helped everyone understand the direction in which he wished the Synod process to progress , when he mandated publication of details of the votes in the Synod Hall, paragraph by paragraph in a welcome gesture of transparency. He said this Synod has been radically different as thanks to the Pope, it has led to open dialogue and genuine debate.
The report of the Synod, described by the Vatican as a “work in progress” will be sent to all Bishops Conferences as the first working paper for next year. Archbishop Martin represented the Irish Bishops Conference at the Synod which ran for two weeks.
Make of that what you will.
These are both crucial points, i.e. the watering down of the catechism on matters of culpability(among other things), AND the unchanging nature of man.
Both are reasons Jesus ends up telling the Apostles that in the latter days it will again be as it was in the time of Noah–men eating, drinking, giving in marriage unaware that the flood was coming until it swept them all away. And why were they unaware? Noah, like those with ears that still hear today, was mocked for his warnings about the coming consequences of unrepentant sin, for doing what seemed absurd, taking his small but Faithful family apart from the rest of society; building an Ark and boarding it to await the fulfillment of God’s promises and chastisements.
Here we are—with especially the “marrying and giving in marriage” part taking center stage. The Ark, as you and Ganganelli point out in similar ways, is still the Church and the Truths she has proclaimed throughout the ages. Mankind is still divided into two groups–those who ignore and ridicule those truths in order to live in sin, and those who appear ridiculous to them, for living by them and objecting to sin–making ourselves the pariahs of our age.
Mary’s Immaculate Heart is our refuge, Our Blessed Mother told us at Fatima.
Either it’s fire-proof, or we’re in for a hot time when the next deluge comes.
Wow! In essence this denounces Pope Francis completely, in the same way Cardinal Burke’s recent interview did, as the well-known, behind-the- scenes, powerful, manipulative “agent of disruption” .
“.[re: the “relatio]” ..”:everyone knows here in Rome that Francis knew, read, and approved it for publication. Nothing of this size happens in this most personalistic and egocentric of papacies without the direct knowledge of the Pope. What was unexpected, but should not have been, was that, despite the intense pressure, the majority decided that it was more Wojtylian than Bergoglian.”
“I have spoken to a huge number of prelates in the past few days, many of them Synod Fathers. They are all furious and indignant with Francis. A president of a[n African] Conference of Bishops…even called him to my face “an agent of disruption.” “The experiences of the past century show- a government of fear and manipulation cannot subsist for long without rebellion, and that was what erupted on Thursday. It was as if a pressure cooker exploded at the end of an 18-month-long simmering. ”
“The Synod has failed..” The protest of the Synod Fathers against Baldisseri of October 16 was unheard-of at any time of the past 50 years, and the silence of the mainstream media is stunning, considering the enormity of what took place. The Italian mainstream media was caught completely off-guard, and already this Saturday they attempt to salvage the prestige of Papa Bergoglio by transferring the responsibility for the failure to his collaborators, including Baldisseri, but everybody knows that these were only faithful and unwavering agents of his powerful will. ”
“In the meantime, the prestige of Cardinal Kasper has reached the lowest possible levels; the leaders of the uprising are considered heroes.”
“..Francis and his allies are making many mistakes..derived from their unending hubris, and an unexpected resistance is showing itself – a resistance that is being minimized by the mainstream press throughout the world. ”
“The optimism of the “Progressives” is in shambles, and the final text of the Synod is at this point a secondary issue: what matters is the battle that will be fought from now up to the next assembly, in 2015. Francis will not take what happened lightly, and Baldisseri must be under enormous pressure from above to manipulate the 2015 meeting in a way that can’t be thwarted by any new miracle… ”
Come, Lord Jesus, show them Who’s really in charge….. 🙂
It’s interesting that they think Benedict should now start showing public disapproval after a year and a half of silence (even less likely than Michael Voris doing the same.?.). 🙂
Lionel, I add my voice to that of my2cents.You get tremendously verbiose to try to prove a small point. The SSPX may not be the solution to the whole problem we’re in, but they are certainly the reason there are any people left to complain about it.
S.A. No, that’s the one I had in ming (sic). I’m using an American keyboard. It no speeka the Italiano too well. 🙂 — BTW, nice HT from Mundabor on the pianist.
When responding to your comment, I remembered the picture of Baldisseri sitting at the piano. And it clicked.
Now just waiting for New Catholic to confirm.
But confirmation is not necessary, since we are really dealing with a small click of revolutionaries. Therefore, very high probability that we got “our man”. 🙂
A priest, especially a bishop, has in his “clerical toolbox” a “mechanism” that allows him to deal with these types of situations.
This is analogous to a politician who has a reposte to a situation when he gets booed. In Germany, the body guards of a politician carry umbrellas so that if an egg comes in the direction of their employer, they open them up quickly an deflect the “projectile”.
W/r/t Bagnasco, what is further telling is his silence in the post Relation Monday discussion. He is completely AWOL.
I hope that this is just a case of strategic positioning for the longer fight.
Thanks for thelink
I’m curious how the Irish MSM is treating this situation?
Incidentally, are there any good Irish blogs that comment on.. to use an American expression, the “inside baseball” of Irish church politics?
Another excellent analysis, this time from Fr. Blake.
Link here: http://marymagdalen.blogspot.com/2014/10/roman-breakfast.html
” I think the big hitters will be thinking long term, possibly many African bishops are indeed looking to the next Conclave, to a Pope of non-European origins, thanks to Kasper, they might well be joined by Eastern Europeans, by those living alongside Muslims in the Middle East. Some of the Eastern Rite Catholics might well be thinking that Rome is actually not as effective a centre of unity as Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch or Moscow, especially in times of persecution, especially with a Papacy that has so little sense of ‘the Tradition’ and that is so Eurocentric and so Liberal. I know of one Eastern Rite priest who has been thinking along these lines ever since the first ‘Bona Serra’.”
” One of the troubles with Rome is that everyone who works in the Vatican considers themselves a ‘courtier’, ‘leprous’ or otherwise. I think it is worth remembering it was a servant, a valet, who was a prime player in bringing down Benedict, just by making public a few secret documents. There is a surprising amount of power held in the Vatican, which like any court or tiny state is a trust based society, by people who overhear, who dispose of paper, who serve lunch, who connect telephones, service computers or even do the dusting. Each one of them by now has a partisan position on the Synod, each one has allegiances to a particular party or person. The tendency is they tend to be of a conservative disposition, the Synod I suspect has given many of them a scent of blood, highlighting that internal Vatican tittle-tattle is actually global. Journalist too have shown their colours. So if I were Pope I would want to ensure I had on my side the cleaning woman, with the silicone polish spray when walking on those shiny marble floors in Sta Marta.”
Yes, the Vatican is the ultimate Bergoglian “bizantinizm”. 🙂
Summa Summarum, Francis is a wounded animal. 🙂
The main question now is how long can he last!
Voris not only hasn’t seen the light, he has rejected it! He has removed the video that has been posted here. To me, this shows it’s more important for him to cover Francis’s bum than to stand with a courageous priest and bishop like Cdl. Burke. To me, he’s no better than Mark Shea.
Hungary and Brooklyn NYC.
In the “could be true” category:
Second Synod To Focus On Learning Fundamentals Of Catholic Doctrine
The church of Francis: Quo subsistit in rerum natura parody” 😉
More post Secret Synod analysis.
Joseph Shaw: “Where to we go from here?”
Dr. Shaw writes:
“After the strange ‘Relatio’ published in the middle of the two-week Synod, we’ve seen a remarkable turn-around of events. It would seem that participants successfully demanded that the reports responding to this Relatio of the ‘circuli minores’, the small discussion groups, be published. These revealed the truth of what a number of Synod Fathers had been saying: that the liberal tone of the Relatio completely failed to reflect the views of the participants. Once the reports of the circuli minores were published, it was impossible for the people drawing up the final report to ignore them: the dishonesty would have been too obvious.”
Note: Take note of the word “dishonesty”. This is an issue that Francis must address. It is the key to defeating him at the next SIN SYNOD II.
“What we have seen this fortnight is, nevertheless, quite scary. We have witnessed the operation, exposure, and defeat, of a ruthless attempt to manipulate the synod and, through the synod, the whole Church. There is no reason to imagine the threat this represented is going to go away.”
“There is going to be a new, bigger synod on the same subjects this time next year, and there is every reason to suppose that the same people will be in charge.”
Note. This does not necessarily have to be. I think the bishop are so pissed, that they should demand that these “dishonest” individuals, i.e. Forte, Kasper and Baldisseri, should be removed. I think that this should be asked of Francis in the name of “transparency, openness and freedom”. 😉
“The important distinction over the next few years, among Catholics who oppose the Church’s ‘autodemolition’,as Bl Paul VI called it, may turn out to be not between Trads and Neo-Cons, but between orthodox Catholics with a spine and those without. What kind are you going to be?”
Yes. What kind are we going to be?
More post Secret Synod analysis: Antonio Socci.
2 + 2 = 4 (too rigid)
2 + 2 = 6 (too lax)
2 + 2 = 5 (aaah, perfect!)
Link here: http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2014/10/2-2-4-too-rigid-2-2-6-too-lax-2-2-5.html#more
[T]he “uprising” of the orthodox prelates of the past Thursday (the anniversary of Wojtyla’s election) was an epic and almost miraculous event.
The Church faithful to Tradition prevailed on that day. It was thus established that, just as it had happened in the [February 2014] Consistory [after the presentation of the Kasper proposal], Papa Bergoglio found himself in the minority, practically with a “vote of no confidence”.
Note* Yes. I was a resounding “vote of no confidence”.
” Perhaps the truth is that he tried it and (for the time being) couldn’t do it. In the end, there is only one sure outcome: the split of the Church, and great confusion in her Magisterium.”
Yes. The split is coming. What is key is that the forces of Christ the King hold the Vatican. 🙂
while obviously the rejection of the obscene paragraphs is a tremendously positive event, I cannot help but wonder if you aren’t being too optmistic about the ordeal.
On Rorate Caeli itself I read about the voting stats, 5 votes short of a 2/3 majority (118 vs 123 required vs 185 total votes) is actually a pretty large vote of confidence on Francis’ line.
Theoretically, he could just remove/bribe 5 (or ten) bishops from next year Synod proper “lineup”, and be assured of a victory.
And what is the Dark Side saying?
“USA Today: Next year could see more pro-Francis bishops, or a worse split”
Via Pew Sitter link here: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/10/19/pope-francis-synod/17551189/
“The next year could go one of two ways,” Ippolito said. “You could see support coalesce around the kinds of statements that fell just short of the two-thirds majority in this synod, or you could see the split between the two sides grow, which could lead to some very serious issues.”
” Michele Ippolito, a Vatican watcher with the Italian news site Fanpage, predicted Francis would spend the year making his case with bishops in hopes of building a consensus for a more tolerant view toward gays and divorced Catholics, as well as in other areas.
And all along, I though Francis was impartial. 😉
Oh well, I guess we need to consign the “leftist clerics gone rogue” theory to the trash bin of history. 🙂
The vote you refer to was the “consensus” position vote.Yes?
Francis couldn’t even get that through.
He had to personally “ORDER” that the rejected paragraphs were sent with the final Relatio text.
Furthermore, only TWO speakers even mentioned the aberro-sexual issue.
So Francis will need to do a lot of “replacing” at next years Synod. But he can’t since he has NO say in who is in the national bishops conferences. (Outside of Italy, of course.)
You need to look at the wider picture. 😉
You sure had a lot to say about my little comment! Just let me say in response: SSPX is NOT part of the problem—SSPX is the solution to the problem.
Yes we both support the SSPX when they affirm Tradition.
Bergoglio and his henchmen have no jurisdiction over SSPX.
The issue is doctrine.Pope Francis, the Vatican Curia and the SSPX are interpreting Vatican Council II and other magisterial texts with an irrational inference which is not part of Tradition.
That is why they are in a position to hold their ground and speak the truth without fear of retaliation from the Modernists currently in control.
They are not able to affirm Vatican Council II in agreement with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was taught in the Catholic Church for centuries.
Like the communities of Fr.Leonard Feeney, the St.Benedict Centers, they are assuming that LG 16,LG 8 etc are explicit exceptions to the dogma on salvation.
The St.Benedict Centers,USA and the SSPX, both traditionalists are using the same irrational premise in the interpretation of Vatican Council II.
The St.Benedict Centers affirm the dogma correctly i.e there are no exceptions,but when it comes to Vatican Council II they use the irrational inference.
SSPX is a safe haven for those who want to be really Catholic. The other Traditional priestly fraternities are sitting ducks.
They (traditionalists) all assume that the dead saved in invincible ignorance( and allegedly without the baptism of water) are known and visible to us in 2014 on earth and these cases are explicit exceptions for all needing to enter the Church formally, with Catholic Faith and the baptism of water.It’s as if you can meet one of these ghosts on the streets.
SSPX part of the problem.
They are not part of the solution.
At the end of the day, Francis can do whatever he wants.
But that would mean that he would pop his “collegiality” fiction.
Living under Msgr Ricca roof over at Sancta Marta, remember.
Ironic isn’t it, that the issue of “collegiality” will hang the VII heretics on their own petard. 🙂
Crawler, no that is not the problem.
Being saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire is accepted as a possibility known to God.A possibility only!
It is assuming that these cases are defacto known to us in the present times and then further assuming that these ‘known’ cases are exceptions to the extra ecclesiam nulla salus, which is the error. Here is the problem.
Except for the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 no magisterial document infers that these cases are visible to us and so are exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma.
No pope has said that these cases are known and visible to us. They would have to be known to us to be exceptions.
The false premise is to assume that what is implicit and invisible for us is explicit and seen in the flesh.Then it is false to conclude that these hypothethical cases are defacto exceptions to the dogma .
I don’t understand what would you like me to do with regard to the forum.
This issue is already in the forum and only Johnno has responded so far.
Berto Slomovicci, my point is that being saved in invincible ignorance ( those who have not had the Gospel preached to them through no fault of their own) has nothing to do with the dogma. Physically these cases are not seen on earth. So I cannot meet any one in 2014 in Rome for example, who does not need Catholic Faith and the Baptism of water for salvation.
So my position is that of the SSPX General Chapter Statement in 2012 which stated that there are no exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
@S.Armaticus : in response to your questions, the Irish MSM did have coverage of the final report issued by the Synod.
Our national television station RTE and their correspondent Joe Little did report on their main TV bulletins that the Synod had amended the wording of the mid-Synod Relatio.
The Irish print media, before the final report had been issued did cover the Synod.
The Irish Times newspaper – a thoroughly biased and deceitful daily newspaper – is virulently anti Catholic. The Times has been to the forefront of being a voice for more liberal abortion, same sex marriage. It carried an interesting piece by Professor Father Vincent Toomey last Saturday which I attach for your reading http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/synod-feeds-secular-agenda-hostile-to-traditional-family-1.1967861
Thank you for the information and the attached link.
Here’s a link to Radical Catholic.
He has a series by Father Joseph Bampton S.J. on Modernism and Modern Thought which is wonderful. Six or seven long articles – search the post list for them – well worth the effort. Father Bampton covers the waterfront on the Modernist heresy.
It’s possible some who sound more optimistic about Francis’ losses right now, are simply looking at the outcomes of these current battles, rather than naively believing we’re done here.
–Looking at the facts– Francis put a plan into action apparently thinking his “control factors” were unbeatable. He may have smoothly acquired a longer enemies list than he had before, but he lost more than he gained even if that is the case, there is obviously much less reluctance now for his opponents them to make use of public media, than there was before the Synod, and that’s a powerful blow he may not have seen coming.
-We heartily agree that much more needs to be done in the way of prayer and sacrifices. But don’t forget that God ‘s plans don’t always follow the obvious path, and He sometimes acts suddenly and decisively while we are still thinking about long-term fight plans. Anything is possible, including an early defeat of these evils.
dear Anastasia and Lake Erie,
Anastasia, you know I’ve agreed with you in the past and that hasn’t changed. Lake Erie, I agree with you 150%
If I may say, without in any way judging the interior of brethren who may have, God forbid, in the past been or in future- will be – misled — NFP is borne of the identical intellect that sourced that evil term “same-sex attraction,”- Lucifer.
Just in case you haven’t seen the interview with Edward Pentin…the link is below.
Manipulated… you bet. 🙂
Never seen anything like it before, and he’s been to 5 of them.
Pat on the back to MV for getting the interview.
My last reply to Lionel:
I get what you are saying, I was just trying to explain why Quanto confidiamur moerore doesn’t even teach Invincible Ignorance as a true, valid, dogmaticly estabilished mean of Salvation.
On the subject of BOD as real, observable phenomenon, it is clear to me why so many (including those opposed to the Universal Salvation heresy themselves!) today openly embrace such a concept and rabidly, irrationally fight for it to be recognized as a dogma.
They simply can’t cope with the idea that most of their friends, families, neighbours are probably going to be damned to eternal torment in Hell, since they are either non catholics, or complete apostates.
And this is why especially Americans (or catholics in protestant-dominated countries) are the most vehement supporters of the abhominable concept.
It is the same psychological mechanism for which most refuse to even contemplate the possibility the N.O. Eucharist is not valid (or the Mass itself, or Ordination).
Finally, on the subject of I.I. and B.O.D. proper, I don’t understand why it is even a subject of consideration, it’s not as if God isn’t omnipotent or omniscient.
Declaring exceptions to the EENS it’s saying God wouldn’t be able to make it so those individual have access to the Church or a Supernatural intervention.
You get tremendously verbiose to try to prove a small point.
This small point could be at the centre of the present Muller-Fellay talks which could collapse once again.
God has revealed all that is necessary for our salvation, all that is the Church’s mission.
All ? Was Fr.Leonard Feeney wrong about exclusive salvation in the Church and is the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 correct to infer that there are known exceptions ?
The SSPX General Chapter Statement 2012 says there are no exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus while the last Communque of Bishop Fellay to Friends and Benefactors infers there are known exceptions.
So there are two lines of thought within the SSPX. One of them is wrong.
Which one is it for you?
Pope Francis got caught with his hands in the cookie jar…and now he has to pull an about face. I agree with your analysis of Voris…he’s more than likely with us on our understanding of Pope Francis…he unfortunately does not express it.
The Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) and the Vatican Curia’s doctrinal position has become their political stand : talks could collapse again because of egoism
The Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) and the Vatican Curia’s doctrinal position has become their political position.Both are making a doctrinal error and not admitting it in public.The SSPX -CDF talks show that both groups are not being honest. Individual members could be protecting their reputations.They may not want to disappoint friends and supporters.This is a political issue for them.They have to stay with the ‘party line’. They cannot say that all these years both groups made a major doctrinal error.
Someone important has to stand up and tell the Vatican Curia and the SSPX leadership that we cannot physically see the dead on earth so Vatican Council II does not contradict Church teachings on other religions and Christian communities.There can be only one rational hermeneutic- that of continuity.
Even the communities of Fr.Leonard Feeney are making this same error and so reject Vatican Council II. For the the Council is a break with the past and the dogma according to Fr.Leonard Feeney.They use a false premise in the interpretation of the Council. This is their political position as traditionalists even after being informed.
“I must say I was shocked by what I heard on Monday morning, which was presented by a very reputable cardinal, the Cardinal-Archbishop of Budapest. So you can imagine I’m a little shaken by that, my trust is a little bit shaken, but I am hoping that we won’t have a repeat of that.”
This remark by Card. Burke in an interview with Buzzfeed on the synod, it gives me hope that enough people are waking up, and God willing the next conclave will be much better for the Church.
If I’m not mistaken, 118 refers to the votes on article 56 about the homos, therefore invalidated in the final document (but somehow, still printed?).
S.A. The picture I linked was the steamroller captioned, “Forte can’t be seen in the photo, but he’s there.” Not only did I miss the link in my initial comment, but then I had to explain the punch line. Don’t quit my day job… 😉
Lionel, for example, your post of Michael Voris, you can just right-click on the #5013, copy, then paste here, (https://akacatholic.com/topic/michael-voris-error-in-premium-programs/#post-5013), or whatever link you want. You can add a short intro with whatever salient points to tease interest, and the blog doesn’t get bogged down. I hope I helped. BTW, I think I agree with your point on V II and EENS, it’s just that my eyes tend to glaze over after awhile. I wonder if sometime you could put it as if you’re explaining to sophomores in H.S. with a 3 minute attention span. (I may be regressing.) God Bless & thanks.
Lest there was any doubt… here is the Voris appology for making that report. “There are those,” I’m sure includes Louie! Sigh…. what a tiresome person. He even “refrained from Communion Sunday and went to Confession.”