For the first time since the publication of the Four Cardinals’ dubia, Cardinal Caffarra has given an interview and explains the reasons and some of the deeper arguments underlying this recent initiative. Throughout the whole of this interview given to Matteo Matzuzzi of the Italian newspaper Il Foglio, Caffarra preserves a calm and unmistakably charitable tone and thus politely distances himself from any polemical way of dealing with some very grave moral matters such as a derangement of marriage and of the family. Foremost, he also makes it once more very clear – as Cardinal Raymond Burke has recently done, as well – that the Four Cardinals are united and are still insisting on the need for some clarifications from Pope Francis.
Different aspects need to be clarified. The letter – and the attached dubia – had been reflected upon for months, and it has been discussed among us for a long time. As to myself, I have prayed [many times] before the Blessed Sacrament during the same span of time.
These are the beginning words of the interview with Matteo Matzuzzi which set the tone of the whole interview. Cardinal Caffarra shows himself as a honorable and attentive shepherd of the Catholic Church who is concerned with the salvation of souls. He also shows the care with which the Four Cardinals have approached the matter of the letter to the pope:
We were aware that the gesture we were undertaking was a very serious one. We had two concerns. The first was not to scandalize the little ones in the Faith. This is for us pastors a fundamental duty. The second concern was that no person – believer or unbeliever – could find in that letter an expression that could even remotely sound like a slightest disrespect toward the pope. The final text as it is now is the fruit of several revisions: revised, rejected, and corrected texts. [my emphasis]
Cardinal Caffarra reminds us of the “grave duty of us cardinals to advise the pope in governing the Church. It is a duty, and duties oblige.” He makes clear the fact “which only a blind man can deny,” namely that “in the Church, there is a great confusion, uncertainty, insecurity caused by certain paragraphs of Amoris Laetitia.” This is happening, according to the Italian cardinal, with regard to three areas of the sacramental economy: marriage, confession, and the Eucharist, as well as the Christian life. Here, “some bishops say A, others say the opposite of A.” (Here we might add that the new episcopal guidelines concerning the “remarried” divorcees now coming out from Malta are again confirming Cardinal Caffarra’s own observation.) Caffarra even calls this phenomenon of chaos “a fact, an undeniable fact, because, in the words of David Hume, facts are stubborn.”
In such a situation, it seemed at first fitting to make use of “fundamental theological criteria of interpretation” with the help of which Cardinal Caffarra had thought it to be possible “to show that Amoris Laetitia does not contradict Familiaris Consortio. [Moreover,] In public meetings with lay people and priests, I personally have always followed this path.”
But then, it came to pass that the Four Cardinals realized that this kind of earlier approach was “not sufficient.” He says: “The contrast between these two [opposing] interpretations [of Amoris Laetitia] continued. There was only one way to deal with them: to ask the author of the text that was now interpreted in two ways which was the right interpretation. There is no other way.” Thus the Four Cardinals chose to approach the pope with the help of the “very traditional way in the Church, the so-called dubia.” With the help of the dubia, explains Cardinal Caffarra, the pope merely had to answer with a “yes” or a “no,” instead of giving “lengthy and elaborate responses.” He adds: “It just seemed the easiest way.” Out of respect for the office of the pope, the Four Cardinals chose first to approach him in private, not in public: “Only when we had the certainty that the Holy Father would not answer [us], did we decide to go public.”
In the context of Cardinal Gerhard Müller’s recent critique of the open publication of the dubia, Mattzuzzi (who has conducted the interview prior to the Müller statement) quotes Cardinal Caffarra as saying that “we interpreted the silence [of the pope] as permission to continue the theological confrontation.” For it involves, as Caffarra adds,
Also the Magisterium of the Bishops (who, let us not forget, exercise it not as delegates of the pope but in virtue of the sacrament they have received), as well as the life of the faithful. Both have the right to know. Many faithful and priests said: “but you cardinals, in a situation like this, you have the obligation to intervene with the Holy Father. Otherwise, for what reason do you exist if not to support the pope in such grave questions?
With regard to the criticism that was expressed against the dubia, Cardinal Caffarra responds:
Some people say that we are not obedient to the Magisterium of the pope. This is false and calumnious. Especially because I do not want to be disobedient, I wrote to the pope. I can be obedient to the Magisterium of the pope if I know what the pope teaches in matters of Faith and the Christian Life. But the problem is exactly this: that in fundamental points one does not well understand what the pope teaches, as is demonstrated by the conflict of interpretation among bishops. We want to be obedient to the teaching of the pope, but the pope’s teaching must be clear. [my emphasis]
Cardinal Caffarra adds that the Four Cardinals did not want in any way to “force” the pope to answer anything, but, rather, to ask him for “sovereign guidance.” Additionally, explains the prelate, “we do not deserve the accusation that we want to divide the Church. The division – which exists already in the church – is the cause of this letter, not its effect.” [my emphasis] In this context, Caffarra considers the “insults and threats of canonical sanctions” directed to the Four Cardinals to be “unworthy.”
As Cardinal Caffarra shows in this lengthy interview, many pastors are now already confronted with the situation that penitents are coming into the confessional burdened by the confused teaching stemming from Amoris Laetitia. Confessors are telling him that they do not know any more what to say when they have a penitent in the confessional who is “remarried” after a previous civil divorce. In Caffarra’s words: these pastors “have a burden on their shoulders that they are not able to carry.” The cardinal also stresses that
These are very serious issues concerning the life of the Church and concerning the eternal salvation of the faithful. Let us never forget: this is the supreme law of the Church: the eternal salvation of the faithful. Jesus founded His Church so that the faithful may have eternal life, and may have it more abundantly. [my emphasis]
In these wholehearted words is to be found such a profound love for the faithful, such a love for the Faith, that it may inspire us all to hold on to our beloved Catholic Faith. Cardinal Caffarra presents his arguments so calmly and charitably that no reasonable and well-meaning person could easily, much less churlishly, object.
Without going more into details – which are important indeed, but would take too much space for now – Cardinal Caffarra discusses in the following the specific parts of Amoris Laetitia that are especially causing the confusion. Here he thus mentions the paragraphs 300 to 305, to include the footnote 351. He also stresses the importance of the correct definition of a well-formed conscience (with reference to Blessed Cardinal John Newman) which is based on the truth and the good. Caffarra also discusses carefully the matter of the “remarried” divorcees and their possible access to Holy Communion. May these people – while not living in habitual continence – now be permitted to receive Holy Communion, or not? asks the prelate. “There are only two answers: yes or no.” He reminds us that “Familiaris Consortio, Sacramentum Caritatis, the Code of Canon Law, and the Catechism of the Catholic Church all respond to the above question with: no.” But, then, if there are bishops who answer with “yes,” adds the Italian cardinal, “then one should also teach that adultery is not, in and of itself, evil.” In this context, Cardinal Caffarra points out that footnote 351 – which mentions admittance to the sacraments in individual cases – “is ambiguous.”
Thus Cardinal Caffarra presents a learned, limpid, and pure line of argumentation concerning the dubia and some of the underlying problems of Amoris Laetitia. May those who have opposed him, and even mocked him, be touched by his deep goodness. (My own little family can testify to Cardinal Caffarra’s personal, recurrent, and intimate attentiveness to the Little Ones of Christ, the “parvuli.”)
May all of his objectively erroneous opponents – for whose deeper conversion we are all called to pray – also be touched and convinced by other voices which are increasingly now coming forth in defense of the Truth of Christ that especially concerns marriage and the Catholic family.
One of these voices – in addition to the re-assurring new interview with Bishop Athanasius Schneider – is a new article written by Joseph Matt, the President of the well-respected Catholic newspaper The Wanderer. The article is entitled “It’s Not Just The Four Cardinals Who Need An Answer,” and therein Matt expresses his just indignation about the critique of the Four Cardinals coming now even from Cardinal Gerhard Müller, as well as about other sharp comments directed against the dubia and their authors. Matt says:
The very title of the congregation which this cardinal heads implies the importance of the office and its crucial role — especially as it relates to the current situation with the four cardinals and the dubia. Cardinal Mueller’s words in this interview are a critical blow to the current dubia situation. What is the relevance of such a congregation if it cannot offer an answer in a matter that requires a clarification regarding the Catholic faith? [my emphasis]
Matt continues his just ardor of indignation by pointing to the unjust treatment of the Four Cardinals themselves:
Mueller’s snub adds to the relentless and uncharitable campaign from within to marginalize these four courageous cardinals. Their treatment by their peers is nothing short of scandalous and constitutes a grave injustice to them and our Church. These good men who are simply looking for clarity and answers to basic questions concerning the Catholic faith do not deserve the kind of disrespect they are getting from their fellow clergymen. [my emphasis]
The President of The Wanderer also makes it clear that mere silence – much less muteness – is not any more a fitting alternative for a member of the Catholic clergy:
The time for silence on this issue among fellow cardinals, bishops, and priests has passed. Make no mistake about this; it is an event that has drawn a line in the sand which will have consequences in the immediate future of the Catholic Church. Those who remain silent about this matter will be complicit in its consequences. The conflict with the four cardinals is not just a remote issue related to them: It affects each and every Catholic who is suffering the detrimental effects already. Fr. Mark Pilon in last week’s Wanderer analyzed the ill consequences of this controversy. [my emphasis]
With some further fervent and sincere words, Joseph Matt calls all Catholics to make a strong and faithful resistance to infidelity, and to bear faithful witness to the truth:
Intimidation and threats did not stop the martyrs, disciples, and Catholic faithful throughout the ages from proclaiming the teachings of Christ. Let’s not let it stop us. Stand up for these cardinals, stand up for the faith. Let your voices be heard.
May this courageous recent statement by Joseph Matt be an encouraging sign to us all, namely: that the end of this ruinous time of confusion and attenuation of Catholic truth may soon find a proper end. May the calm and charitable witness of Cardinal Caffarra himself be an inspiration for us. May the faithful Catholic resistance grow so strong that Pope Francis may realize that he has to stop his own current and cumulative sowing of confusion.
UPDATE: Reader Andrew Guernsey has shared with us his own English translation of the full interview. You may view it here (PDF link).
This is the strongest interview so far as it asserts more authoritatively the duty of the Cardinals in issuing the Dubia & asserting they will stick with it until it is answered. The fall of the Maltese episcopate & the coming investigation into the Knights of Malta, together with the Vatican invitation to Dr. Ehrlich author of ‘Population Bomb’ to present a paper at an upcoming seminar there is enough reason for needing fast action to stop this NWO nonsense. Truly, the silence of the majority of Cardinals & Bishops on this issue is diabolical at this stage & one they will bitterly regret.
If so many prelates from bishop to cardinal to pope could remain silent, look the other way as innocent children, teenagers and seminarians were victims of clergy sexual abuse……..
why are we surprised anymore by their silence?
So many have answered for that atrocity for all eternity, and yet those who are living are too arrogant to think otherwise. Sins of the flesh permeate the Vatican, the hierarchy down to the diocese.
Impurity!! Impurity is the culprit, the demon that, if not wrestled with and thrown out, the Church will be unrecognizable to many of us, and that is something our good Lord will have to handle.
Many are compromised. Only a few are not.
In light of the Maltese disaster, this is certainly very timely.
Before, we thought that the Pope was a disaster waiting to happen. But the waiting is clearly very much over. It is here.
I agree – as soon as I read this yesterday, I thought that the moment had come, certainly a lot sooner than I would have thought. The Maltese document was published in L’Osservatore Romano, so Francis and his henchmen were clearly in on it from the start. Unless he corrects the Maltese bishops and denies their interpretation, I’d say it’s undeniable that he has entered into heresy and now must be formally given a chance to renounce this.
Incidentally, the “divorced and remarried” were just a red herring. The issue is really the rejection of the universality of the Church, the reality of the Eucharist, the reality of objective sin and the validity of Christ’s teachings, and the rejection of free will.
No doubt. The worst is coming. What we have is the inversion of Christian teaching. Totally demonic.
AMEN! YOU GOT IT!
A formal schism is at this point inevitable, unless the Pope steps in to correct it, which we all KNOW will not happen. As Isabel points out below, the Maltese document was published in the Vatican newspaper, so it has the blessing of the Pope himself. And……..she is correct that if indeed he does not denounce this action by the Bishops of Malta to be against the teaching of the Church, he has pretty much declared himself a heretic, but he gets away with it by his SILENCE. A line has been drawn in the sand and no longer can the Bishops sit back and pretend they don’t know what’s happening and don’t know how to fix it. They need to stand with the four Cardinals and start confronting the Pope themselves as to his answer to the Dubia. There is strength and safety in numbers, if there are enough of them, he can’t sack them all! The time has come for them to start SQUAWKING CHARITABLY BUT ASSERTIVELY! Answer the Dubia or consider stepping down!
I recall the words of Blessed Anne Catherine Emerich who said: ” People in that time must pray much for the dark Church to leave Rome.” And……………PRAY INTENTLY WE MUST.
If that is their concern (safety), then they are not worthy of their red hats.
Right you are! But I do believe that’s the fact of the matter, and whatever it takes to prod them on.
Dear Marc, An interesting comment that kind of makes me think that “birds of a feather flock together”, but the birds haven’t calculated two things. 1.) Our prayers can convert them and 2.) They can’t excommunicate us. There are many Catholics here that have been in the battle for a longer time than my family and it is through their comments and understanding of the faith they are contributing to a badly formed catholic such as myself.
God love them. They are walking on eggshells before bull in a china shop. And they are in red, no less.
“The first was not to scandalize the little ones in the Faith.”
The scandal has been provided by the Holy Father, the Cardinals could only provide further scandal by not raising their voice. Certain Bishops Conferences and individuals contribute to the scandal with no concern for the laity but to provide them a rationalization for persistent mortal sin. Such ecclesiastics have a millstone with their name on it awaiting them.
Mercy is rendered by freeing individuals from sin, not confirming them in sin. Some of our resident wisdom figures appear unaware of that — but take it from me, a miserable sinner.
God reward authentic pastors such as Cardinals Brandmüller, Burke, Caffarra, Meisner and Bishop Schneider.
Where are the rest?
Indeed, where are Cardinals Pell, Arinze, Sarah, Napier & Bishops Lenga & Gadecki’ Where are the thirty or so Cardinals hiding in the background but supportive of the Dubia? Where is Bishop Fellay who has gone very quiet since the Dubia was announced? Amazing when push comes to shove how they all disappear!
As I have probably said here before, some of them are operating stealth for maximum effectiveness. This is judicious. Life in clerical ecclesia is an extremely “alpha male” experience — yes, I know, it doesn’t appear that way from the outside, but it is. It is “rough.” They aren’t bent on money, but personal ideals, ego, etc., its a very complex culture.
The best of them know how to fly through the highest reaches of the ecclesial jungle — the good guys are doing their job.
Pray for them.
And pray for the cowardly sychophants — an ample bunch to be sure — as well.
I’m sick and tired of them. From now on I’m going to ask God punishes them for cowardly irresponsible.
James. I think you are absolutely right. We must be patient.
Slightly off-topic Pope Francis is always preaching about clericalism being a bad thing. Does this mean I should be anti-clericalist (presumably an extreme form of being anti-clerical)? I can think of a few clerics I feel very anti about.
Fifty years is a long time to be patient. We must insist on getting this Modernist crowd out of the CC forever. Too much esteem shown to bad people who won’t acknowledge the Triune Godhead but only are interested in cosying-up to the enemies of Catholicism. The four Cardinals & their supporters need outward support as well as our prayers etc. to let them know their efforts are appreciated & urge them to continue with haste rather than sit around waiting for PF’s response before taking another step forward.
Oh, Lord, how long!!!???
I think it will be a matter of months or a year or two – not another fifty years.
That’s a topic. Clericalism.
It means different things depending on who is using it. Off the cuff I’d say political types use it to defame all clerics simply because they are clerics. Within the Church clericalism is a pejorative employed to describe priests who wield the authority of their office as if it was constitutive of their person and not a grace to aid the faithful.
Sometimes authority needs to be heavy handed, most times not. All men are weak and easily self-inflatable. It happens. A lot. Even at this very keyboard and I’m “only” a layman.
Clericalism is most egregious and pronounced in what Pope Benedict referred to as careerism – wanting to get ahead in the thirst for personal recognition and the exercise of authority. Everyone needs a pat on the back. Good service deserves recognition. But a gluttonous appetite for power in opposition to a vocation to serve will not do. Given original sin it is however endemic.
Briefly compare and contrast John Paul, Benedict and Francis.
John Paul was by the grace of God an enormously talented individual – at once made for the stage, made to proclaim, tender and paternal. Not without weakness – a poor administrator to be sure.
Benedict. Steadfast, brilliant, loyal, courageous in his prayerful search for truth, humble in the willingness to self-correct (in some instances far too much so).
Francis. Leftwing slogans, nanny speak, pious poetics, pejoratives directed toward the laity, shrill toward his confreres. And that is only the beginning.
He was a failure in the Society of Jesus, and only slipped ahead because of JPII’s lack of human resource support and acumen, misplaced pity, and a certain naiveté. He was held in low regard in Argentina. His persona provided a usefulness to the St. Gallen group and proved his winning card. They gave him acknowledgement which he craves. He cooperated with them. A stunning example of viral clericalism in success mode. But that success is employed in the deconstruction of Roman Catholicism, “reforming” the Church according to his own lights. Some are infallible from birth.
The only clericalism he objects to is that which he “perceives” in those who provide obstacles to his agenda, which is a calculated payback for the slights and defamations he has experienced in his – career.
James: A very interesting analysis. But what exactly did the St Gallen group see in Bergoglio? The only member of that group whom I know tolerably well is Cardinal Cormac Murphy O’Connor in that I have watched him as my diocesan Bishop and then as Cardinal. He has always struck me as a platitudinous non-entity who has got where he is by some strange form of entropy. He seems to stand for nothing in particular and will stand up for no principle. I just see him as one of Satan’s useful idiots. But perhaps I am missing something.
I don’t think you are missing anything.
Really … how could any of them have any credence with any mature individual to move and shake an election? It’s all who you know, how you work it, who you hang with. The idea that Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, Carlo Marini or Godfried Danneels would have responsibility for a fish tank over a long weekend is frightening. But within that world they did and do wield power.
It beats me. It horrifies me. But I am a groundling – I never “made it” to
the top in anything.
1Peter5 had an interesting post on this.
https://onepeterfive.wpengine.com/vatican-conspiracy-against-pope-benedict-for-pope-francis/
One thing in which I’ve taken the greatest “delight” is how they pulled the first edition of the Bergoglio biography by Austen Ivereigh which had “too much information.” The delightful aspect of that “pull” is they recognized their egregious behavior had gone public and believe we are so stupid not to recognize their shenanigans.
“Let’s just pretend nobody read that.”
Rome on denial rather than the Tiber.
I will go to my death laughing over their slapstick tomfoolery.
Or more likely crying.
It broadcasts loudly who and what they are. Talk about “hand in the cookie jar,” “caught with your pants down,” and “the emperor has no clothes” — all in one.
They hold us to be fools.
“He has always struck me as a platitudinous non-entity who has got where he is by some strange form of entropy.”
That is one of the best descriptions of that vacuous idiot that I have ever seen!
However, there is a common thread and calling which links CMOC, Kasper, Bergoglio and the rest of the “St Gallen mafia.” Their careers and their red hats have all been positively regarded because of their involvement in their respective ecumenical scenes and have been prepared to compromise the Catholic Faith in order to suit proddie sects. CMOC was the compromising chairman of ARCIC, Kasper was head of the Pontifical Council for Promoting “Christian Unity” and actively involved in the compromising dialogues with Lutherans, Bergoglio was active with the Anglicans “of the Southern Cone” and was so anti-evangelistic that he told “bishop” Greg Venables that nobody needed to become Catholic and it was better if they all remained Anglican. Danneels, Marx and others are all of the same compromising ecumenical stripe. They have all given up on the Catholic Church long ago which they see as just one “Christian denomination” and all the rest are equally valid “paths up the mountain to God.”
Francis and his “reforms” are just another step in that journey to perdition where the Catholic Church falls in line with Protestant heresies. CMOC has been a key player in this plan for decades and it is probably the reason why the St Gallen crowd let him into their nefarious circle.
Job security.
It would seem so.
Cdl. Napier has just come out publicly in support of the 4 Cardinals and the Dubia. But………some of these men are as slow as molasses in January!!!
That’s good news & at long last. Can you link me to where you read that please?
Ask God, their Boss.
If everything is sacred nothing is sacred and if we are all
sinners then no one is.
When I walk out of Confession I am no longer a sinner.
Everything created by God is sacred by the fact He termed His creation good. Man himself is created in the image and likeness of God, recreated by the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ – the New Adam – the First Born of the New Creation, conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the New Eve – the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Then, read well 1 John 1:8.
We are all sinners by virtue of original sin, not simply by our actual sins
themselves (mortal or venial in nature). Not being a theologian myself I suggest you consult the Catechism, but I believe it is safe to say that by Baptism original
sin is remitted and makes us available to God’s free gift of Himself (grace),
but a consequence of original sin – concupiscence (a persistent vulnerability
to moral rebelliousness) – remains. In this regard we are all always sinners,
prone to gluttony (any and all inordinate appetites), lust, avarice, pride,
sadness (envy), wrath, boasting, acedia (sloth or dejection).
The early desert Fathers had much to say about all this – like Evagrius of
Pontus and St. John Cassian. The battle that is the spiritual life is the
effort to abandon, eradicate, this constitutive vice, grow in the virtues (faith,
hope, charity, prudence, justice, temperance, fortitude) and attain to union
with God. This condition of concupiscence is a central notion of Christian
anthropology. All the great spiritual writers, the mystics and saints are about this effort. Salvation by Jesus Christ dashes its triumph in our lives if we persist in faith and good works.
Read well 1 John 3:2.
Sacred means set apart…..not ordinary. If everything is deemed sacred then
nothing is set apart…all becomes ordinary and nothing is sacred.
The sacrament of Baptism removes the stain of original sin from our souls
as you say and renders us sinless but with a tendency toward sin. A tendency or a temptation is not sinful.
Quite frankly this “we are all sinners” comment is used by libs to lessen the gravity of sin (aside from reeking of false humility). In other words don’t tell
me what I’m doing wrong you’re a sinner too…..or no one is reallyresponsible
because everyone is in the same boat.
One needs to be very careful not to go along with the Modernist agenda.
Well isn’t that the “genius” of the Modernists — their ability to hijack vocabulary, ideas, revelation itself, and reinvent it, throw the groundlings a chunk of piety, and they come off smelling like a rose.
As for the hypocrisy stone — so overused as to be comical. They cannot call upon the words of the Savior in whom they don’t believe or have reinvented for their own comfort.
Don’t let their abuse blind you to the deepest realities which I cited.
Rest assured, mystical theology is no friend of the modernist adversaries who walk amongst us.
God bless you.
Allow me to insist that if the following of ONE commandment becomes a matter of conscience, that is not a small thing, ALL commandments become also a matter of conscience. So the obligation to sustain the Church with our hard earned money is also a matter of conscience. Well, MY conscience says that if my alms are going to feed heretics and good for nothing perverts I rather not collaborate until I am personally sure that the Church has been reasonably cleared of such wrongdoers. May be the United Nations will feed you but not me. And I am starting THIS Sunday. Let us all hold our donations for 40 days. You will see how traditional “The Jesuit” gets.
It would be marvellous if we could get Catholics to boycott the collection plate or to put in notes telling them to sign the Dubia instead, but I suppose that would be impossible to organise.
We are One Body … we can pray.
Dear Christian,
Agreed the Princes of the Church are taking the action and I’m up for prayer!
I strongly agree. My pastor is faithful and I will not penalize the parish. But the bishop of the diocese is more than worrisome. I will withhold my contribution to the diocesan annual fund in 2017 and I have already redirected that robust
donation to a Roman Catholic enterprise I can count on. I will not mention its name but we are all aware of opportunities where the money will be used for the faith without compromise.
I look forward to placing my protest in the appeal envelope in a few weeks.
It is done, and it will continue annually until there is a manly call to order by the Bishop of Rome.
Send it to FSSP. No support modernism. Vatican indeed gets a lot of financial support from NWO billionaire George Soros.
That’s even exactly what I have done! Good faithful traditional priests need our support not condom distributors or Francis fan-club charities who add to the problem by adding his quotes to every letter they send. I love the ideas a few of you put forth- writing on bank notes and placing notes in collection envelopes. We all have serious concerns. Be prepared to place your money in the fruitful place to multiply the Master’s talents. The good shepherds will then be able to truly feed the flock that remains true after the rest defect.
Don’t make public to whom you are making the contribution. It could cause the recipient to receive some backlash.
Dear James, we will try to do the same! Thank you to everyone that has suggested this idea.
in Christ.
Christopher.
I gave a little extra to the Parish I attended today as the Priest allowed a collection for the pro-life organisation.
My own Parish though has refused to take the collection and I will be reducing the amount I give even further
There are plenty of good Bishops around who can be supported (though not too many in England) and other Catholic organisations that deserve funding such as 1P5.
But really I find handing money on the collection plate more and more worrying.
Don’t let your right hand know what your left hand is doing…. just put you donation in and say a prayer Jesus will take care of it. .
Don’t worry about whose stealing it etc…
Good approach. The anonymous protest envelope should state the amount of the re-direction and the reason; nothing more.
If your diocese is a corporation sole (most in the U.S. are) then each and every Sunday collection goes to the bishop, not the parish. For most Catholics in the U.S., “giving to the parish” is a convenient fiction.
That’s a reality sandwich. We have a collection “for the parish” each week, one for our school each month, and one for the poor each month.
I suppose checking the diocesan web site might shed some light on this.
Thanks for the heads up — but they got the bucks for the year already…
Not quite true. Collections go to the parish, and the parish in turn pays a “tax” or “assessment” to the diocese. In cases where the diocese has loaned funds for parish building projects, there may be a repayment schedule for that as well.
In a Corporation Sole diocese, parish funds are typically swept into a central diocesean bank account—the money is the property of the bishop in office. Parish expenses are funded by the diocese (e.g., ask your priest how he’s getting paid–through the diocese or through the parish? Who provides and pays for his car and car insurance? etc.) Certainly the diocese keeps tabs on what’s coming in and going out from each parish (or should) but parish are sometimes allowed to “overdraw” or exceed their contributions over expenses–can go on for decades .
Who would lead? Hard to organize when are leaders are either faithless or cowards.
You are so right,,, all these macho macho parishioners,,,, ain’t got a nacho thing….
The real leaders of our Church are incorruptible, indestructible, immortal, and they love the faithful: God, His Saints, and His Holy Angels.. We have the most powerful weapon known to man: the Holy Rosary. Pray, pray, pray and ask in the way Jesus instructed to Bishop Oliver Dashe Doeme: “Boko Haram is no more” but instead of saying “Boko Haram” [ http://tinyurl.com/gpfpx9t ] simply say “The corrupt in the Church are no more” on every decade just after the Our Father. Let us all do this since it is not against the faith to ask God to defend us.
Correction for you: “God”, not “Dog”.
Awful typo! Thank you for letting me know! God bless!
No money from the Sunday collection goes to Rome.
The CHURCH is not Rome. Believe me, if alms go down 20% Rome will hear about it.
I’m sure they will – they hear about everything, particularly where money is concerned.
Funny that they altered EVERYTHING in the Holy Mass, except the collection of alms.
They go to the Diocese which is an arm of Rome. I was trying to get our local PP to have a separate account for our church only but this didn’t get off the ground. Probably afraid someone might report him. The Vatican isn’t the only place to have spies!
Nope won’t work
I did not realize that the four cardinals approached Francis in private and he in essence refused to answer them. The word that comes to mind is arrogance.They have done everything in their power to be charitable and respectful. For Francis to not even give them a respectful answer places him in a very very bad light, especially when you contrast his behavior with the fantastic four. Pride cometh before the fall.
They waited for his response for almost 2 months before going public.
Oh yes now I remember this time factor coming up at our catechism class. My aging brain. They were left with no alternative as they knew that it would not be dealt with and their very well informed consciences would not allow it to go unanswered. Are not cardinal Caffara’s eyes so full of Christ like kindness and meekness?
According to the rules you have to wait six months after two warnings have been issued. Go to The Remnant Newspaper with the article “If the Pope refuses to answer the Dubia. What happens next?”
Rules?
Can you give a link to this article? I did a search and didn’t easily find it.
As far as these things go, there is no established canonical process so, as far as I see, there is no specific timeline. And technically, no warning have been issued. Simply some questions. That’s all the dubia are.
You are right, and I wish others could make these distinctions.
Thus, the very next step will not be a “formal correction” to the pope regarding AL precisely because the first step was merely asking questions.
They will not immediately leap from merely “asking questions” because statements are “ambiguous” and “need clarification” to a slam and bam “formal correction” because suddenly there are “clearly errors” in AL.
What I mean, there must be an interim time (of correspondence or lack thereof) between The Dubia and a public formal correction. This will be something private between the cardinals and the pope and certainly not known to us at the time, which is likely happening now. This would probably be two things 1.) informing the Holy Father that there seem to be actual “errors” to them this time, and not just “ambiguity” as was previously implied, and the respectful petition for a response and, if no response 2.) a subsequent warning that if there is no response very soon, they will issue a “public formal correction” for the whole Church.
This interim time is going to be private and it’s going to take probably a few months…at least.
A council is formed and Francis forfeits the papacy.. that is if he doesn’t change the error.
an error can effect a revolution within the church. I reckon AL has already increased the number of divorces among catholics by a few million worldwide– and i think the millions of children who are effected by this should be represented by a canon lawyer–with the mothers knocking down the walls of the popes palace demanding restitution… how then would Pope francis respond? O for a pope for the poor- the chaldean being persecuted, the underground Chinese, Cuban and Viet Catholic, for those tirelessly defending the innocent unborn day in and day out, the mother who attends her large family, the father who works hard to provide for the family! A pope who understands the trappings of the west and the evil mentality of those who want to protect the systemic cause of the collapse of civilisation
Are bumper stickers available saying something like, “I support the 4 Cardinals” or “Answer the Dubia Pope Francis”? I know it’s not much , but at least it would publisize an issue that is mostly invisible to most Catholics and certainly to most Protestants.
In all reality, I’m not sure such would be appropriate. It politicizes the issue, which isn’t the point of this endeavor. In fact, the cardinals specifically stated that it should not be politicized when they first went public. This has much more in common with a family having an intervention with an alcoholic father who is simply not listening than with a political issue. I could be wrong, but it just doesn’t seem appropriate…
I emphatically do not agree. Cockroaches hide in the dark. The issues surrounding former changes in the mass and now changes in doctrine should not be hidden. Pressure has to be brought to bear on the pope,otherwise he has no incentive to reconsider these changes or even stop him from taking punitive actions against the 4 Cardinals. I’m sorry, but, prayer, fasting and penance are not enough. Organizing an underground church has to be part of the plan. If most Catholics don’t know or are not made aware that there is a problem outside the internet, very few of them will even realize that a problem exists.
When I was a teenager, back in the 1960’s a wife with 6 children, I knew from my parish, was given an annulment by our diocesan marriage tribunnal. I can’t tell you the scandal it caused. The husband was heartbroken while the wife went off and married her lover, in the church. That was approximately 50 years ago. Now this pope wants to codify in stone the injustice that was done to that husband and children. I knew nothing about the Vatican and very little about Vatican II. Don’t give me this BS that this is being politicized. It already has been and the innocent are being slain.
I believe the VII NO generation are too afraid of ‘offending’ – the Pope, the Bishop, the Priest, the Muslims, the Protestants, their neighbour who votes for a different party etc. etc. They have not had to stand up for their principles (assuming they have any) & are incredulous of those who do, branding them trouble-makers. Even our clerics keep their mouths shut when they should be screaming their dissent against the present regime no matter what the Bishop thinks. Unfortunately, there is always a price to pay but the price of losing one’s heavenly inheritance is not to be compared.
Good Idea. Make them and I will buy one.
If the Holy Father thinks he is right then it would be better he answers the Dubia. Because if he does not then he gives the impression to the Church that he wants the ambiguity to be there on purpose. If he answers the Dubia then his stance would be clear, whatever that stance is. If his stance is that he is right on allowing Communion for the civilly remarried divorced then at least it is clear that the Holy Father is against the teaching of St. Pope John Paul 2 whom he himself declared a saint. All in all his answer to the Dubia would prove whether he is truly humble to admit his errors in AL or his humility is only an outward show to the whole world. Not answering the Dubia shows his pride and nothing else. A truly humble person would have answered the authentic doubts that his own team of Cardinals have asked him sincerely and respectfully. By not answering or by keeping quiet when the Dubia Cardinals are being insulted in public by the liberal Cardinals does not show any humility on the part of the Holy Father but rather lack of care for the souls of the Catholics whose shepherd he is. Is not the Pope called ‘a servant of servants’? I don’t see this servant attitude in Pope Francis if he does not answer the Dubia. He may not answer according to the understanding of the 4 Cardinals but he has to answer so that his mind on this matter is clear beyond a shadow of doubt. He owes at least this much to his cardinals whom he leads. In John’s gospel many times the apostles did not understand what Jesus meant when he said something but they discussed it among themselves but Jesus would understand they had doubts and answer them to clear their doubts. Here the 4 Cardinals have genuine doubts about some teachings of the Pope in AL which they have queried him in writing very respectfully and he does not answer them. The Vicar of Christ does not seem to have the openness of Christ whom he serves. Very very sad indeed. If the Pope does not change himself he will go down in history as the Pope of Confusion in the Church. Would he want this dubious distinction?
While Jorge Bergoglio offends our Lord Jesus Christ by twisting His teaching, this Cardinal expresses utmost respect for Bergoglio.
He also claims that he needs clarification from the pope. He will never be successful, because he is dishonest. He does NOT need clarification, because Bergoglio and team have provided it in spades. The wicked machinations of Jorge Bergoglio and his method of deliberate obfuscation of truth are well known and documented.
AL is already being implemented, Catholics around the world are already taught grave error, and they follow false teachings, leading them to life of unrepented sin. This is absolutely clear to anyone who wants to know.
No follower of Jesus Christ, who truly loves Him, and who believes He is a just though loving God, would insist on giving respect to those who insult Jesus Christ and who lead souls to hell by lovingly accompanying grave sins.
The Cardinals are trying to be diplomatic. These are very serious issues that have rarely been brought up by anyone post-Vatican II. I admire their fortitude. I also understand your point that the Pope does not deserve such consideration.
I would rather they dropped this so called diplomacy, and said yes for yes, and no for no.
Jorge Bergoglio is not showing any diplomacy, when firing faithful clergy form positions of influence over the flock, and bashing laity for faithfulness to Jesus Christ.
He is not showing any decency, when preaching dialogue while refusing to dialogue with faithful Catholics or Cardinal Mueller – I fire whomever I want, because I am the pope.
Souls are being lost by the millions, it seems. This is time for truth, not diplomacy.
I heartily agree. As I’ve said elsewhere we need a strategy and organization. The real question is will any prelates faithful to Jesus be left for such a task in 5 years?
This is why I cannot respect his ascension to the Seat of Peter. The question of two popes needs proper clarification as it is more in keeping with the prophecy of St. Francis of Assisi when he said there would be two popes, one not canonically elected but a destroyer.
It sickens me to see desperate Catholics putting their hopes in those 4 cardinals/bishops who, like Bergoglio, have been seduced by Modernism, the worst of all heresies. They don’t tippy-toe around Francis for the sake of “diplomacy”. That’s shallow nonsense. They do so because they are morally compromised by the evil that has infiltrated the church STARTING with Vatll. Their differences from Bergoglio are a matter of degree, not of kind. He has no Catholic faith in his soul; theirs is compromised.
They lack the humility(the fab 4)to see their own arrogance, their own blindness and pride. They are incapable of calling evil by its right name.
Bergoglio is evil. And if those four fools were responding to the Holy Spirit, they would be demanding that he recant and repent because if he does not his soul will be damned forever. Instead, they hide behind protocol. And they agree with some or many of Francis’ heresies. Like the heresy of ecumenism. Can any honest Catholic believe that Pope Leo Xlll or St Pius X, before their pontificates, would put up with the endless blasphemies that are spewed forth daily by this reprobate.
It is good to meet a like-minded person sometimes. One finds herself isolated much too often – isolated from a world, where reason and decency rule.
We know that in the post-modern world, reason is claimed to be a tool of oppression, and decency is an ability to cooperate with all evil, without judgement.
Thanks. The feeling is mutual. So many of the Trad Catholics, bloggers and commenters, cling to the fragile hope that Burke, and the other three, are going to get the church back on track, so to speak. All because, they’re not willing to see the depth of church corruption, going back to and including Vatll. And those 4 are a mix of heretical and faithfullness to Catholic dogmas. Tragically, their, no doubt, material heresies undermine their Catholic resolve, and they come across as simpering idiots, so eager to please Francis, and to avoid giving offence, at any cost. Like, Cardinal Burke sees no problems with Francis’ “year of mercy”.
And I’m not a Sedevacantist. But the evidence is overwhelming that Vat ll and every single one of the popes since then was seduced by the heresy of Modernism. So to deny the evidence would make me a fool.
Even Ann Barnhardt, who pulls no punches, had to find a way to convince herself that BXVl is the pope and Francis the usurper.
I’m convinced that Francis is an apostate. That doesn’t mean I think I’m infallible or that I think I can’t be wrong. Of course I can. Even though the public evidence weighs very heavily against him. It will take a future pope to make the final infallible judgement against him.
Let’s be honest as well as realistic – no future pope or hierarchy is going to rescind VII. The best we can hope to get is the worst bits removed, if even that. So, in fact, any future pope will also be of the VII school, even Cardinal Sarah, who seems a holy man. The wickedness is so bad that Divine intervention will have to occur in order to turn around the CC, as its beyond human endeavour. Canon Law binds the four Cardinals into following a procedure that we all wish wasn’t obligatory. Not only they say it must be followed but all the theologians & academics also. Would that it were different.
That is why Our Lady will have to intervene with Our Father’s permission.
Yes, it is the only solution.
I agree that it’s going to take Divine intervention. The corruption is so deep, so widespread, so entrenched. As to Vatll, perhaps some of the documents can be salvaged.
But I think you’re missing a point I tried to make. Are bishops/cardinals slaves to canon law. Material heresy is also against canon law, but it did not stop the conciliar popes, and now Burke, et al. The church has become so fastidious thanks to Modernist popes like the timid Benedict. I point him out, because he is so spineless. But it’s all of the conciliar popes. The church was so much more robust and earthy back before the 20th century.
The point you don’t see has more to do with the spiritual than with the correct rubrics of canon law. This apologetic approach of the fab 4 is not prescribed by canon law, and it’s the default position they take because it’s all they are capable of, since their own souls, compromised by Modernism, prevents them from standing up for truth like real men.
And supposing Francis decides to satisfactorily answer their 5 questions? Which he won’t. What then? Is that the end of his heresies? Burke and the others agree with many of Bergoglio’s heresies like the “year of mercy”, ecumenism with Protestants, out reach to world non-Christian religions. So it’s not just Francis who has to recant and repent.
And what happens after Francis shows his backbone once again? And right now he’s the only bishop that I’m aware of who has any spine, albeit, tragically committed to the destruction of Christ’s church. He will never recant. To believe that he will is delusional. He is completely convinced(the sin of pride writ large)that he is doing God’s Will, and he sees the 4 as pip squeaks(didn’t he exclaim recently, that he does not understand why seniors are afraid to die? What does that tell you about his arrogance and sin of presumption?)interfering with his grand vision for the church. What then???
You might believe that the 4 will get tough then once they follow the rubrics. But they’ve already revealed their true colours. They are morally compromised Modernists. And they just do not have the “right stuff” to do the dirty work that the Holy Spirit calls them too.
We have all been told that this is the only procedure possibly allowed by Canon Law. Even academics & lay theologians have all agreed on that point. Canon Lawyers (including the saints) didn’t apparently think that such an obstinate, heretical, blaspheming pope in the grip of Satan would ever sit on the Seat of Peter & didn’t therefore write a canon to correct such a possible occurrence. At least, that is what I read into what all experts have said in this regard. If there is a way around this other than by the path the four Cardinals are taking, we should be made aware of how to set about it with the greatest haste ,as PF is not able to answer the Dubia (as we all know) & therefore won’t. He will just go on & on making up new rules to suit his & the St. Gallen Group (Mafia) Agenda & it is very displeasing that the rest of the Hierarchy are allowing him to do this. Many of them, I’m sure by now, deeply regret voting for him but they must make their voices felt & lean on him heavily to resign as St. Gallen Group did on PB.
I would dearly love the VII Council to be revoked but is that not illogical? If the Cardinals would collectively remove PF & vote in a more Traditional man as pope that would properly restore the Old Rite, all the sacraments, devotions, catechesis, & rescind AL in full so that the Ten Commandments would be restored for all time, didn’t meet with abortionists, show respect for Luther, give interviews to atheistic journalists or on plane trips, & upheld all the precepts of the CC as laid down by Christ & the First Apostles, then VII would sink into irrelevance.
We are not that far apart after all. I value that you grasp just how awful the church’s predicament really is. Now, in light of that, isn’t it unrealistic to expect anything worthwhile from Burke, who has no idea that the church can only be saved by Christ’s direct intervention, and who is part of the problem anyway, that the fool doesn’t even see at all.
I can’t imagine that Bellarmine would dare to believe that a thug like Bergoglio would ever seize the unlimited power he has taken as his “right”. Would he state today that a pope’s heresy not only has to be made public, but that it has to be made MANIFEST, which apparently, he saw no way to measure if the heresy was real or not. Obviously, he could not have foreseen someone as corrupt as Bergoglio who endlessly blasphemes and preaches heresies(that’s sufficiently manifest for me) and makes Luther look like a sweetfaced altarboy. Francis, who is a “diabolical narcissist” by Ann Barnhardt’s reckoning. And of course he is as long as it’s understood spiritually as coming from the pride of Satan.
And as far as theoligians are concerned, they may have mastered canon law, but with few exceptions are cautious to the point of obdurate stupidity.
This is the greatest crisis that has ever hit the CC & no-one was prepared for it. Those that should be knowledgeable about the best way to tackle it don’t have the guts nor the spiritual armoury to do so because Bellarmine, Suarez et al never dreamt of such a thing happening & their advice is therefore not strong enough to canonically deal with the situation. It is hard to believe that one man can be so powerful that no-one but God can judge him. Even when he is acting against God’s Law & sending souls to damnation no one feels empowered to try & stop him. Neither has he ever spoken ex cathedra – the very fact that they claim him to be Pope gives him the power he needs to wreck 2,000 years of Catholic teaching.
At least the four Cardinals have brought the world’s attention to this drastic situation but need to finalise what they started quickly & not be willing to give PF more time to arrange more synods to introduce a married clergy, women deacons, etc. Nor do we want him representing the CC at Fatima like he represented the Church in Lund. I wrote him beforehand saying he didn’t represent me or my family – I felt it my duty to do so. i read where even secularists are taking note & many changing their minds about Francis.
The Islamisation of Europe is well under way & PF taking three Muslim families to Rome & leaving behind Christians in Lesbos was a huge blunder. Our church still shows videos of them coming over by boat in huge numbers & PF requesting them to be looked after. He refers to them as refugees which they are not (in the main) but young, fit, male adults of fighting age who have already caused devastation in the countries that did take them in. He has no fear of dying because he doesn’t IMO believe in God, Hell, damnation but won’t come right out & say it as that might end the NWO agenda.
I sympathize, but protocols and procedures are essential to the proper governance of any complex entity. The Roman Catholic Church is a classically complex institution — in the best sense. Its fall from grace in the past almost sixty years has been in no small part the abandonment of protocols and procedures. The very jettisoning of the initial agenda for the Vatican Council II and the form and composition of its declarations are a prime example of the problem. Those that hijacked that council deliberately employed a different means of writing their texts inorder to create an ambiguity in the thought of the Church in order to bring about a radically different entity with the same name.
The respect for protocol exhibited by the four cardinals is actually a strong component in their approach. It serves as a subliminal call to order — and serves to contrast the peculiar responses and behavior of the Kaperian Bergoglians.
It is frustrating. But witness the chaos that Francis’ bizarre style brings to the life of the Church. Nothing is getting done — only in-house fighting while the world gone mad cries for the clarity of faith and reason embodied in the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Let keep praying. We got a long way to go yet.
You are correct, of course.
The knowledge and faithfulness, and on personal level – tact, fairness, honesty, and generosity of the Cardinals, is what Jorge Bergoglio frames as rigidity and hypocrisy. He then uses this false narrative against them.
I understand that procedures need to be followed, that an honourable person should not stoop to the level of a dishonest one, no matter what the circumstances are, but… it would help, if the laity and faithful bishops and priests received support in form of clear statements regarding the known machinations and ridiculous theological statements and propositions of the current pope.
Apart from respect for the pope (however undeserved), there is the question of respect and fear of our just Lord God, and the issue of care for the salvation of the laity, as well as a greater responsibility as a shepherd. Many are following Bergoglio’s false teachings/pastoral solutions, and many have died following him rather than Jesus Christ.
This should be unacceptable to a good shepherd. I find it cowardly and unacceptable, morally wrong. Diplomacy, proper procedure, meekness – these should take a back-seat to a correct proclamation of the Gospel, and to salvation.
Bergoglio’s “creative” approach to the Gospel is deceptive, vulgar and harmful. I believe that Jesus Christ our Lord is very angry about this. He would not stand by and tolerate this depravity. We know He never valued procedure and tradition more than Truth. And He told us to follow Him, to strive to be like Him.
Fear of God leads to respect for the pope.
Respect does not mean respecting error, but it also does not mean deriding the person
The Cardinal respects the office of the papacy. His personal opinion of PF is not
stated. It is probably a courtesy on his part to defend the position of the four
cardinal’s letter to PF but probably unnecessary . Cardinals certainly have a right
and ,in fact, a duty to ask for clarification of papal pronouncements when they are not only unclear but an obfuscation of Catholic belief and a danger to souls.
It is the length of time that it takes to remove a holder of the Papal Office whom most people understand to be a heretic & blasphemer & who is out to extinguish Christ’s Church on earth & probably not canonically elected as per St. Francis of Assisi’s prophecy, that grates with most Traditional Catholics.
True, true.
I have prayed to God for a long time to inspire Pope Francis to change his ways but I don’t see him doing that in the last almost 4 yrs of his Papacy. He has spread so much confusion among Catholics through his words and deeds ever since his election as Pope on Mar 13, 2013. The only people who are happy with his teachings and deeds are the worldly people(including many worldly Roman Catholics) who want their liberal agenda to be accepted in the whole world. Last thing I can do, I have already started doing: praying the Divine Mercy Chaplet everyday asking the Lord ardently to make inactive all those who are Church’s enemies, whether they are enemies from outside or wolves in sheep’s clothing from inside who are more dangerous. I asked the Lord to chastise the Pope and the liberal cardinals who are spreading Apostasy in the Church rather than allowing the Apostasy to spread and then chastise the whole Church for that. Hope the Lord answers my prayers. If many people join me in praying specific prayers to the Lord like this we can have Pope Francis resigning probably and a more worthy Pope coming onto the seat of Peter who would reverse all his wrong decisions made till date. May Jesus, the true Shepherd, hear the prayers of sincere Catholics all over the world and do the necessary changes in the Church soon so that many souls may be saved from being lost by the leaven of false teaching. Our Cardinals who should be ready to die for Christ are not even having the courage to come out in support of the 4 courageous Cardinals. It is like they are having a tape on their mouths and this tape is there because they are more bothered about losing their positions in the Church. They keep quiet even when the 4 Cardinals are insulted in public by the liberal Cardinals of the Church. Who has made these liberal cardinals the mouthpiece of the Pope? Why don’t they just keep mum and let the Pope answer, the Dubia is not addressed to them but to the Pope, so why are they making any comments in public?
Our Lady has real friends and good shepherds in these Cardinals. May almighty God continue in the graces he gives them in these deeply troubling times.
What we are witnessing now are the heretical outcomes of Vatican II which are spreading across the world like a fire storm as more and more Bishops accept and promote the corrupt teaching of Amoris Laetitia.
Here is a another opinion on this matter by Michael Matt at the Remnant who is a brother of Joseph Matt at the Wanderer. The Remnant has been on top of this situation since the beginning.
http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/2984-blessing-adultery-christ-the-judgmental-vs-francis-the-humble
Action is required now. Let us pray that Our Lady of Fatima will come to the rescue.
I love Cardinal Caffarra, He with the other Cardinals that have taken action just have the Holy Spirit flowing through them.
I hope with all my heart that they win the battle that is confronting us. Praying for those that are “fighting the good fight” and those that are on the wrong side of the truth praying that they convert!
Cardinal Caffarra looks good because all the others Cardinals are feckless craven cowards. I want a Cardinal to speak plainly and call the Pope a heretic (we all know he is) who is trying to destroy the Church.
They have to go through so many procedures that we’ll all be dead (including PF) before they finish.
Lol yeah what’s the hurry. Everyone is on the scene, including the false prophet, one world religion, anti christ. Enoch and Elijah well, not sort of,,,
Actually, this article gives a detailed account of what has to happen.
http://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/fetzen-fliegen/item/2981-pope-francis-refuses-to-answer-the-dubia-what-happens-next
It seems that many in the Church have taken on the worldly attitude that new is better, the new car is more reliable than older cars, the newest medicines are saving more lives, new computers are faster and more powerful than old ones, even new people are more healthy then old one, thus new beliefs are more enlightened than old ones.
God is old, infinitly old, are we to believe we need a new one? They are doing just that, going directly against the words of Jesus Christ. New teaching not taught in two thousand years of the Church.
The more I see this, the more I realize the validity of the stand of the SSPX. We must obey Jesus Christ and his Church, but as God exists in eternity, unchanging, likewise the Church stands unchanging. As the old testament is a testament to Gods people throughout history, we see how evil kings took power and turned the people against God, yet they were still Gods people and with time God would deliver them from these evil kings through the faithful prophets and people. Likewise, we must stand fast with God, his teachings, his Church, and his prophets like Cardinals Burke and Caffarra. One day God will deliver us from the rule of the evil kings who turn his people away from him, but we must remain faithful.
Could be as simple as a Pope who changes a Divine Institution for his sister to feel better about her adulterous situation- South American dictatorship 101. He grew up under Peron, his wife was a hooker- explains a lot.
Few now remember that in 1934 (October 10 to 14) the Eucharistic Congress took place in Buenos Aires, presided by Cardenal Eugenio Pacelli (later Pius XII) Argentina was then governed by a de facto regime after a military coup led by Gen. Uriburu interrupted seven decades of peaceful and prosperous governance by the Conservatives. Gen. Uriburu was an unapologetic Nazi and was quickly sent packing and replaced by the more moderate Agustin Pedro Justo, “elected” for the occasion. Pres. Justo was a Mason but something happened during the Eucharistic Congress and he publicly reverted to the Catholic Faith of his infancy. Thousands upon thousands of thieves, prostitutes, adulterers, and all kinds of notorious public sinners lined up along the Avenida de Mayo to confess their sins. Until the recent gatherings of Catholic Youth in Europe that Congress in Buenos Aires was the most massive gathering of Christians ever. It is common belief among Argentines of faith that the Eucharistic Congress took Satan by surprise and he did not like it. The devil prepared a scoundrel called Gen. Juan Peron, a Fascist widower who had a liaison with a talentless radio and porn actress called Eva Duarte. Together they made a mockery of the figures of Christ and Our Blessed Mother by developing an iconography that survives to this day among the ignorant. Eva was called the “Mother of the Nation” and “Jefa Espiritual de la Nación” among other semi blasphemous titles. She died of ovarian cancer and not long after that the Catholic churches of Buenos Aires were sacked and burned in a sort of Kristallnacht that was later blamed on the Communists (whom, at the time obviously lacked the means to do such thing.) Since the arrival of the malefic triad of anti Catholic political chieftains Irigoyen, Uriburu, and Peron (representing the Radical Party, the Military Party, and of course the Peronist Party respectively) Argentina has become and example of how NOT to run a country, falling from the top 10 economies in the world to the company of countries like Uganda and Mali. I am inclined to believe that the devil prepared a long series of incompetent clowns to run one of the most fertile, and resource-rich countries in the world to avenge the many souls he lost in 1934.
Our present Pontifex was a follower of Juan Peron in his youth. His style of publicly posturing as a “man of the people” while cultivating an authoritarian –some say despotic– management style is very much taken from Peron’s book. One does not know why God has allowed Argentina to suffer that fate, and why He is allowing the Throne of Peter to be occupied by such person. It is true there were worse Popes — Alexander VI comes to mind — but lately our present Pope seems most inadequate to lead the Church in this age. However, God knows best and He will not leave us completely. Peron was a man who dominated Argentine Politics for seven decades. None of his projects ever worked and in fact today he is a model among many contenders of how to be an ineffective leader. The apple does not fall far from the tree it seems.
Along with a cohabiting nephew, and a niece who married a divorced man.
This is boiling down to a confrontation between the sacred and the profane. The Sacred side relying in the teachings of the Church and the Words of Jesus to make their arguments, the profane side relying on bullying tactics and the use of profane terminology to refer to those who oppose them, since they don’t have a coherent response to that sacred argument. Terms such as coprophagia, a term a holy person would never use to describe those who oppose them, marking the one who makes such a reference as less than holy. It is clear who represents the Sacred side and who betrays the presence of the profane right down to the very essence of their being. The Third Secret of Fatima is being fulfilled before our very eyes. By the way there is an excellent documentary on Netflix which was made available today, referencing Malachi Martin, called “Hostage to the Devil”. It is excellent, and for those who know Father Martin spoke the Truth, a welcome confirmation of that very fact, almost 20 years after his death.
It is indeed a war between the wicked (devil) & the good, but it is high time that those on the good side got bolder & fought with the mind & zeal of combatants, which they are not doing for fear of damaging the Papal Office & all that it stands for, while PF completely treats the papacy with disdain & continues to do great harm to the structure of the CC because he is the pope & he will give the orders. There must be someone in the Hierarchy that has read the Third Secret of Fatima so why don’t they reveal it in full? It is blind obedience that has brought us to this dark place – we should discard that stance immediately as the present destruction of the True Faith demands that we do. The Apostasy did indeed start at the top as Our Lady predicted & now we are all caught up in it.
Hi Ana – There is but one fence that separates the wicked side and the good side, and that is the Truth. The line the Truth creates does not shift nor does it meander, for it is built by God. Jesus I Trust in You.
” . . . marking the one who makes such a reference [to coprophagia] as less than holy.”
I think you’re being tactful here, because we’re all less than holy, but this is something else entirely. No normal man has such filth in his mind, much less thinks it fit for public reference. We’re talking about a psyche that is a good deal less than holy or even normal. There’s a distinct whiff of brimstone.
I wish I could unknow that word. Before Francis placed it in public forum, I had never heard of such a thing — pure evil filth. This is not what I would expect to a holy man to speak as a casual reference (or any reference for that matter). The words that come from our mouths are a reflection of our hearts. Surely that is true; and it may even be a Proverb.
It was Jesus, pointing out that it is not what we eat that makes us unclean, but the evil deeds and words that come from the heart. Matt 15:17-19.
Hi Cornelius – All this makes me very sad. It also gives me insight into some of the suffering Jesus experienced in the Garden of Gethsemane. Perhaps we should pray for the same strength Jesus prayed for before He faced His Passion for us. Perhaps it is now our turn to face our passion, as a Church, for Him.
Cardinal Caffarra is, of course, being exceedingly gentle with his words when he says “only a blind man can deny that there is great confusion in the Church.”
I am not so gentle. I say, only a total idiot, or the willfully blind or the entirely complicit can deny the evil confusion that exists in the Church at this moment in time. For those members of the hierarchy who deny the gravity of the present situation, they are in the latter two categories period! And God shall exact vengeance upon them. May it come soon. Amen.
Malta says everything: both the bogus draconian ‘investigation’ and the decree to openly admit unrepentant active adulterers to Holy Communion if they feel at ‘peace with God.’ If the CDF does not correct the Bishops of Malta, then the head of that congregation is culpable for aiding, by his silence, those who willfully contradict the Holy and Apostolic Faith.
Not to mention the invitation of Paul Ehrlich to speak at a conference held at the Vatican on ‘Biological Extinction.’ This man is a complete fraud and is responsible for the spread of global abortion and contraception (the death of millions.) He makes Jeffrey Sachs and Naomi Klein look like innocent school children, and they are heinous criminals whom have been embraced by Pope Francis as well as the evil Emma Bonino (and the list goes on ad absurdum.)
Make no mistake, these men are the ones who call evil good and they shall face the Just One for their crimes. They are causing many to lose the grace of salvation, and they are doing it in the name of God. This is violence to the soul of mankind and they mock the Lord by proclaiming it in His Holy Name.
Pray, Fast and do penance for those most susceptible to their evil lies, that God may enlighten them to the truth and His Justice so that they do not fall for this Satanic Deception.
Beloved, know this: God shall not be mocked. His Justice shall Prevail. Let us humbly submit ourselves to Him and proclaim His Truth no matter the suffering we must face. Amen.
Pray for me. It’s getting very difficult to carry out my office as Pastor and the difficulty increases daily.
Be assured of our prayers for you Father. The darkest night is before the dawn.
Praying for you, Father. Thank you for pastoring us here online.
Thanks Father for being ultra clear!! God bless you. Don’t change we love you just like you are.
God help us!
Father, I am so grateful for you and your clarity of thought and your devotion to the teachings of the Church. I pray that Our Lord will send you consolation through the Spirit.
Dear Father RP,
Yesterday, our most holy TLM priest, a Benedictine, gave a beautiful homily regarding the wedding at Cana. He spoke of the “good wine” being saved for the end according to the Gospel, as he ended his homily. It was quite sobering, yet in that Truth, it is quite humbling.
You are the ” good wine” Father. Stay with our Lady, and she will guide you, as you know.
Dear Mary, Mother of God,
Watch over your priests and protect them. Stay with them as they “wait” for our Lord’s command as to what to do next and next and next, as you waited with our first apostles in the Upper Room.
So many feel alone, abandoned…….please, we beg of you dear Lady……let them know that they are the closest to our Lord’s heart and yours. And…..dear Lady, help us, the laity, to BE THERE for these priests, support them and be patient as this a very difficult time for those who have truly been called to Christ’s priesthood.
Amen.
Go with God Father RP……..we ain’t going anywhere!
Fr, I believe that, among the three options you present (“total idiot, or the willfully blind or the entirely complicit”), the last is the most likely explanation, at least for our shepherds (like the Maltese Bishops), who presumably know better.
One could also argue that willful blindness is a subset of being complicit, just as a willful refusal to come to know moral truth leaves us still culpable for our transgressions. Invincible ignorance must be genuinely invincible, not chosen.
It was a shock to read that Cardinal O’Malley has been appointed to the CDF while the story of Fr. Gallagher of Palm Beach, who went to the police when he caught a visiting Indian priest showing homosexual pornography to a fourteen year old boy, is being vilified by both his Bishop Barbarito & by Cardinal O’Malley who was the former Ordinary there. They apparently wanted to ship the pedophile quietly back to India instead of reporting him, as was the proper thing to do. Fr. Gallagher is suing the Diocese & we should all pray that his parishioners will fill the court house to give him public support in his efforts to prevent their children from being demonised by this man. The CC is rotten at the core. It is no wonder that the Vatican Commission on the Sexual Abuse Scandal has come to nothing with this man in charge.
Question on the Father Gallagher case: I could be mistaken, but I recall that the pedophile did the same thing in India and was then shipped to USA where it occurred again.
If I am correct, then much makes sense regarding the reactions by “bishop” Barbarito.
I would not have gone to the police. I would have invited the pervert to go fishing and then feed the fish with him. Forgive me for being such a troglodyte but I would have gone full Old Testament on that perv.
I will.
The burden the laity carries would be ever so greater Father but for the support of faithful priests as yourself. I know something of what it is to be within the ecclesial culture while not flowing with the tide. It is rough and dispiriting.
God reward you for your pastoral engagement with us.
Gentle but to the point. But there certainly is a dig in there 🙂
This is one of the four great men Fr Spadaro SJ labelled as “witless twits”. To the contrary, Cardinal Caffara will go down in history as one of the sane and saintly men who resisted the current confusion and ecclesial autodemolition. He is also the recipient of Bl. Sr Lucia’s grave words that the “final battle between God and the Devil will be over marriage and the family.” I know which side I want to be on in this battle – the side of the four Cardinals who are on the side of the angels. As for those who insult and advocate Eucharistic desecration, look at their fruits. The Jesuits to which Fr Spadaro belongs are dying. There are 6 less Jesuits in the world every week. This once glorious Order is now dying on the vine, a natural consequence of their heresy and apostasy.
It’s time to decide: stay with Christ’s church and trust in Him, or leave. This situation is hurtling towards schism very quickly.
“We had two concerns [in writing the dubia]. The first was not to scandalize the little ones in the Faith. ”
If only Catholic bloggers would take this into consideration when writing about Church crises.
There is exactly one individual who is responsible for any scandal being offered to “the little ones.” Don’t lay it on any other door step.
I’d name the name but I don’t want to scandalize anyone.
I’m not sure how you can find fault with what I said. There’s not just one person on the face of the planet who can be scandalous. The four Cardinals acknowledged they have the capacity to scandalize the little ones as well and so they have worded their dubia accordingly. Online personalities have the same responsibilities as does anyone with influence or authority. Many a sedevacantist have been made by careless mudslinging of internet bloggers.
Bring some imagination to the task.
There’s certainly not any groundswell of open support for these 4-6 bishops, even from bishops that we might expect to be supportive. And there’s been more than enough time to speak up; I think the die has already been cast as to how this is all going to go.
I thought the duty of Cardinals as Cardinals is to elect the new pope, not to advise the current pope. I’m not sure this is an accurate statement: “…grave duty of us cardinals to advise the pope in governing the Church. It is a duty, and duties oblige”
But I’m open to correction if someone has better information.
Very much the contrary. The primary purpose of the College of Cardinals is to advise the Pope in the governance of the Church. It would be dereliction of duty for them not to raise an alarm in a situation requiring further attention.
Conclaves come less frequently than one might hope these days.
I just don’t remember reading that. Do you have a reference?
I’d check out the Catechism (probably in citations on bishops), the Catholic Encyclopedia, and the Code of Canon Law . It is very clear and not such startling notion at all.
http://ccc.usccb.org/flipbooks/catechism/index.html
http://newadvent.org/cathen/
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_INDEX.HTM
You might be hung up on a misunderstanding of the papacy which is common. The pope has ultimate power, but his power is not carte blanche.
From the Dogmatic Constitution “Pastor aeternus” of Vatican I (1869-70) – “The Holy Spirit was not given to the Roman Pontiffs so that they might disclose new doctrine, but so that they might guard and set forth the Deposit of Faith handed down from the Apostles.”
Pope Benedict for instance affirmed this on June 2005 at St. John Lateran — the pope’s “cathedra”:
“…the Pope’s ministry is a guarantee of obedience to Christ and to his Word. He must not proclaim his own ideas, but rather constantly bind himself and the Church to obedience to God’s Word, in the face of every attempt to adapt it or water it down, and every form of opportunism.
The Pope knows that in his important decisions, he is bound to the great community of faith of all times, to the binding interpretations that have developed throughout the Church’s pilgrimage. Thus, his power is not being above, but at the service of, the Word of God. It is incumbent upon him to ensure that this Word continues to be present in its greatness and to resound in its purity, so that it is not torn to pieces by continuous changes in usage.”
One comment, addressed to those who use terms like “Novusordoism” and regard everything post-Vatican II as a corruption and a bastardization: Caffarra is through-and-through a “JP2” bishop. He was chosen by John Paul to be the initial head of the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family. Yet here he is, standing as one of the few with sufficient courage to speak up, and repeatedly drawing on the teaching of John Paul II (Familiaris consortio, Veritatis splendor, etc.) as he does so.
A significant number of people who comment at 1P5 (certainly not all, but more than a few) seem to regard John Paul II as at least partially a Modernist, and fundamentally a “Novus ordo” pope, perhaps better than some of the others but still part of the problem. If this describes your own position, I would invite you to consider the stark contrast between what is happening now, what is being taught in the last 3 years, and the teaching of John Paul II, reiterated here by Caffarra, and cited repeatedly in the ‘dubia’ letter.
You have a “good eye” and bring forth a sensitive topic.
Speaking only for myself, one with a great veneration for Pope Saint John Paul, I say this. We were well pastored by him. Undeniably he was blessed with a certain genius – so apparent, and so necessary for the moment in history during which he was Pope. If you weren’t in full adult mode when he came before us in 1978 you can’t appreciate the real grace he was to the Church. He was like a living miracle. A glowing critique of Pope Saint John Paul is actually easy to provide and it is, without a lot of hyperbole, seemingly endless. George Weigel says it all in his biography.
Weigel is not silent about the deficiencies of Pope John Paul’s pontificate. They were real, and anyone who was bringing an unprejudiced eye to events while they were happening was not unaware of them – but what was fruitful in his pontificate was so
overwhelmingly good it was easy to turn a blind eye to the inadequacies. Today the fruit of those inadequacies are impossible to ignore. And it is painful.
A bishop at the council, he desired to wring the good out of it, preserve it, and gift it to the Church. His desire to heal the wounds of the post-conciliar era, agonizingly and grossly festering through the pontificate of Bl. Paul VI, made him cautious in handling the heterodox. He sought to maintain unity — but at a cost we now are paying. He was negligent in governance of the liturgy, he was imprudent in the choice of bishops, their advancement to the cardinalate, the reform of religious life and the discipline of the clergy. That is the short list – only things that come quickly to my mind. Those who know the entrails of the ecclesiastical jungle I’m sure could amplify these and provide more. Given this reality I can also say he was so good he was somewhat naïve and did not sufficiently grasp the nature of the vipers with whom he was dealing. It would not occur to such a good and holy man that there would be such personalities shepherding the local churches. While aware of bad clerics, sisters and laity he didn’t grasp their number or their contemptable virulence. We have it before our eyes boldly now every day.
While I can understand these inadequacies and easily lay them aside in relation to him because of the depth impact his teaching had on my life, he would not be so easy on himself witnessing the catastrophe we now endure. History will not be so forgiving as I am. And that is a cautionary note – we need to start to let our estimation of these pastors sit for fifty to a hundred years before we start canonizing them. Turning the blind eye to serious weakness of our contemporaries serves neither us nor the future church well.
This is an excellent summary of the last 40 years, and an excellent comment in general (especially “he desired to wring the good out of it, preserve it, and gift it to the Church,” which serves as a powerful summary of his whole goal during the pontificate). I agree with every single thing you’ve written here. Just as you say, John Paul’s single biggest mistake was that he tried to win over his enemies (and thereby prevent a literal split in the Church) with innocence of a dove, when in some cases what was necessary was the cunning of a serpent, in dealing with serpents.
My point in the initial comment was to highlight the fact that the cardinals courageously opposing the poison currently being spread are all drawing on the teaching of John Paul as they do so. To accuse John Paul of being a mere stepping-stone on the way to Francis is a calumny. This calumny is a problem not only because of disrespect to John Paul, but because it distorts the present situation in a dangerous manner.
If we fail to draw necessary distinctions between John Paul and Francis (or for that matter, between John XXIII and Francis, or Paul VI and Francis, or Benedict XVI and Francis) we empower what he and his allies are doing. For the purpose of ‘optics’ and public opinion among the laity and rank-and-file priests, it is extremely important for them to present Amoris, and everything that flows from it (e.g., accompanying euthanasia) as perfectly in continuity with the Council, and with the other post-conciliar popes, so that they can dismiss Burke, Caffarra, Meisner, Brandmuller, etc. as “dissenting” from the Magisterium. But this is a poisonous, utterly false narrative, a distortion both of the Council and of these other popes.
Amoris is utterly contrary to the teaching of Gaudium et spes on marriage; it is utterly contrary to message of Humanae vitae; it is utterly contrary to John Paul’s Theology of the Body, Familiaris consortio, Letter to Families, etc; utterly contrary to many statements of a similar kind made by Benedict XVI. Amoris isn’t just a break from earlier Tradition (The Lord’s own words, St. Paul, the fathers and doctors, the Councils and popes), it is also a break from the Vatican II documents and from the post-Vatican II popes.
The articles on this site are, in general, balanced and fair in their discussion of the post-Vatican II popes, even if the authors are often clearly following the adage ‘If you don’t have anything nice to say…”. The comment boxes here, however, are another story. Usually it only takes about three or four comments to find someone condemning the whole post-Conciliar Church as a betrayal of the faith, and lumping all the post-conciliar popes together as Modernists. This is a demonic ‘divide and conquer’ tactic, to separate “traditionalists” from “JPII” Catholics. We would be a stronger opposition to what is going on if we were united; but in reality, we are splintered into various little bands.
My comment was not an attempt to pick a fight, but my latest in a series of attempts to call for unity between “traditionalists” and “JPII” types, without which we have little chance (at least in human terms, obviously God is capable of anything) of even slowing this juggernaut. It will crush us under its treads while we bicker amongst ourselves online.
It was not “entirely” evident that the Council was as toxic as it has proved to be. How many of us do not go with the flow – we trusted our betters, our betters trusted their confreres. The vitriol experienced by some toward Pope John Paul is understandable, but need be laid aside. During his pontificate the vermin hid under the rock and connived. Pope Benedict was a ray of hope too soon extinguished – but his resignation has left me embittered.
Every Catholic of the era has a right to be outraged at what has transpired. The salacious front-page scandals we have endured are as nothing compared to the mendacious, cowardly, “theological” malfeasance with which we have been abused and are now once again shouldering with its wretched virulence. It is not without reason we saw the collapse of catechesis in the wake of the Vatican Council. Empty minds, unformed consciences are fertile territory for heterodoxy. A clean slate is far easier to write on.
But you are correct and I share your concern – there is a critical need for those with a sober appreciation of the rich tapestry of the faith, those devoted to Jesus Christ and authentic Roman Catholic praxis, to bond together. The trust shattered between the faithful themselves, and the faithful and our priests and religious will not be easily restored. Until it is the Gospel will be muted or distorted in a world, in a Church, enslaved to concupiscence and lies.
Dear Father,
We pray for all the good priests we know and priests the world over each night to remain strong and hold on to the Truth. We shall be happy to add you to our prayer list!
+God bless you
+JMJ+