As Katholisch.de, the official website of the German bishops, reports today, Cardinal Willem Eijk, the Dutch cardinal and Metropolitan Archbishop of Utrecht, requested that Pope Francis bring light into the confusion concerning the question as to how to deal with “remarried” divorcees in the Church. In an interview published today in the Dutch newspaper Trouw Cardinal Eijk (64) says: “People are confused, and that is not good.”
Cardinal Eijk refers here to the ambiguous teaching stemming from the pope’s document Amoris Laetitia. As Katholisch.de puts it:
Francis pleads for the idea to make possible, in individual cases, that the remarried divorcees have access to the Sacraments – after a careful pastoral examination, and even if the previous canonical marriage still exists.
Cardinal Eijk now proposes that the pope write an additional document in which doubts should be removed. Eijk himself supports a stricter interpretation of the Canon Law in this regard. In his view, Catholics may not be allowed to remarry if their divorce has not been presented to the Church’s marriage tribunal. Otherwise, according to Eijk, these couples may not have access to Holy Communion. As he puts it, according to a translation of Mark de Vries:
“We have the words of Christ himself, that marriage is one and can’t be broken. That is what we maintain in the archdiocese. When an ecclesiastical court has declared a marriage null, it is officially confirmed that there has never been a marriage. Only then, one is free to marriage and receive the sacraments of Confession and Communion.”
As Katholisch.de reports, Cardinal Eijk also criticizes the debate about this topic within the Catholic Church: one bishops’ conference sets up different rules than another. He says: “But what is true in one place cannot be suddenly untrue in another place.”
Cardinal Eijk’s statement has considerable weight inasmuch as he is a respected expert in questions of moral theology. Additionally, he is not a retired prelate and thus he takes much more risk in making such a stance. He was, in 2015, among the signatories of the Thirteen Cardinals’ Letter to Pope Francis requesting a fair procedure during that second Synod of Bishops on Marriage and the Family.
Moreover just ahead of the 2015 Second Family Synod, Cardinal Eijk was among eleven cardinals who published a book in defense of the traditional Catholic teaching on marriage, which was entitled Eleven Cardinal Speak on Marriage and the Family: Essays from a Pastoral Standpoint. In that book, Cardinal John Onaiyekan (Nigeria) had the following words to say which now ring with a piercing tone:
The synod [on the family] has not been called to decide whether or not divorced and remarried couples can receive Holy Communion. This is certainly not the purpose of the synod. Nor has the synod been called to discuss the issue of homosexuality and whether or not two Catholic men or two Catholic women can present themselves at the altar for marriage. […] These are issues that are already clear in our doctrines. Synods are not called to change the doctrines or teachings of the Church. [emphasis added]
Thank you cardinal Eijk!
God bless you!
What if he “clarifies” it and says those in perpetual adultery may receive communion? I mean he has already agreed that is what should happen.
Dear Cardinal Eijk, I think the synod [on the family] had been designed to allow divorced and remarried couples to receive Holy Communion.
But it doesn’t stop there.
If the argument works for the divorced and remarried, it will work just the same for homosexuals…..that’s part 2, already in the works……
and part 2 was always really part 1.
Rule #1 of the Francis pontificate is that when His Holiness should keep his mouth shut, he speaks (see Amoris laetitia, Laudato Si) and when he should speak, he keeps his mouth shut (see the dubia). Therefore, applying Rule #1 to Cardinal Eijk, it is predicted that Francis will contemptuously ignore His Eminence’s sincere request.
A tripe to Malta may be in His Eminence’s future (see Cardinal Burke).
Of course he’ll ignore him. As he always do. Ignorance is his best weapon. And not just of him, but all those who are deceived, whenever they get a question for clearing things up or similar. What they can’t do, they can’t do. And one of those things is precisely that ‘clearing things up’.
Besides that, he’ll ignore card. Eijk to death, as the other ones, and in the same time keep going to do everything possible a.s.a.p. to implement his (and not only his) evil plan.
It appears the Ploumen affair (and every other recent scandal coming out of the Vatican and Episcopal Conference’s ad nauseam) was a bridge to far for Cardinal Eijk and he has found his Miter and Crosier, good. May the Lord bless him and reward him, and may others do the same and do so now.
Yes, rather than a single tortoise, perhaps we’ll see a creep of tortoises appear. The fruit of prayer, and a gentle
nudge from The Groom’s Mother.
I wish she would give them a good kick.
ANOTHER BISHOP ASKING FOR CLARITY??? MORE…CLARITY…??? WHAT MORE CLARITY?!?!?!? THERE CAN’T POSSIBLY BE ANY MORE CLARITY!!!!! THIS IS THE PROBLEM!!!! ~ as I fall flat on the floor with both hands on my head screaming…
I’m right there with you, Em. Why are these prelates speaking one at a time. Don’t they know how to get in touch with each other?
O course they have spoken as a group and were ignored. They should know by now we are far past the talking stage. It’s time for those faithful Cardinals and bishops who are still standing to get together and tell Francis the Heretic his time is up.
That’s right. I see a music director marking the tempo with both hands in front of an orchestra. I hear the sound of strings, violins, cellos, brass, flutes and clarinets.
These modernist-progressive prelates have been playing “catholics” like an orchestra for hundreds of years.
They take two steps forward, one step back.
They know exactly how Bergoglio was going to act and they gave us a few cardinals like Burke and other patsy-types. They gave us a Dubia and then a filial-correctio. It’s all orchestrated.
Then cardinal Burke dissapears, shuts up, two die, and the concert goes on. Burke is now back in Rome holding hands w/ Francis again.
They plotted the V2 council heresies.
And these men laugh their way up to the altar every day, seeing how silly their priests and weak men in the clergy go about their days, roaming senselessly like mute dogs (as the prophet Isaiah refers to them) unable to bark and unable lift their voices like swords and trumpets for battle!! The Church Militant of our time is so pitiful and so full of weak men and women who do absolutely nothing to fight. We are fighting for souls. We aren’t fighting with souls. But we must fight until death for the salvation of souls.
The kettle is certainly on the boil, and is beginning to whistle.
RC
Time to turn up the heat!!
Seriously. How long oh Lord? How long?
There is a need for a clarity! Especially if it considers Catholic people. For if you really want to know the Truth, you can’t ignore it, can you? ????
Here is more Catholic news under the hashtag #clarity
https://independentaustralia.net/article-display/how-miscalculations-may-have-made-a-prostak-out-of-mr-holocaust,11103
https://independentaustralia.net/article-display/technology-unveils-truth-behind-yugoslavias-concentration-camps,11127
dobila si poruku od prijatelja .. vratila nam se nakon godinu i više dana naša prijateljica anne .. još jedan jak oslonac na portalu ..
Primih poruku. Slažem se s tvojim mišljenjem. Hvala ☺
a ja se slažem s tobom oko “Clint Eastwood-a” 🙂
LOL ☺
Veliki pozdrav!
ZDS ????
Šta je s vama luđacima?!?!? SkojeVAc je već rekao da nismo tu dobro došli ;o) ZDS!
A “viđe” tek tebe! Sad će nam opet staviti ban na reply ????
ZDS!
;o)
Škicni komentar.
Clarity (finaly) rules! ????
https://narod.hr/hrvatska/kotorska-biskupija-bokeljsku-mornaricu-ocuvali-su-i-bastine-ju-katolici-i-hrvati
Odlično .. još jedan dokaz da smo okupirani i u institucijama koje nisu toliko u fokusu javnosti .. kad sam pročitao Trkulja, sledio sam se jer znam jednoga koji je chetnik do koštane srži .. možda mu je u rodu.
Hvala.
Ma sve su uzurpirali. Najgore je što rade distorziju povijesnih istina i skrivaju činjenice kako bi u samoj tradiciji Bokeljske mornarice proveli “etničko čišćenje” i prisvojili ono što im ne pripada.
Vidim da se nešto zaljuljalo. Evo i najnoviji članak. Petir je navodno reagirala pri EU. To je dobro jer se mora spriječiti nakana Srba i Crnogoraca da “izbrišu” Bokeljske Hrvate i njihovu tradiciju. Meni je nevjerojatno da se to uopće usude i da nakon svega još uvijek imaju obraza pred ostatkom svijeta nas za nešto optuživati. Ovaj slučaj Hrvatima treba postati “red line” iza koje se dalje ne povlačimo nego samo možemo krenuti u napad da obranimo svoje.
https://narod.hr/kultura/slucaj-bokeljska-mornarica-podignut-eu-razinu
ZDS!
Uzurpirali su jer mi nemamo vlast od 1990-te koja bi vodila kadrovska pitanja na način da se postavljaju ljudi koji će štititi hrvatske interese, niti imamo bilo kakvu strategiju, taktiku i operativne planove djelovanja.
Svi takvi kao Trkulja (znam da je Srpkinja) koja je samo jedna u nizu, prošli su ispod radara zbog Tuđmanove pomirbe. Svi ovi pojedinačni pokušaji od Petir, Tomašić i dr. su nedovoljni. Potreban je organiziran i osmišljen nastup i dokle god njega nema oni će se usuditi to raditi, jer otpora praktički nema, a to je za nas male ljude frustrirajuće.
Slažem se. Sve je to zadesilo Hrvate. Ipak, oni koji su to orkestrirali podcijenili su naš katolički narod jer ne znaju što sve može snažna i čvrsta vjera “nekolicine malih ljudi” u Trojedinoga Boga te zagovor Majke Božje, Svetog Josipa i Svetog Alojzija Stepinca. Sada neka samo gledaju kako će teći “godina iznenađenja” u režiji Boga, Majke Božje, Hrvata i zajedništva svetih, a ne prodanih duša koje sebe smatraju “globalnom elitom”! ????
Crocky! Aj, pokušaj ako možeš otići s mnom na “kahvu” u petak.
Exactly my view Father. The Ploumen affair is the obvious catalyst that tipped the balance. Let us hope that this gives courage to other Cardinals to speak out.
She meant it for evil, and more self-promotion of her service to Molech and dead babies, but God is using it for good. I won’t celebrate Cardinal Eijk as a hero– but it takes a lot of courage to stand up these days, both in society, and a rebel Church. Let’s not be ungrateful or harsh for good moments within the warfare.
Very well put, indeed! “God is using it for good.” “Evil will oft evil mars” and I think that might well be the epitaph of the Bergoglio papacy. Certainly, of its denouement.
RC
I fear the Cardinal is simply asking for a clear (re)statement – Yes, Communion is not a reward for the perfect, but nourishment for the wounded. We are all wounded. Go ahead. – By the way, when did a little wine and bread hurt anybody?
Perhaps it is as simple as this. Tell me what to do, glorious leader, and I will do it.
Did you notice that Francis, gave a very nice Angelus address today and an impeccably Catholic allocution on the Blessed Virgin? Who was expecting that?
By now sadly, almost everyone around here, at least. We know the drill at this stage, don’t we? When the crew starts showing signs of restlessness and mutiny, Francis puts on his “Catholic Pope” outfit. That’s often the case on Sundays at St. Peter’s. He dons his “deranged heretic” outfit at daily Mass in Casa Santa Marta.
He seems determined to sweep up all the awards at the prestigious Robert Louis Stevenson Memorial
Gala event held later this year. Established by bookies as the overwhelming favorite to “clean up” in the
Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde category.
Although there are two sides to every story it appears that he has little by way of competition in the religious sphere. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b0095a4af6405db11b5c9e25c28ecf636fbbff23912ad36f18dcc6b1d4a8b7a6.jpg Interestingly this gala event is held annually in Split, Croatia.
????!
Jorge Bergoglio has already clarified. In addition to telling us that most catholic marriages are invalid, while many non-sacramental unions ARE (making marriage independent of God’s grace, but dependent on the lack and/or skill of beings having sex – procreative or fun and pleasure creating), he stated clearly, that there is no other interpretation than that of Argentinian bishops.
When will this game end? Why pretend that we don’t see what we see?
His view of marriage is no different from that of Martin Luther. This is also more proof the NO church hates marriage.
Yes, they are working tirelessly to convince us that there is no connection required between marriage and procreation. Bergoglio is known for frequently refusing to marry couples already expecting a child in Argentina, as he wanted them to marry “for the right reason”. He would tell them to come back in a few years, if they were still willing to marry.
I wonder what is the right reason to marry in the eyes of this man. Is it an unquenchable desire for genital pleasures?
I really don’t detect a lot of concern for the plight of children – children of single mothers, children of broken families, children molested, children sexualized, children given to sodomites, children aborted. He is a monster.
The NO Church? There is only one Church. I was married NO and let me be very clear: the priest who married us made it clear that what we were doing was final and indissoluble. A few bad churchmen don’t invalidate the entire Church. If they did, the Church would never have begun.
Traditionalists could set up a Schismatic Church, warns Theologian:
“I am convinced that they are doing serious harm to the Catholic Church by their emphasis on rules and regulations and sacramental punishments” – Fr Gabriel Daly OSA
“I find myself in real difficulties in my attitude to today’s high-ranking traditionalists. I believe they must be opposed for the sake of preserving Gospel values.” https://www.catholicireland.net/traditionalists-set-schismatic-church-warns-theologian/
How “gay” is he?
They are not all homosexuals, but this Man had a vision for The Church shared by too
many, that somehow, someway, we can solve “problems” by compromising truths.
Oh, it is mostly homosexual.
This is what we call a total disorientation.
Very sad, the progressives lack humility.They desire to judge Morality itself and amend it’s
essence where it conflicts with their sensitivities.
There is much much more what progressives misses and just cannot get:
Acts 28,26-27: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+28&version=DRA
An inconvenient truth.
I’m just curious as I don’t know the guy from a stray dog, but is this guy a meat packer?
I came across the article some hours ago, and never heard of him before that. He is a
90 year old Priest and theologian and I have no idea if he labors as a packer in a meat
factory.
Interesting.
Hopefully he is just mistaken.
It’s tragically mistaken of course. People of his ilk believe that V2 gave them
a carte blanche to interpret Scripture, Tradition, and Culture in whatever way they
sought fit.
Acting out of an authority of their own making, they are shaped by the perpetual bomb-blast
of the prevailing Social Culture we inhabit, poisoned in fact, by secular and worldly pressures.
I guess bishop Eijk doesn’t read official Acta. It’s clarified and promulgated:
“No hay otras interpretaciones” Acta Apostolicae Sedis (2016), page 1071
As a matter of fact, the argentinian ‘guidelines’ simply reproduce almost verbatim what Francis, or rather Fernández, wrote in AL.
In the meantime, Canadian, Polish, African and Khazak Bishops interpreted AL in accordance with the Magisterium of the Church about marriage and family… and Francis hasn’t admonished them.
Cardinal Eijk is right (at least in my humble opinion). As Pope, Francis has the duty to step forward and clarify what he’s been saying. Otherwise, he should resign.
Welcome to Tehran, Eminence!
The pope has been ‘clear’ in that he refuses to uphold the teachings of Christ and the Magisterium on this issue.
Obvious to any honest person.
To me he has made it clear he intends to oppose the teachings of Christ. That’s been obvious for at least four years.
Whilst I applaud the Cardinal’s intentions, sadly the clarification he requests has already been given. I think that, however good his intentions, he refuses to accept the reality of the matter. And not just His Eminence, but other Catholics as well. When people ask for a clarification, even though one has already been given, it’s just a sign they can’t swallow the pill. They are in denial that the Pope has actually done the unthinkable: he has declared that adultery is permissible and the Sixth Commandment is now retired. I suppose it’s no different when a family finds out their son was a murderer. They are usually in denial at first due to shock. Sadly, the slower it takes for them to swallow the red pill, the harder it will be later on.
It is a game. They pretend what happened did not happen. In fact, it is called lying.
Well, quite.
Is there any particular reason some Bishop or priest cannot get on TV and ask the Pope specifically what is in the Dubium? Just put it out there so the entire world can see it was asked.
Are we not beating a dead horse?
Pope Francis has made abundantly clear what his teaching is. The dilemma now is what to do with a teaching by a Pope which is in contradiction to Holy Scripture, the Apostolic Tradition and the Apostolic Tradition. That is the problem now.
And yes, there is another. What to do with a Pope who does such a thing. And how do we process our understanding of the papacy after such an event. That is the abominable situation we are left with. We can tackle it now or wait for a less awkward moment. But make no mistake, that is what is in our hands and we need to acknowledge that. Pretending otherwise is a further disservice to God and His people.
Adult time, Episcopate!
In the meantime souls are being lost. But who cares about that.
this dubia matter has taken too long………imagine a university maths lecturer that is asked a difficult problem in front of some other 100 students. He does not know the answer, but gains time by saying he could not deviate from the current subject, but promises all he will give a reply. Once home the lecturer will research the problem and practice the answer so that the next possible time he will explain it to all his students and affirm his reputation, but what happens if he ignores this student and fails repeatedly to give an answer, bad rumours will creep and his reputation will be tarnished………please Francis your reply!
God Bless the Cardinals that at the very LEAST speak up in favor of Christ and His Church, but…….how long, Oh Lord, do we have to watch these Cardinals stand around wringing their hands and calling for an end to the ‘confusion’ which is A.L?? Where on earth do they see the ‘confusion’ pray tell?? Bergoglio has made it crystal clear that he wants adulterers and ‘irregulars’ (homosexuals) at the Communion Rail. The ‘soft peddling’ is getting SOOOO old. And this guy actually thinks that Bergoglio is going to END the so called ‘confusion’? Come on your Excellencies……give us a break here!!
Indeed, Francis and the Vatican aren’t unclear about what they want at all, they’re clear enough and sometimes even too clear, as in this reckless Ploumen affair. Cardinals should stop asking the Pope to “clarify”. Instead they should tell him that they won’t obey him anymore, no matter what the consequences. They should be defiant and set their scruples aside. Let the bell toll, and let the Pope know that it tolls for him. Call barber and priest: “Réveillez vous, François, il est temps”.
Another Dubious Dubium.
Are Catholic prelates really just plain stupid?
Or are they really smart, waiting for the “just right” parsing of words to allow anything-goes while still blathering out “No Church teaching has changed”?
Indeed it would be nice for Francis to be far more clear. If we put all the pieces together, we get a pretty clear image. But a clear statement would indeed be nice. It’s good to see a Cardinal asking for clarification on his teaching.
… Wait… that’s already happened? … oh and there were 4 of them?
/sarcasm off/
It is nice to see that Cardinal Eijk has finally found an ounce of courage, but it would have been nice to see him with it, oh, maybe 493 days ago when the dubia were first submitted to the pope.
Well, it could b the result of prayers. Lets keep praying.
Very, very true!
I was listening to the most recent Barnhardt podcast today, and she continues to make very logical points supporting her thesis that Francis is not the Pope, but rather, Benedict is. Her premise is not based on anything heretical said by Francis, but the invalidity of Benedict’s resignation. If you haven’t listened to her before, it will be worth your while. I am not saying necessarily I agree with her, but she does make a person think.
I agree. Her reasoning is the only thing that makes sense to me. Disclosure: I am Catholic today for stumbling on her site…which led me here and to other trad sites.
“I am Catholic today for stumbling on her site…”
I’ve heard she has made many converts….which is not easy to do in these turbulent times. Welcome aboard!
Be careful.
Her reasoning is not without substance and is not without a large measure of common sense to-boot, but it not in any way judicially proven. That may or may not be established in our lifetimes.
Anne is brilliant, but bonkers.
“Bonkers” is not a criterion for truth. Whether something is true is a criterion for truth.
Deal with the argument, not the person.
She has no proof in the form of ANY official Church declaration or judicial ruling and until that occurs, Bergoglio is the Pope. A really BAD one to be sure, but Pope nonetheless.
I’d love her ditty to be true as it would solve several dilemmas. But it smacks too much as an appeal to an effeminate solution to a grave and vexing problem.
I personally think things are worse than Ann Barnhardt allows.
She has her following, but she is in the end one woman who says she knows it all.
Until she is sainted.
Which hasn’t happened yet.
😉
Calling the arguments an “effeminate solution” is not a logical argument, it is name calling.
And you are still arguing ad feminam. Arguments do not depend on the speaker for their validity.
A ditty is a song, although a poor one.
What’s your point?
The argument is pure opinion. Ann Barnhardt is just a gal with an opinion. Her assessment is not even unique to her. Until the CHURCH, as opposed to Ann Barnhardt, DOES something to advance the theory, it is meaningless.
Right now it is nothing but a feel-good solution to many who just can’t stomach what they see in the pontificate of Jorge.
“And then there is the religious indifferentism of JPII…..What about him?”
Here is a very good & interesting read, about that: – http://www.angelusonline.org/index.php?article_id=2272§ion=articles&subsection=show_article
Gosh…when did God stop using people to get His truth out? He used a deaf, dumb and blind 14 year old boy to lead Charlemagne to the relics of St. Anne. An ignorant French girl to ensure the Immaculate Conception became dogma.
I think you are missing the point.
It is one thing to have a question, or an opinion based on the information available to us. We are dealing with a problem that has elements of BOTH fact available to us, facts that are not fully known, AND a juridical component. We simply cannot state as meeting all the criteria, as provable fact, when PART of what would make it fact is yet unavailable; in this case, that missing piece of the puzzle is the judgment of the Church {as well as other hidden facts}.
This issue of the juridical component has to do with authority, and THAT is something AB utterly lacks. She has ZERO authority. She is merely a gal with an opinion. She does at times appear to have quite an opinion of herself, quite an elevated opinion of herself, but in the end, she’s just a single gal with some ideas. She holds no authority to issue judgments on this issue.
Again; AB can rant all she wants and proclaim herself to be in possession of all the truth she wants to but one FACT she does not possess which is essential for her position to be true is the judgment of the Church.
This isn’t an issue that is merely open to discussion. This is an issue that necessarily has a judicial component.
Maybe a case from history can help. It’s not a perfect analogy, but it has a few similar elements to the problem we face in making decisions about what we see today.
Galileo.
Galileo’s essential observations were true {well, at least as true as we understand them today…}. However, the Church ruled against him because he stated as FACT something that he could not PROVE. He did not yet have the capacity for proof. That came some 200 years later.
A similar situation applies to AB on this issue. There are observable problems with the abdication of B16. I don’t think many will argue otherwise. But the issue is a juridical one.
Without the decision of the CHURCH, we have no authority to declare the abdication null as provable FACT. To do so is to assert private opinion over the ruling of the Church. To do so is to violate one of the positions AB strenuously asserts all the time!
Follow me, because it is important.
What AB rants about others she is 100% guilty of herself; She fumes at the effeminacy of everybody who chooses the easy way out of hard situations and goes off making personal interpretations of current theological issues when only the Church has the authority to make those interpretations. She is doing with this issue of an anti-Pope exactly what she condemns others for doing with other issues.
CHOOSING WHO IS POPE AND WHO ISN’T IS NOT LEFT TO PERSONAL OPINION.
Until we have a judgment of the Church stating otherwise, we have a Pope to deal with. That Pope’s name is Jorge Bergoglio. For AB to DEFINITIVELY STATE ANYTHING ELSE is utter hypocrisy on her part. It is frankly, Protestantism.
To be clear, I am not saying her position makes no logical sense {based on the limitations it is hindered by}. What I am saying is that for her to assert as fact and to act accordingly is to deny the authority of the Church.
But seriously, bless her heart, if you have read her at all, you surely can see the problems she has with authority in-general.
Finally, I admit, it would be very nice if she was right about the issue. It may be that she is, or rather, that the observations many of us have made about the past proceedings are correct. MANY people have made similar observations. AB is hardly prophetic in many of the things she says. But to go further is to ignore the limitations we all have in the state in which we live within the Church.
A perusal of history will demonstrate that there have been many Popes who have been VERY problematic, by the way. Right from the beginning.
For example; Just how long did St Peter associate with the Judaizers before St Paul resisted him “to the face”? We do not know, but we can make some educated guesses and it would appear it was for quite some time, maybe YEARS. Think that wasn’t a HUGE problem at the time of the faith’s birth? And we know from the New Testament that there were many very, very serious problems with the culture of the faith from the beginning, with chaos from many important Christians causing much difficulty.
Personally, I think a better informed read on the problems in the Church today can be found in Father Miceli’s book on the “Antichrist” {among many others} than in the opinions of AB about who is Pope.
But that’s my opinion and I won’t front it as fact upon which your salvation depends….
I think your Galileo analogy is perfect…..he didn’t have the “capacity for proof” at that time, but he was proven right nonetheless. So where does that leave those who believed him at that time? Were they guilty of a sin “at that time”? And then released of the guilt of sin 200 years later?
I think your accusations of effeminacy against her is false. She’s pretty much the lone voice in pointing out the emperor has no clothes. Her stance has cost her….I’m guessing more than just monetarily. I think her claims of Francis being an anti-pope and the shunning and ridicule she experiences requires a lot more cojones than most have. Certainly more than I have.
Frankly, I believe it is Protestantism to call a man who clearly does not have the faith the “pope”, especially while there is a man right now in the Vatican, wearing papal white calling himself a contemplative pope emeritus and is still referred to as His Holiness. How long must we wait until a St. Paul “resists him to his face”? The same spirit who gave us VII is the same spirit telling us we have a non-Catholic pope. Doesn’t make sense to me. But that’s just my opinion…LOL.
The Galileo analogy is sort of weak in that the issue he was faced with had been debated for hundreds of years. And do we fully understand the universe and the placement of galaxies today?
Ann Barnhardt isn’t the “the lone voice ” of anything. Good grief she must have quite the following! Others have presented critiques of the problems in the Church long before she arrived, for that matter, before she was BORN. To suggest she is somehow unique in observing what she has is silly. As for paying a price for her views, well, that I cannot really comment on as I have only her word on it and that isn’t in much detail. As far as her receipt of ridicule, it appears to me more like she thrives on the attention rather than is pained by it. But that’s just my interpretation reading her. I could be wrong!
You nor she have any authority to “teach” that Bergoglio is not Pope. Period. The difference between you and AB is that you are modest and prudent enough to admit your view is an opinion and she lacks that modesty and prudence. As far as observing Bergoglio’s actions and words, anyone can do that. And as you say, they do not at all appear to mesh with consistent Magesterial teaching. We wait for the Church to provide the final word on judicial matters.
As for how long must we wait for a clear resistance by the Cardinals to the face of Bergoglio, that is up to the prelates. But trust me, I am just as impatient as you are. Maybe more so!
Can you point me to any Catholic, other than sedevacantists, who are publicly saying PF is not the pope? And this is a unique situation even for the post VII Church. To my knowledge, we’ve never had basically the entire Church agreeing that we essentially have two living popes….one contemplative and the other active. Both wearing papal white. Both being referred to as His Holiness/Holy Father. Both speaking at the ordination of priests (or was it bishops or cardinals…I forget?)
I am a convert (really a re-vert, as I was baptized Catholic…but never, ever practiced the faith), but lived as a Protestant from 2000 – 2014 and went through RCIA in 14/15, was Confirmed and re-entered the Church Easter 2015. I was in a “second” marriage to a man who introduced me to Christ. It’s been heart wrenching for me to be divorced. The only reason I say this is to point out I’ve only been a practicing Catholic under this “pope”. Where would I be today had I stumbled on the truth of the Church via Jimmy Aiken or Mark Shea or Dave Armstrong? Mostly likely still in an adulterous marriage and maybe even believing I could receive the Eucharist while in that situation.
I fully admit I have a soft spot for her….but until she does or says something contrary to orthodox Catholic teaching, I’m going to listen to her. She hasn’t steered me wrong yet. Her logic is the only thing that makes sense to me in our current situation.
Louie Verrechio for one and there are others you can google. However, I took your point as being that AB is a lone voice of public critique of the Pope himself, the problem of metaphors…
I was received into the Church the Easter after Bergoglio was elected, so we have a lot in common.
Also, I like AB in many ways, too, but she asserts as one with authority on that issue that she has no authority to decide. That’s all.
Until she is sainted.
Has the Church ever canonized anyone before their death? St. Catherine backed the right guy, while St. Ferrer got it wrong. Now I’m not saying in any way, shape or form that Ann is a Saint…but if we waited until someone was canonized to believe them, or at least consider their reasoning….
An invalid abdication would be the tidiest solution of the current papal dilemma, but it would only be one piece of the puzzle. Right now the Church’s problems are far more extensive than that caused by an invalid election of a Pope. Folks who somehow put their hope in this as the “fix” are missing the bigger picture.
In point of fact, by the way, I don’t think Barnhardt is. She seems to have a clear understanding of how deep are the problems in the Church today.
You say that as though you think “bonkers” is not a compliment.
If being crazy, which is what bonkers means, is a compliment in your eyes…
But maybe these days being aware of reality and talking about it makes you crazy in the eyes of the rest of the world.
I think you might be a bit over-sensitive in this regard.
I take my hat off to all sincere converts in these unprecedented times of mass confusion and truly diabolical deception. I am sometimes astounded that anyone with one iota of discernment can be so convicted of unchanging Catholic truth that they are moved to enter and remain faithful members of the Church. But, evidently the Holy Spirit gives you the vitally necessary understanding that these are, beyond question, the darkest days that the Church has known in her entire 2000 year history, but after the darkest night will come the most glorious dawn. Thank you for your valuable comment.
Arguably, the darkest days for the Church were the 3 days when Christ was in the Tomb and the apostles had abandoned him (but Blessed John) and were in hiding. Though, I would agree, that these appear to be the darkest since then, and there has been plenteous darkness between the two.
Thank you, Father, for your response. Of course, nothing can ever compare with the all-embracing darkness that overcame the whole of humanity when Christ breathed His last and His sacred Body was laid in the tomb. But I have long subscribed to the view that, since the Church is the Body of Christ on earth, it must, of necessity, follow in the footsteps of her Divine Master, ascend her own Calvary and be put to death. When this crucifixion occurs, humanity will once again be plunged into a darkness that recreates, proportionally, the original darkness into which the world was plunged with the death and burial of Christ. Thus it will appear to the world, and indeed, to many within the Church, that the Church has been finally and irretrievably extinguished, as indeed happened with the disciples 2000 years ago with respect to Jesus. I, like many others, believe that the summit of the Church’s own Calvary has been attained, the stripping her of her sacred garments is well underway, and her nailing to her own cross will soon commence, In fact, it could well have commenced already. I also believe that, mercifully, from where we now are to the conclusion of this crucifixion and burial of the Church and her inevitable and glorious resurrection is not a matter of many decades. It is something that must happen quickly, for the sake of the elect.
And, I, with many saints agree that the Church must undergo what her Blessed head endured. And, it appears that we are in the thick of it
I am a convert as well. I saw everything happening in the Church and HAD to enter! The Barque of Peter may be in a huge typhoon, and she may be contending with an overwhelming amount of mutineers, but I am confident her loyal crew with weather the storm!
And I give the most grateful thanks to God for you, and for all those with similar testimonies to share with us.
I feel similarly.
Convert from 2013.
Who are her loyal crew?
I also agree with her that fighting between neo-Catholics and trads is destroying the office of the papacy.
Francis is doing that.
And so is the fighting between the neo-Catholics and the Trad-Catholics. The neo’s say there’s nothing to see, the Holy Father is being misquoted or misinterpreted. Yeah, he may not be the most orthodox pope, but don’t believe your lying eyes and ears….which makes the papacy irrelevant. And the trad’s by maintaining Francis is pope with all that he is saying and doing says the protection the CC has against teaching error is not really so….which makes the papacy irrelevant.
It would be handy if this turned out to be true, but even if it does, it is no fix for the Church’s problems of internal heresy, corruption, immorality and schism. THOSE will still exist even if Bergoglio is declared an anti-Pope this afternoon, and without actual men among the Cardinals and Bishops who will return stern discipline to the administration of the Church, all they will do to the black eye Bergoglio has given Jesus is add a dunce cap on top of his head.
I think her assessments of the the many problems of the Church and some of the ways to combat them and actually fix them are far more useful than her opinion about the validity of abdication.
It would be nice if she was right, but even if she is, we still need to act on the restoration of piety and holiness in the Church. That huge challenge is I guess why I don’t care so much about the validity of the Pope’s abdication.
Didn’t see that one coming…
Here we go again…..another prelate who refuses to see the obvious because that would require him to condemn the Francis. We need more clarification on AL? Really?
Burke’s already raised the white flag (after ~490 days), how long will this one last?
I’ve said previously I will not judge the Pontiff’s conscience but i will judge the fruit of his works, which a large segment of the Church as Flemish Belgian [i note Flemish because unlike Danneels they’re not all liberal heretics] Cardinal Eijk says is suffering strife and confusion. The Pope’s works. If Lucifer were given absolute freedom to destroy our Church could he devise a more powerful devious stultifying way of doing so than what Francis is accomplishing? Would God permit this is no longer the question because He has permitted it. The Why is due to the tragic disloyalty of the majority of Catholics. It’s sort of if This is what you want so have it. A retribution. Whether Francis is simply a pawn in all this I can’t say. We know we must resist the prev presumed impossible as a reality. We join forces with Cardinals Eijk, Brandmueller, Burke, Aux Bishop A Schneider, Bishop Stefan Oster and all the others who perceive iniquity and call it what it is. Religious Deception.
and in the meantime, the sheep are being separated from the goats.
Yes Tony that to me seems what’s occurring and why I feel compelled in conscience to oppose the Pontiff’s policy.
Now is the time for courageous witness. Jesus knew in that night, that He would suffer terribly, and that many would still be lost. What we are enduring now is nothing compared with what the apostles went through, and thank God they didn’t give up. God gave them the power of His Holy Spirit, and they completely gave themselves in witnessing to Jesus.I think this is what St. Paul meant by his own suffering completing the one of Christ. Of course nothing is lacking in Christ’s suffering, but we are called to share in it till the end. For some reason that only He knows, God is allowing all this to happen, and like with all trials, this too will verify the quality of our faith. God be thanked for refining us!
Rose I share your views entirely.
I can’t help but believe this was in the making from even before “the” council. No one who was catechized before 1965 would have been able to ignore the blatant disregard the Holy Father and a legion of bishops are rendering Holy Scripture, the Apostolic Tradition and the perennial Magisterium. A fifth grader would have raised their hand in objection and been well founded. The Baltimore Catechism was a most effect pedagogical tool.
But we were also taught perfect obedience to ecclesiastical authority.
In the wake of the council catechesis abandoned the Catechism.
The generation following mine was a sitting target for anything shoveled at them.
Now we have a perfectly ignorant laity, by far most of whom never had the opportunity for a Catholic education, and those who did — at any level, have been formed by deviant instruction.
We need to own this catastrophic error made in the sixties and — out of naiveté and good intentions was perpetrated over the next fifty seven years. After all, no one would question an ecumenical council — nor its “spirit.” The wolves waited in abeyance and are now ripping and feeding voraciously.
We need to acknowledge that there is a misapprehension of what constitutes authentic submission to ecclesiastical authority. Everyone is on board with the perennial Magisterium — EVERYONE — especially the Bishop of Rome, or no one is. He is the locus of unity. He is off the track — so goes the Church.
That can not continue.
We have to stop pretending what is happening is not happening. We have to stop pretending the Pope is on solid ground. He is not. For his good and the good of the world the episcopate needs to tackle this — if we wait until the next conclave it is going to be in the hands of the grossly nefarious — particularly in light of what happened the last time, we cannot have confidence in the majority vote of men, many of whom have abandoned authentic Catholic doctrine while pretending otherwise.
One of the nasty things about the Council and the later “Spirit of Vatican I(” was that the Reformers were counting on us “sheeple” not resisting. They used the very strength of the laity — their obedience — against them. That was them, all right. The Reformers: Nasty. Smug. Merciless.
And just who is “nasty, smug, and merciless” be definition? Old Spite, of course. As you say, his wolves are feeding voraciously. “Cry havoc, and let slip the wolves of Hell”, as it were.
RC
I’d ^ twice if I could.
“Sheeple” — that’s going in my lexicon!
Graci, RC.
You outlined how we reached this point James. Catholics except for our converts are woefully ignorant of the faith. And correctly it reaches back years before Pope Francis. “According to the Chairman of the German Catholic Bishops’ Conference in 2009 Archbishop of Freiburg Robert Zollitsch, ‘the death of Jesus Christ was not a redemptive act of God to liberate human beings from the bondage of sin and open the gates of heaven'” (LifeSiteNews.com). Zollitsch added Christ’s death was to offer “solidarity” with Mankind. He was removed shortly after. If that occurred today I doubt he would be replaced. There likely was ‘silent’ heresy long before Vat II that like the homosexual avalanche outed from the closet in line with the nefarious Spirit of Vat II. This Sunday’s Gospel addresses the Daemonic. Carl Olson wrote an interesting related article on CWR. I plan to address the same topic tomorrow morning in a pedagogical sense outlining Catholic doctrine. It appears the Satanic is involved in the rapidity of such wide spread evil, especially as it relates to the Church.
Tomorrow we have the Sunday of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15: 11-32) and Feb 3 is Meatfare Sunday aka the Sunday of the Last Judgement. This Sunday emphasizes His Mercy and next Sunday emphasizes His Justice as a warning against the sin of presumption.
Margaret according to the Latin Rite the Gospel for Jan 28 Fourth Sunday in Ordinary Time is Mk 1:21-28. It gives account of Jesus expelling a Demon from a man in the Capernaum Synagogue. I just referred to it in my response to James above.
Thank you, Father, for your prompt reply and the great quote.
Yes, in the Byzantine Tradition we started pre-Lenten preparation 2 weeks ago on the Sunday of Zaccheus (desire to see the Lord). Last Sunday was the Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee (Luke 18: 10-14; humility vs. pride). We don’t fast or abstain because we don’t want to imitate the Pharisee (v. 12). Next Sunday is traditionally the last day to have meat (Meat-fare = Carne, vale, I.e. Carnival). Cheesefare Sunday (aka Forgiveness Sunday – Feb. 11 this year) is traditionally the last day to have dairy products. Pure Monday (2 days before Ash Wed.) is the first day of the Great Fast for us.
Re the Gospel: We have Mk. 1: 16-22 on August 7th and Mk. 1: 23-28 on August 8th.
My RO cousins are in their 60s and 70s and still keep the traditional fast, so I’ve been trying to keep the traditional fast too. (It’s TOUGH when you’re surrounded by chocolate at work! ????)
It’s wonderful how we can learn from each other. As PJPII might say it’s the Church breathing with both lungs. ????
According to the even older Latin Rite (Usus Antiquior), Sunday Jan 28 is Septuagesima Sunday. The vestments are purple and the Gloria is not said because it is a time of preparation for Lent. The Gospel is Matth. 20: 1-16 and is the parable about the householder who went out early in the morning to hire labourers to his vineyard. “So shall the last be first, and the first last. For many are called, but few are chosen.”
Thanks. Intervals like Septuagesima enlivened the liturgical stretch of Ordinary Time. Reinserting it perhaps even borrowing some practice from the Byzantine Rite would further enrich the Latin Rite as it stands now.
That is where St Gregory got it from, Father – read Gueranger and Schuster on the subject. Come back to the traditional and genuinely Roman rite, Father. Tradition is all of a piece! Please, do return to the TLM!
WOW. I had no idea that the West got the pre-Lenten Sundays from us (even though the TL calendar has different readings).
Re Alleluia: We sing Alleluia throughout the year except Great Monday thru Great Wednesday and Great Saturday.
We DO have Alleluia on Great Thursday (plus the “Gloria” which is part of Passion Matins w/ the 12 Gospels). and Great Friday Vespers. It is also sung on the Feast of the Annunciation which is NEVER transferred even if it falls on Great Friday. Reason: The Son of God could not be crucified nor rise from the dead unless He assumed human nature, which is what He did when Our Lady gave Her Fiat.
P.S. Do you have an excerpt from Gueranger?
The Traditional Latin Mass (Usus Antiquior) is full of the richest spiritual and cultural treasures. That’s good enough for me. Far better than the rite that was artificially fabricated by ++Bugnini with massive input from six Protestants. The Reform of the Reform for the Novus Ordo Mass was tried for many years. It did not work.
Of Course! How else to explain it? Satan is our eternal enemy. The regime in Rome is his tool.
Amen Father!
This is really absurd. The Pope has been perfectly clear. It defies reality that these men do not know this. The only question is what are you going to do about it?
He is asking the obvious.
Francis has been everything but clear. What he wrote is to be interpreted or not in accordance with the perennial Magisterium of Church about marriage and family? Because, if it is not, we know what the consequences will be for him…
I think he means Bergoglio is clear in his intention to destroy the Church.That’s clear to me in any event.
It is a supreme challenge of the will to avoid using the words “idiot”, “moron”, “worthless sack of ……” to describe the thing making the noise that emanates from under a red hat.
To think that there are Protestants willing to lose all rather than decorate a wedding cake while we have these pathetic effeminates running the Church is possibly in my opinion the greatest scandal of all.
God Save the Catholic Church {from Her Cardinals}.
If the divorced remarried can have access to the Eucharist, does that mean that St. Thomas Moore is no longer a saint?
Does it also mean that the fall of England ment nothing?
If it wasn’t for Henry leaving the Church, Cromwell never would have rose to power. And if it wasn’t for Henry leaving the Church, Mary would have never rose to power in the way that she did. Queen Mary, (Who in a power grab, overextended her power as a female soveriegn, never before in mordern history had a woman been set as head of state, and endowed with so much power,), set up the complete destruction of Catholicism and the immergence of humanism through Elizabeth and the Elizabethian Era.(Now with the precedent set, a women endowed with the full powers of state, Elizabeth rolled in, knocked out Catholicism, and place herself as both the head of the Church and state. This is significant, because it is the first time a woman was place as the moral authority over the rights and souls of man. This was the first conceptual break with natural law and natural order.
None of this matters?
The bloodshed over centuries?
The lost souls?
What was it all for?
Once upon a time, the Church leadership was willing to suffer incredible loss for the Kingdom.
It appears they are no longer willing to pay that price.
And don’t forget him who is more than a prophet, the greatest saint born by women, John the Baptist who was the very first martyr for nothing else than for the Holy Sacrament – Matrimony.
ps. Both of them, st. John the Baptist and st. Thomas Moore are my own patrons and protectors.
My first name is John, and my second name is Thomas.
But that was then…this is now. C’mon, get with it. Did God really say not to eat of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil?
What do you mean with “this is now.”?
Get with what?
The TRUTH is always the same! Unchangeable.
And yes. God did say exactly that!
You should know that, and remember that. And also we, should not to eat of the bad fruit of those poisonous modernistic trees, planted by the enemies of Christ.
My apologies. I was being sarcastic.
Apologies accepted. I didn’t knew what I must make of that, because I don’t know you.
And had no time to research your previous postings.
Btw. I don’t like sarcasm so much. I do not think it is really helpful for anyone.
I argued about that with a few people, months ago on some other topic here.
Suggestion: Please put (sarc) or (Sarcasm) at the end if you’re being sarcastic. You threw me for a loop too.
Thank you for the tip, Margaret. I will remember to do that next time.
You’re welcome. ????
Well really…after all we didn’t have a tape recorder????
All good points, plain as day. When I argue with my bishop about these issues he looks at me like i have two heads… it’s all so clear. Black and White
Indeed! It is so clear. And so black and white, as you said.
Too sad, to see how many of the clergy are actually not aware about even the simple facts, let alone about the mysteries of the Faith.
Bad, bad, bad fruits of the IIVC! When we see that we are in time when the flock knows much better than (many) shepherds what is the truth and what is a lie, then you know how late it is already!
We are at the very front of the heaviest battle.
Hosanna Maranatha!
A much belated happy patronal feast day to you – the Synaxis of St. John the Baptist was Jan. 7th. However. Feb. 24 is the Feast of the First and Second Findings of the Head of St. John the Baptist. 😉
Thank you dear Margaret.
God bless you my sister.
You’re welcome. ????
I forgot the rest of your feast days, though. In addition to the ones mentioned earlier, these are your patronal feast days:
Sunday of St. Thomas (Low Sunday on the TL calendar)
May 25 – Third Finding of the Head of St. John the Baptist (it’s also the actual birthday of St. Padre Pio)
June 24 – Nativity of St. John the Baptist
Sept. 23 – Conception of St. John the Baptist (also the Feast of St. Padre Pio)
Oct. 6 – Feast of St. Thomas (same Gospel as the Sunday of St. Thomas)
You have lots of days to celebrate, Ivan!
Thank you, my dear sister, in the Lord.
You are so kind and worthy and caring.
A true example of a Christian soul.
I am very grateful for you. 🙂
God bless you, lead you and protect you.
Ivan, don’t give Margaret a swelled head! 🙂
:-)) Don’t worry Barry. She knows already that she is a very rare jewel!
Btw. I like your new avatar much more than the old, doggy one!
You’re cute. ???? Btw…You DO know that “Barry” is Irish for “head”…right? 😉 ????
There’s are number of possibilities in Irish, I think. 🙂
You’re welcome. ????
Isabel of Spain was mother of Catherine of Aragon and Queen Mary’s grandmother and a powerful head of state. She preserved Catholicism and dealt decisively with many dicey issues of Church and State.
Yes, but Catherine was only Queen Consort, she had no intrinsic power of her own, Anne Boleyn proved that… and Cromwell had Catherine carted off, and her Nephew King Charles basically abandoned her… so how powerful was she?
I don’t think he was calling Catherine powerful. He was calling Isabel powerful. Catherine was mentioned just in passing, as being Isabel’s daughter. That’s the way I read it, anyway. Pardon me if I am wrong.
Queen Isabella’s power came from her popularity and her adoration, not from the Law. She was not in sole control of the state and she submitted to the authority of the Church, Mary was in sole control of full powers of the state and she submiited to the authority of the Church. Elizabeth, Full powers of State and full authority over the Church, and over the spiritual direction and souls of man… Absolutely had never happened before, would have been defined as an absurdity. Espeacially to Jewish custom of which our Savior was a memeber. Woman weren’t even allowed into the main prayer area in the temple, never mind head of the Sanhedrin. The whole ideas absurd. It defies the natural order of existence.
And we have endlessly suffered as a Church because of Elizabeth I
Interesting discussion.
It also means John the Baptist was beheaded for some silly reason.
Excellent, one sentence, so much Truth.. Well played Sir.
(Ma’am)???? Thanks – just thinking how many martyrs and saints are blatantly mocked by all the heinous attempts to play let’s-pretend-God’s-laws-have-changed.
Ma’am. oops.
CMHO, (cry my heart out) You just touched on a point I argue with many of the novus ordo priests all the time. Jesus, Yeshua, came not to destroy the Law, but to complete it, and to come in, and exist in, continuity with it.
The Law is intrinsic to the nature of Christ. Christ without the Law is the same as Christ without the Mercy, Not Christ or of Christ.
Then you end up with “make your own Jesus.”
I think we even go way to far to divorce our religion from it’s cultural ancestral roots. Christ was a Jew, the Jews are Gods chosen people,( God takes favorites whether anyone likes it or not), culturally Jesus a Jew.
Think about this…
If Jesus, in that garden, when asking God to have this cup (sacrifice) pass over him, (Didn’t want to, but it was up to God, and following the Law is inherent to Jesus’ nature.)
Then he said
” Yet not as I will, but as you will.”
and then his sweat became as blood…
The blood sacrifice that washed the sins from the world wasn’t when Longinus plunged the spear into his chest. The victory was won in the garden. Christ knew all that was before him at that moment and submitted to the will of God. Christ is only truth, there is no lie in Christ. The second he saw, and said yep O.K. Abba, it was done.
and then his sweat became as blood…
The Passion isn’t for God, it’s for us. It was the “wrapping up of the sacrifice if you will.” or the process, not the actual sacrifice. When Christ saw it and said O.K. and didn’t challenge God’s dominion. They victory was done and the story complete.
Bare with me…
Now what if God said, Son your O.K. was the perfect sacrifce and allowed the cup to pass over..?
We’ll then, Jesus would have had to return to conventional Jewish life, now as both Rabbi and Head of the Sanhedrin and as King of Israel . By Jewish law and custom (intrinsic to him) he would be required to get married, have children, and raise and defend a family, and provide for his community.
We would see much more of the complete nature of Christ. David who was God’s favorite, because he was most “like God”. is more of the nature of the composite being that is Christ than what we experience through the gospels. The gospels only allude to half of the inherent nature of Christ as pascal sacrifice. (the lamb) The Lion is yet to come and he makes it very clear” luke warm Christians I will spit you out of my mouth”. No Lamb there.
Just saying…
So, yes the Law is important…
Well of course. Beginning with “don’t eat from that tree” and the narrative of Cain’s & Abel’s sacrifices, our very lives are aimed towards obeying & worshipping our loving, omnipotent Father for our self-sanctification & salvation & His glory.
I always wonder what they are thinking, who claim belief yet want to make up some new rules, when they look on a crucifix. This was for His own amusement? Pardon the facetiousness.
Issue of Dominion
That which is real must possess certain intrinsic qualities that determine the nature of its absolute state. That thing, in order to be real must:
exist in and of itself.
have always been and always will be.
be fixed, unchanging and indivisible.
God is the only thing in this reality that qualifies as something that exists, and possess the natural inherent qualities that define intrinsic realness.
Since God is the only thing that is truly real and substantial in this existence. And since He is the only thing in this existence that possesses all the intrinsic qualities that define something that is absolute, real and substantial,
God is the primary substantial reality that is True and absolute.
God is the only thing that is real and substantial, and everything else in reality is only a secondary derivitive of that which is real and absolute.
God!
A derivitive has no intrinsic realness on it’s own, it’s existence and natural state is that of dependency.
Because a derivitive has no intrinsic realness of it’s own, all derivitives exist only as a secondary unsubstantial and created thing. This derivitive may only ever exist as a secondary unsubstantial reflection of of the primary absolute state of the original, which is real. (primary and absolute)
Because of the intrinsic unrealness qualities of a derivitives nature, it can never be greater than or independent from the primary absolute. God
Therefore, that which is created can never be:
greater than,
have dominion over,
independent,
from that which is intrinsically real and absolute…
GOD!!!
You are not your body. Your body is a vehicle which houses your soul and inside that soul, resides the Holy Spirit. To use a metaphor:
We as human beings cannot go into the deep parts of the ocean without a scuba suit, The environmental conditions of the deep sea are not compatible with conditions needed to sustain human life. We cannot live without this suit to ptotect and sustain our lives.
The body is the “scuba suit” of the soul. It affords the soul the opportunity to interact with life and transverse the waters of experience. It creates the stage for our individual soul’s natural growth and it’s development into a mature loving relationship with God our Father.
Since everything is God, and since everything is made through God, all conventional existence is an extension and derivitive of God the absolute reality.
Grasping this understanding makes the relationship between God and Man that much more intimate and personal, as he is not only watching us, He is with us and in us. Sharing this experience with us. He smells what we smell and tastes what we taste. He feels what we feel and knows what we know. On a subatomic level, God is with us through every dimension of our natural existence.
Allow me another metaphor:
If the body is a Temple, it can be also looked at as a Church, with the soul it’s Tabernacle and the Divine spark of the soul, the Eucharist.
So how sacred is the body? Only as sacred as you keep it.
We should always work to keep our Church, our Temple. well cleaned (spiritual) and well ordered. (physical/intellectual) So we may serve God and His children.
All Sin is an Issue of Dominion
All sin is an issue of dominion. Whether you are going to do your God’s will, or whether you are going to take dominion and possession over that vehicle, (That which is not yours and that which you didn’t create) and do your own will.
In every moment there is the opportunity to turn your cheek to God or to turn your back to Him, an opportunity to live under the loving umbrella of God’s communal support and protection, or not.
It is only when we take dominion over that which is His, (and not ours) do we sin.
So we joyfully and willfully submit our total composite physical being to Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior.
YESHUA
Why the special exception for only one class of Commandment-breakers? There are countless sins demanding excuses, exceptions, and discernments for why the sacraments can be blasphemed, and taken falsely unto condemnation.
Because we’re only talking about that one issue right now… I you want understand the proper way to act like a True Catholic, go to my site… bloodandwatersociety.com
it’s all right there.
Don’t be impatient – he will get to those.
Cardinal Onaiyekan is quite right of course. The “synod on the family” has done nothing whatsoever for families – quite the contrary, in fact.
On the other hand, Cardinal Onaiyekan is quite wrong. It is clear what the synod was intended to do – to undermine perennial Christian teaching on marriage and the family and to promote adultery and sodomy in its stead. Who could believe otherwise?
Exactly.
Who? Well, for starters, a few bemused cardinals and bishops who hang out at the Vatican. Then there is gang who leads the Church in Germany, a sprinkling of Legion of Christ ladder-climbers, some out-to-lunch Latin American clerics also on the make, and few wily sophists sporting Roman collars and miters in the US. Of course, it may be they actually know better but are simply following the Bergoglian line of advancement these day in ecclesiastic circles.
Speaking of circles….where is CDL Maradiaga???
Is he still in some airport traffic circle?
My guess? He’s ensconced in the Vatican — perhaps at the Casa Santa Marta in the basement; got to be humble, you know — plotting some clever new heretical practice. He’s been off the radar long enough to have his plan almost complete by now. He’s probably putting the finishing touches on it, mixing in a little obfuscating traditionalist-sounding rhetoric, a few ‘thees’ and ‘thous’ along with some pious assertions concerning the plan’s total orthodoxy, stuff for the rubes out there in the pews who still seem to like those kinds things.
This is the same hypocrite and ‘pope’ who, just a few days ago, exhorted us all to “bring clarity where there is ambiguity.” Physician, heal thyself!
” just a few days ago, exhorted us all to “bring clarity where there is ambiguity”
That’s part of the playbook. It’s done deliberately.
Of course it is. It’s almost as though he’s taking the p#%s out of us. At least, that’s the way I feel. But there’s more, much more to it than that. He works in the shadows of his deliberately crafted ambiguity to pursue the course he is hell bent on pursuing.
Your Eminence,
Pending your receipt of a reply from Pope Francis, allow me to be so bold as to offer my own customized attempt at achieving some clarity in this matter.
Has Pope Francis opened the door to communion for the divorced and remarried? YES
Will the pope enlighten those who are still confused as to whether this is actually the case? NO
Do faithful Catholics want you and any other prelates in responsible positions to boldly proclaim your opposition to this diabolical disorientation and novel contagion and censure the person who is its undeniable source? YES
Yours exasperatedly,
Ivor Hadenuff
WOW. You broke the sound barrier with that one. I could hear you all the way here in southeastern PA.
Calling heresy “confusion” is simply more modernist double speak.
Really, this is an insult to Catholics all over the world.
I really do not understand the culture that would produce a man like this Eijk fellow, or the rest of the Cardinals either.
Try Vatican II culture.
Heretical practices encouraged by Francis spread to Portugal. http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2018/01/26/portuguese-diocese-endorses-communion-for-remarried/
Yes. And this is perhaps the worst, next to Malta’s, of the AL accommodations to active adultery. Complete and total capitulation…shameful at best.
“In Portugal, the dogma of the faith will always be preserved…etc…” ???
By whom?
By whom? And what exactly does this Fatima message mean in light of recent
events in Portugal?
Barry, it means the Fatima message is exactly, precisely on schedule and so we pray and wait for the consecration to be made and it WILL be made, LATE, but not too LATE.
Not under this Pope, John. And unity among Bishops is weakening by the day as Our Lady Of Akita
prophesied. And the next Pope will most likely be in the mould of Bergoglio so where does that leave us.
The Pope in union with all the Bishops of the world to consecrate Russia PROPERLY at some future date?
I think that Horse may already have bolted. I appreciate your comments John, there’s a lot of confusion
about the Fatima Consecration “issue” and indeed other prophecies that state Russia will Glorify God more
than any other nation.
They are already turning back the clock in Russia regarding many social evil’s, while the West embraces a new
form of Communism. Just some thoughts, I don’t know.
It’s true, it will be, I guarantee there are souls there right now holding on to the dogma of the faith. Ireland is another country in a prophecy that said it would maintain the faith. Where? Probably in a lot of souls spread out all around that country.
This specific mention by Our Lady at Fatima should be self-evident for Portugal, and indeed everywhere else
where there is a significant Catholic population. The Church, a remnant even, would always prevail.
So what Our Lady is referring to is open to interpretation, and the latest actions of the Portuguese hierarchy with
regard to A.L gives one pause to reflect upon what exactly Our Lady meant.
If the Dogma of the Faith is being preserved, why are the Portuguese hierarchy rewarding adulterers with full
Communion?
Historically, the Portuguese hierarchy, with some honourable exceptions, hasn’t done very much for the Faith. It’s sad but it’s true…
It’s the same with Ireland for the last few decades.
I just listened to Fr. Ripperger in “Our Times, Spiritual Preperation” and he said these prophecies should always be taken very directly without interpretation. So if our Lady said “in Portuagl, the dogma of the faith will always be preserved”, then it will be and exactly as she said it would be, no interpretation required.
Unable to be specific, but I’ve been aware for years that he Diocese of Leiria-Fatima has been in a state of “confusion.” My sense of things would be that it is quite comfortable with the Bergoglian epoch. If anyone knows more speak up.
Mind you: “In Portugal, the dogma of the faith will always be preserved”; not: “Portugal will always preserve the dogma of the faith”…
A notable distinction Joao, however in light of whats happening in your homeland with what
Our Lady said at Fatima THOSE words are arguably confusing.
Well, yes… and no… With few (though very remarkable) exceptions, the high clergy of my country has never been up to their duties…
In Portugal, the dogma of the Faith, along with the devotion to Our Lady, has always been kept by the anonymous priests and the anonymous faithfuls. And I gather it will always be like that…
As someone said many years ago, Portugal is a “permanent miracle”…
“As someone said many years ago, Portugal is a “permanent miracle”….”
I hope that I can say the same thing about my conversion 🙂
God bless!
Johnny,
We ought to be keeping a scorecard to record the “pros”, “cons” and “undecideds” as a measure of the indescribale confusion caused by AL.
In favour: Malta, Braga, Chicago, Argentina, San Diego, Germany (maybe)……
Against: Seattle, Philadelphia, Costa Rica, Portsmouth (England), Poland…..
Undecided: Rest of English dioceses…..Germany (maybe)
Germany seems to be mostly “in favour”. But apparently the bishops produced a document “clarifying” AL and Cologne and Augsburg baulked at deciding anything because they couldn’t understand the clarification document.
For months I have been mocking the utter chaos exemplified by the bridge over the River Niesse between Gorlitz and Zgorzelek. As I walked over this historic boundary in 2016, the teaching of AL changed 180 degrees in 100 yards. Maybe I can repeat this feat two miles from my home as the River Thames divides Portsmouth diocese from Birmingham and I don’t know which way Birmingham will jump.
I suspect that many of our clergy will follow the peerless example of the Vicar of Bray, who changed his religion 4 or 5 times depending on which King sat on the throne. Bray is about twelve miles east of where I live and has been overrun by modern housing and commerce, though his church very much survives. And the wickedly funny song and its countless derivatives give huge pleasure.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vicar_of_Bray_(song)
Bill, here is an article that appeared just this morning on the site The Catholic Thing. It sums up quite well the gravity of this challenge to orthodoxy favored by Francis.
https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2018/01/27/a-second-look-at-the-kazakh-bishops-profession/
Thanks for that!
Thanks very much for that link. Plenty of people have re-emphasised those solid arguments with just about zero visible results in Rome.
I note that the Archbishop of Birmingham, our neighbouring diocese, has been involved in the futile ARCIC (Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission) exercise for years. As this ludicrous yakfest has been running since 1969 with no visible results for Christian reunion, apart from mountains of paper, my bet is that Birmingham is going down the Malta route on AL and Catholic doctrine will change 180 degrees as you cross the Thames.
My bet looks more like a 100 to 1 racing certainty, if you judge by the Joy with which Birmingham’s website is celebrating the forthcoming World Meeting of Families in Dublin.
=======================================
It’s All About Love
A new Diocesan programme to celebrate the joy of love is to be launched in January.
The Family Ministry-led event will culminate in a pilgrimage to Dublin in August 2018.
One hundred places have been secured for the pilgrimage, and it is hoped a diverse group of people from across the Diocese will take part in the programme.
=======================================
I’m sitting on a curious situation with my bishop. He came out defending the orthodoxy of AL to me in a letter early on. Mentioning by the way that there was no heresy in it when I actually never said that in my letter to him…think he might have been somewhat self-conscious…?
Anyway, I just wrote him asking him if he is going to sign on to the Kazakh statement.
That was a couple weeks ago. So far he’s Bergoglioing me.
LOL.
I reckon there are quite a few bishops who are wearing themselves out chasing their own tails on this thing, some of whom believe the Pope to be in error but are too gutless to say it, others who just don’t know, and others who just don’t care. And then the others who are raging heretics and think the Pope is too orthodox…
Like the Vicar of Bray, I suspect that these bishops will make sure that they keep their jobs, whatever “interpretation” they are expected or forced to proclaim.
Only one diocese so far. I wonder what the Bishop of Guarda will do. His doctoral thesis was on Portugal and Vatican I and he dug up just how awful some of the Bishops were at that time. It was the laity who eventually rose up and said enough is enough but it took Our Lady at Fatima to finally finish the job.
To my utter dismay, the Patriarch of Lisbon is reported to have said that he’s going to implement the argentinian ‘guidelines’ here… 🙁
WOW.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/98e7e4edc87fde60892a00cae3162b7f00e4197ca71b59780aa0d46dad0fd2a7.jpg
Asking questions, now? His reaction is 2 years late.
His avatar should be Zootopia’s “Flash”.
Better late than never.
Let us not give in to anger, which then causes us to condemn those who join us for not doing so earlier. After all, are we not praying for and hoping that many more will join in the fight? Personally, I am praying everyday, and so are many of my parishioners, for many more to do so, even ones who have appeared to have given in.
This very day, I exhorted my parishioners to continue to pray for the conversion of the clergy and encourage the with Cardinal Ejik’s public call for Pope Francis to clearly address this situation. Never quit praying for the Bishops and the Clergy! You never know when one might be on the brink of conversion and holy boldness.
Pax Tecum,
Fr. RP
Would be nice if there was some universality in the words coming from the Pastors. If your only source of the Catholic world was from the pulpit at my church, you’d never know there were any controversies or serious discussions on the state of the Church. No mention of anything from the Synods, no mention of anything the Pope has written in the last few years. Really just weak preaching about being nice and Jesus loves us (not that they are by themselves bad/wrong things) and nothing about the constant need for Sacrament of Reconciliation. Apathy is the best way to describe my “churchin” over the last 3 years.
Hi Brian, if you can (I know it is not always possible) try to get to a Tridentine Mass. More than likely, the preaching will give nourishment for the soul. God bless.
This is all superfluous.
Were there an analogy made here: As if Jorge was a husband, and the rest of us his spouse, like in a real marriage. You know the kind where the two are one. Like the reflection of the Trinity marriage is supposed to be.
Well if that spouse’s behavior(see the behavior of Jorge…..) was destroying, literally, the unity among the spouses and the children(ie…the rest of us) and the good spouse asked the bad spouse to address it(ie…for a long while) and the bad spouse “kept on keepin on” with his destructive behavior
THEN
The GOOD SPOUSE has both the OBLIGATION and THE RIGHT, BEFORE GOD HIMSELF, as the Church ALREADY TEACHES RELATED TO SACRAMENTAL, VALID MARRIAGES, THAT THE WRONGED SPOUSE RIGHTEOUSLY CAN SEPARATE THEMSELVES AND THEIR INNOCENT CHILDREN FROM THE UNREPENTING, FAMILY DESTROYING SPOUSE.
PERIOD!!!
It is time for priests and bishop to SCHISM.
IT IS BLESSED BY GOD HIMSELF.
JESUS CHRIST WANTS US TO SCHISM.
PERIOD. HE BLESSES IT.
BUT WE MUST REMAIN FAITHFUL TO OUR MARRIAGE AND PRAY FOR OUR ERRANT SPOUSE, BUT WE ARE GUILTY OF HIS WRONG DOING IF WE DO NOT SCHISM.
Yes, I am the abandoned spouse who has for nearing three decades remained faithful to our abandoned marriage. I know justification for a separation, even a divorce if needed.
IT IS TIME FOR THAT SEPARATION, OFFICIALLY.
No, it’s time for a formal correction and condemnation of Amoris Laetitia.
Keep waiting, and waiting, and waiting, as you participate in the adulterous behavior with Jorge.
GOOD JOB!
HE IS AN ADULTERER. PERIOD.
Make no mistake about it. You are no different than a spouse who remains with an adulterer who refuses to stop.
You are BLIND if you do not see that. But, I understand the bind.
I am living it, too. In the Church and in my marriage.
Enough said, by me.
Karl, keep on keeping on, carry that cross to the finish, as a married man, I’m right there with you, the sword the brings division has pierced so many families but as Saint Padre Pio said if the cross is heavy, ask God for help and he will extend his hand and help you.
And the innocent children might think that the good spouse is being evil by leaving the unfaithful spouse.
The good spouse and innocent children WILL be vindicated, Karl.
We have to stay at the foot of the Cross with Our Lady, the Virgin most faithful and the Beloved Disciple.
Offer up your sufferings for the Church, Karl. You will be truly imitating the Bridegroom of Whom you are a living icon.
He is with you, Karl:
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/97df09ea04c69b13a0a04e0a0591dea73881d5a1152a070031457fdfd39447b8.png
One of my daughters told me that her children are Catholic BECAUSE of the choices that she has seen me make. Meaning, my fidelity to our abandoned marriage, primarily.
I am not advocating starting another Church. I am saying Rome is corrupted and MUST NOT BE submitted to. This MUST BE FORMALIZED and the Pope told he must repent, in public, or he will be isolated from the true Catholic Church.
ALL clerics who follow him must be subject to the same. Ultimately, if they do not repent in public, they MUST BE FORMALLY EXCOMMUNICATED.
If this does not happen, everything is emptiness.
I will continue to be faithful to our wedding vows, but I cannot be submissive to clerics who will not act DECISIVELY.
In this case, I must follow my OWN CONSCIENCE as it leads me wherever. If THAT is not sufficient for GOD, then I will be lost, but I must do what makes sense to me. This is the direct fruit of all of this.
I believe, with moral certainty, that this confusion is EXACTLY what Jorge Bergoglio is about.
Any cleric who does not see this, clearly, is unfit to be even a Catholic, much less a cleric.
I have heard no Catholic bishop OPENLY CONDEMN him, not that I am aware of. The time to ask him to ADDRESS the DUBIA, is past.
He is giving the MIDDLE FINGER IN PUBLIC TO JESUS CHRIST, WITH FULL KNOWLEDGE AND COMPLETE FIRM CHOICE TO DO JUST THAT.
Dear Karl,
What set off little alarm bells in my head is what you posted earlier:
“It is time for priests and bishops to SCHISM.
IT IS BLESSED BY GOD HIMSELF.
JESUS CHRIST WANTS US TO SCHISM.
PERIOD. HE BLESSES IT.”
Vs. what you replied later:
“I am not advocating starting another Church. I am saying Rome is corrupted and MUST NOT BE submitted to.”
Schism, if I remember right, is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff and the bishops in communion with him.
There’s a world of difference between schism and doing what St. Robert Bellarmine advised, i.e. if the pope went against the customs of the Church he should not be obeyed.
We have to obey the pope and bishops in what is NOT manifestly sinful. Otherwise, yes, we have to obey our superiors (c.f. Rom. 13: 1 et seq.)
God bless!
In Christ the King,
Margaret
P.S. In our church, today’s readings were 1 Cor. 6: 12-20 and Luke 15: 11-32.
I do not believe that a SCHISM forms another Church. THAT we cannot do, just as I cannot enter into another marriage, because my wife is an adulterer.
However, to remain with an adulterer, is to leave the impression(called scandal as I understand it) that adultery is acceptable, which it is not. Therefore, in civil terms a separation or divorce is RIGHTEOUS AND GOD LOVES IT! He DOES NOT love finding another spouse, which is what forming another Church is.
But, Rome MUST BE rejected. It is wrong to accept it piecemeal.
A Pope has no right to teach heresy and to remain obeyed in other areas. This ONLY leads to confusion/pandemonium. All those who support him are wrong.
There must be clarity, or it is scandalous. There is no middle ground. He has refused clarity.
My parents taught me that to argue with someone is less wrong than to ignore them. To ignore them negates their right to exist.
That is EXACTLY what the current Pope is doing, completely willfully and completely knowledgeably. I am not reading his mind.
His silence affirms his heresy.
Dear Karl,
Obviously, there must be clarity. I don’t know the answers to your questions. I wish there was something more I could say to help you. Sending you a hug and prayers.
In Christ the King,
Margaret
P.S. Something to console you:
Let us sing a hymn of praise to the Virgin Mary,
glory of the whole world!
She was herself formed by human seed,
yet she became the Mother of the Master, the Gate of heaven,
the theme of the angels’ hymn and beauty of the faithful.
She was seen as being heavenly
and the Tabernacle of the Godhead.
She indeed tore down the wall of enmity between God and man,
and brought peace in its place, she opened up the kingdom of heaven.
Let us therefore cling fast to her for she is the anchor of faith,
and let us receive as our stronghold the Lord Who was born of her.
Be of good cheer, then, and have confidence, O people of God,
for He will fight our enemies for us, He is all-powerful!
God bless you, Margaret.
To continue to have relations with an adulterous spouse is “condonation.” The one doing the condoning forfeits certain rights.
Behold Pope Francis today:
“Authentic pastors,” Pope Francis said, “are those who do not abandon people (to be left) on their own nor do they leave them in the throes of their confusion and their errors, rather, with the truth and mercy they lead them back to rediscover their authentic nature in the good.”
https://www.ncronline.org/news/spirituality/francis-chronicles/lead-people-away-confusion-error-gods-mercy-pope-says
BahahahahAhahaha!!
So, by his own words, he is an inauthentic pastor?
And a hypocritical one.
I would say he is a Pass Tor!
Father, honestly, with this Pope, that quote could go the other way…..
Francis claims that he is promoting truth and mercy.
The irony.
The man is the quintessential oxymoron. Emphasis on the last syllable there.
Utterly clueless. It is positively mortifying.
I was going to add “I’m glad he doesn’t have his finger on the button,” but of course he does, and a far more lethal one than we normally reference.
Indeed, maybe he has already pushed it, but our clergy class, loath to see the bitter truth written on the wall for the past fifty-seven years, still won’t speak up.
Lets pretend, all is well…
And people will point to that and exclaim see he is Catholic.
Stuff like that is probably written for him, but in his earlier time as a Jesuit priest, he wrote this things with a (neo)conservative JP2 leaning to them.
Better than nothing but still a weak response. Amoris Laetitia is not confusing to those with strong faith. They can see the rotten fruit.
“Synods are not called to change the doctrines ou the teachings of the Church”
Did you hear that, your Holiness ?
Neither are Popes elected for this purpose, too.
“In other news, Cardinal Eijk has just been appointed by Pope Francis The Merciful as the new Cardinal-Archbishop of the Kergeulen Islands: residential & lifetime position.”
The Pope has already opined that most Catholic marriages are invalid anyway due to lack of informed consent (i.e., poor catechesis)—and he has the results of hundreds of marriage tribunals to back him up. Cardinal Sarah, Prefect for the Discipline of the Sacraments, has been silent on the issue. The Pope considers this a settled matter.
Yesterday I sent a letter ro my Arcbishop
Don’t hold your breath.
More often than not over the years I have gotten replies from my Archbishops. This time????
You may have a hope. At least you’re Cardinal.
Pls forgive me I just could not resist… 🙂
Ha.
Good on you! Look forwards to hear from you the result. God bless.
In a sense it is good more prelates are speaking out, but they need to change tact. I despair at the cries for the Pope to “clarify things”.
There is no need for clarification. It is VERY CLEAR what Francis intends and has been from the start. It is resoundingly obvious he is over-riding the clear teaching of Christ regarding marriage, but cannot say this openly due to established doctrine. This is because he – and a large part of the novus ordo Church – is protestant in all but name.
After all, Protestants chop and change morality to suit changing social attitudes and their own personal circumstances, but Catholics follow Christ alone, through thick and thin.
So, lets drop the feeble pretence that Francis is unclear and lets just call him out for what he is and what he is doing.
Its similar to the hand-wringing about the “silence” coming from Rome, in the face of petitions, the dubia, and requests for clarity. There is no silence. If you listen hard enough, you can hear Francis laughing at us and Our Lord Jesus Christ.
And note how the Cardinal’s argument is based on couples first getting a “Catholic divorce” – i.e an annulment – before returning to the sacraments. Annulments are, of course, given out like sweeties in the modern era with only the most cursory glance at the facts. if someone today asked for an annulment and didn’t get one easily, I would faint with shock.
So, the Cardinal plays fast and loose with the teaching of Christ too, except that he covers it up with the “annulment trick” to present a veneer of respectable orthodoxy, a pretence.
He is not really asking Francis to return to clear Catholic teaching and practice, but he is asking him to buy into the smoke and mirrors of the annulment trick, rather than justify the situation with Jesuit waffle. He is asking for a return to the “keeping up appearances” tactic which characterises the post-V2 era, instead of just openly ignoring Christ like the Protestants do.
During my two years (1998-2000) working in Michigan, my parish priest explained that if he helped an unhappy couple to complete their application form for a divorce, sorry, sorry, annulment, he had never known such an application to be refused. Admittedly, the USA had a higher annulment rate than any other country and the Archdiocese of Detroit had a higher rate than anywhere else in the USA. But this was a blatant admission that getting a decree of nullity was just a question of using the right phrases.
The priest who told you this was speaking honestly.
Lack of Sufficient Consent and Simulation.
I faced both charges. The first destroyed our marriage and took about 11+ years for me to reverse. The second, because the Tribunal had integrity, took about 1.5 years before my wife withdrew her case, in the second instance.
Read Bob Vasoli’s book. He was a good man, God rest his soul.
tack
Or,
“Which way did he go, Jorge?”
For you oldies but goodies…like me!!!
Looney Tunes…..like the Pope.
How fitting!!!!