Yesterday, we told you that the Vatican Philatelic and Numismatic Office plans to issue a stamp bearing the image of Martin Luther. Now, in a reflection given to commemorate the fifth centenary of the Protestant Reformation — and published in the official Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano — Cardinal Kurt Koch, President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, has made some rather astonishing observations that seem to complement this bizarre decision perfectly.
As with the L’Osservatore Romano‘s recent publication of the Maltese Bishops’ (arguably heretical) guidelines on Amoris Laetitia, the stature of the publication itself matters. Recall this description of the paper’s purpose from Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone: “Created to defend the Catholic Religion and the Roman Pontiff, the daily newspaper became the official organ of the Apostolic See, which made it an instrument, along with its value, for the diffusion of the teachings of the Successor of Peter and for information about Church events.”
The text of Koch’s remarks is not yet available in English, but one of our translators, Andrew Guernsey, has provided us with some salient excerpts. When Koch speaks of Lund, he is referring, of course, to the papal visit there last October [emphasis added]:
…the event of Lund was not only received with gratitude, but also met with criticism and opposition….While, on the Catholic side, a Protestant tendency of Catholicism is feared, on the Protestant side there has been talk of a betrayal of the Reformation…
These expressions, which were confessionally partisan and polemical, which on the part of Catholics, exacerbated the rejection of Luther and of his reform are no longer possible in an ecumenical age. In an ecumenical age, it exists as a fairly general rule, the joint participation in the life of others in joy and suffering…
In the ecumenical movement, moreover, the idea came to develop that the Reformation does not apply only to the Protestants, but also to the Catholics, and that, consequently, the commemoration of the Reformation can happen today only in ecumenical communion. This is presented to both parties as a welcome invitation to dialogue about what Catholics can learn from the Reformation and on what Protestants can draw from the catholic Church as enrichment for their own faith.
…the commemoration of the Reformation in 2017 can only be made in ecumenical communion. In this broader context, it becomes clear that Martin Luther really did care. He absolutely did not want the break with the Catholic Church and the founding of a new church, but had in mind the renewal of all Christianity in the spirit of the Gospel. Luther was pressing for a substantial reform of the Church and not a Reformation that would lead to the disintegration of the unity of the Church. The fact that, at the time, his idea of reform was not able to be realized is largely due to political factors. While, originally, the reform movement was a movement of renewal within the Church, the birth of a Protestant Church is above all the result of political decisions…
…Since the renewal of the whole Church was the true purpose of Luther’s reform, the division of the Church, the birth of a Protestant church and the separation of Protestant ecclesial communities from the Catholic Church should not be considered as a successful outcome of the Reformation, but as expression of his temporary failure or at least as an emergency fallback. In fact, the real and proper success of the reform will only be realized with the overcoming of the divisions among Christians that have been inherited from the past and with the restoration of the Church one and united, renewed in the spirit of the Gospel.
In this regard, the Second Vatican Council, which bound together, in an irrevocable manner, the ecumenical commitment to restoring Christian unity and the renewal of the Catholic Church, has made an essential contribution, such that we can state, even in this respect, that in the Second Vatican Council, Martin Luther would have “found his own council.” The council would have appealed to him in the time in which he lived.
…it will already be a great achievement if the commemoration will take further steps towards a binding ecclesial communion. The latter must remain the goal of all ecumenical effort and, therefore, it is precisely to this end also that the commemoration of the Reformation must be aimed.
…Melanchthon has thus proven to be a great “ecumenist of his time”, able to show the way to us today as we celebrate together the commemoration of the Reformation. This will only be an ecumenical opportunity if 2017 will not mark the end but a new beginning on the path of ecumenism aimed at achievement of full ecclesial communion between Lutherans and Catholics…
There are some things to unpack here.
I have no idea what an “ecumenical age” is, or if there’s any cure for one. What I do know is that the Great Commission is valid for all Catholics of all times, no exceptions.
Neither do I know what “ecumenical communion” signifies for prelates like Koch. We already know that the rejection of the concept of an “ecumenism of return” — the idea that all ecumenical activity should be geared toward conversion of non-Catholic Christians to the True Faith — is ascendant in the 21st century Vatican. We hear a lot about this idea of “journeying together” in ecumenical circles, as though we’re all just following parallel paths to heaven, regardless of our significant theological differences.
Koch also says that the split Luther caused was a failure on his part; it’s pretty tepid stuff, but actually a more severe criticism than I would have expected. He then says, “In fact, the real and proper success of the reform will only be realized with the overcoming of the divisions among Christians that have been inherited from the past and with the restoration of the Church one and united, renewed in the spirit of the Gospel.”
That sounds to me vaguely like “ecumenism of return” language. I can’t be sure, because the concept of a unified Church — which should be self-evident — is not actually defined here as “the Catholic Church”. If he’s hinting at that, it’s good news, but odd, considering the ecumenical climate in Rome.
Then he unloads the read head-turner, though, saying that “the Second Vatican Council, which bound together, in an irrevocable manner, the ecumenical commitment to restoring Christian unity and the renewal of the Catholic Church, has made an essential contribution, such that we can state, even in this respect, that in the Second Vatican Council, Martin Luther would have ‘found his own council.’ The council would have appealed to him in the time in which he lived.”
I remember a story a friend told me, way back in my early days of exploring traditional Catholicism. He said that he was driving along somewhere in rural Virginia, and he got a flat tire. Realizing he didn’t have a spare, he walked up to the door of the closest building — a Lutheran church — and asked if he could use their phone. (This was before the ubiquity of cell phones.) He said they were very friendly, and while he was there, they, like the dutiful Christians they were, invited him to their Sunday service. They handed him a program, which had the text of their liturgy printed inside.
“It was the Novus Ordo.” He told me, an astonished look on his face. “Pretty much word for word with a couple of small changes.”
It always struck me, even then, before I was more fully awake to the crisis, that the Catholic liturgy should, if it’s done right, be a stumbling block to Protestants. We have fundamentally different sacramental theology. As time went on, I came to better understand the larger ecumenical agenda behind not just the changing — in a Protestantizing fashion — of the liturgy, but also the larger Protestant influence on the Second Vatican Council itself.
And while my friend’s story was anecdotal in nature, not theological, it only stands to reason that if the post-conciliar Catholic liturgy was amenable to Lutherans, the council that set the stage for that liturgy’s creation might very well be acceptable to Luther himself. Cardinal Koch certainly seems to think so, and why shouldn’t we take his word for it? He’s the man charged with understanding the differences and commonalities between our two faiths, and is closely aligned with those most in tune with the so-called “Spirit of Vatican II”.
One wonders, therefore, what Koch is driving at when he speaks of taking “further steps toward a binding ecclesial communion.” Is this unity something he envisions under the “de-fanged” version of post-conciliar Catholicism, offensive (and inspiring) to precisely nobody? Or is it something even less — a federation of churches loosely affiliated with the pope?
Unfortunately, we can only speculate at this point. Whatever it is, it’s going to be something less (or perhaps more, depending upon how you look at it) than it should be, and that’s a problem. We need the restoration of an authentic Catholicism — liturgically, theologically, doctrinally, catechetically — before we can do much good through evangelization. I’ve often wondered if many of the Catholic converts from Protestantism since the Second Vatican Council would have converted to the pre-conciliar Church — and if not, why not? Did they convert to fullness of truth, or only to the heavily redacted — and frankly, dumbed down — version of this religious powerhouse that was the driving force of Western Civilization?
As I’ve told you before, I suspect one of the next big agenda items will be intercommunion. If I’m right, this feels (despite certain positive noises about “unity”) as though it’s actually just one more step toward justifying the unthinkable.
Come on let’s pray to defeat this nonsense from Malta and everywhere else that abuse against Our Lord Jesus Christ is happening. Let’s fight the good fight.
Yes, it is the best and only option.
It used to be, during the JPII and Benedict eras, churchmen like Koch would occasionally let this sort of thing slip from their lips from time to time, then became mum on the subject for fear of reprisal for sounding too “unorthodox” or breaking with the “hermeneutic of continuity”. Now, thanks no doubt to the “Francis Effect”, it’s as if they don’t even care any longer about being caught spouting such heretical garbage.
These prelates truly do believe that Catholicism today is a fundamentally different religion from what it was prior to 1962 or so, to the point that they are now practically shouting it from the rooftops. They must be simultaneously exhilarated and bewildered that virtually no one is calling them out on this, so they are becoming even bolder by the day. So we keep getting dose after dose of this drivel—”Luther was right all along/The Catholic Church must change/Ecumenism is more important than anything”—and yet no one save for us “reactionaries” says a word.
Cardinal Koch, not that you would ever read this, but if you by chance happen to do so, know that the reason I am Catholic is precisely not because it is any way shape or form like Protestantism, and that its sacramental theology of Holy Mother Church—as historically expressed in the Mass of the Ages and the offering of the unbloody sacrifice—is inherently incompatible with Protestant theology. To try to claim some sort of false equivalence between the two is an insult to the laity’s intelligence, and you should know better. These matters have already settled since the Council of Trent—you know, the council you and other prelates like to pretend never happened. If you want to be Catholic, then be Catholic, with everything that entails; otherwise, just be honest and join another “ecclesial community” more in line with your personal preferences. But, please, modernists, keep your hands off Mother Church; all you are doing is fueling the ire of her loyal sons and daughters who are tired of seeing her treated as if she is inherently flawed and ugly rather than the beautiful, spotless Bride of Our Lord Jesus Christ that she is.
Yes, they won’t leave the Bride of Christ; they insist on dragging her in the mud. Protestantism has little to offer me, thank you. I will remain Catholic.
Do you think God cares about theology?
Absolutely. Theology is the study of God; it’s faith seeking reason. Theology is how we understand God, and He most certainly cares about us knowing Him and understanding Him, as best as finite creatures can. “God desires all men to come to the full knowledge of the truth.” “I am the way, the truth, and the life.” So yeah, God cares about theology.
No, God is surely finding it very amusing. Study of God you say! Hahaha…How can (say) a 1.7 kg gray messy mass ever understand infinity? Did the great Aquinus achieved his goal? You tell me! By revelation? Whose? Of the Prophets A, B, C, D…? and you let a group of people (Council?) to decide which will be elevated to the pedestal of canonic Authority! Why do you cloth the unfathomable (God) in a male noun? Do u think He (?) cares about His(?) own sex identity? Unless we go back at least to the Desert Fathers and reflect humbly (and most likely very painfully) on origins of our Christian Catholic faith, we will go in circles forever…and our Moslem brothers (yes, because Islam is a heretic Christian sect) will rejoice and kill you. They already do…Something else 4 u to think about and reflect upon. I’m sure we both agree God is infinite Love. Why would he allow his own creation for fight each other? (I do not want 2 go to the story of Original Sin). But why He(?) allows so many religions to contest for His(?) favours if He(?) is just One? Even your darling theology is not one, but many…and some of them deny God…
You are clearly a heretic. Do you deny this? ‘Cuz in your last few comments, you really sound like one.
And, before you post again, you might wanna review our comment policy… specifically this part:
“Do you think God cares about theology?”
That is itself a theological question.
I am trying to follow your logic, but now I realise that there is none there.
Please continue!
While I agree that the Q I posed is in itself a theological question, but why would you reserve for God a playground restricted by logic alone? You know as well as I know that God is (primarily? only? mainly?) Love. Now could you then, following your own line of condescending argumentation, delineate or establish how would Love shrink to the domain of Logic? Let me to continue a bit differently yet: it has been said that God is a Mathematician, because the world can be described by logical operations of mathematics. Perhaps maths would restrict God to rather small subset from an Infinite Set of possibilities coming out of Love??? And isn’t theology a rationally, logically organised “knowledge” of God?
Ergo: isn’t then theology a gravely restricted view of God?
You tell me please. Thank you.
God has no deprivation of anything in any way. He is purely Actual. So all those attributes you mention are fully and infinitely actual in God, and He lacks absolutely nothing.
Don’t forget that in St John’s gospel, it begins with God as the Logos. Have a look at that word. As well as being infinite love, God is infinite logic. Our study of theology is pleasing to God. He is not offended!
Good start of an answer. I think if we clear up the terms, or what you and me understand under and around them, we would sit in happiness and silently contemplate the greatness of God. May I repeat again that the grave mistake which started under the auspicies of Protestant reformers and blossomed from the XIX century in the great German Protestant Universities (Heidelberg, Gottingen) was to “investigate” God using tools of critical philology is till with us. (Nowadays we would call it deconstruction.). Catholic seats of learning could not catch up at all and were wasting time fighting evolution a la Haeckel. That defined what theology would mean from that time onward. And it has not changed at all, and the results is what we see now. The the few Catholic or impartial scholars who were not swayed by this fashion, did not have a chance to be heard by the main stream of catholic learning. The Catholic seminaries became the greenhouses of this new fashion, firstly shocked, then paralysed, and finally unable to come up with a defence, not to speak of a victory. Laudably, you seem to refer rather to Thomistic line of thought, but Thomisme was and is until now a marginal and unless it is resurrected in full rigour and creatively applied in the seminaries, together with a spiritual discipline (which is a non-negotiable prerequisite) and mastery of Greek & Latin at least, that theology remains well and truly dead. And remember: Logos is much more than Logic (although the Greek root is the same).
“I’ve often wondered if many of the Catholic converts from Protestantism since the Second Vatican Council would have converted to the pre-conciliar Church — and if not, why not?”
Speaking for myself, as a relatively recent convert, yes I would have converted to the pre-conciliar Church, in fact I feel a sort of nostalgia for something I never knew.
My great grandparents and grandmother converted from the Cof E. She always said the Catholic Church was the real church from our Lord not a fake created by a fat woman killing king. When will the English wake up and realise the government created the fake CofE so as to control and distort Christianity.
It’s the “big tent” idea. They’re pressing ahead. No more denominations.
NWO religion paid for by Soros. Everything about it is false.
PADRE PIO SAID THAT MARTIN LUTHER IS IN HELL AND CHRISTIANS WHO FOLLOW HIM WILL MEET THE SAME END:
By Fr. Stefano Manelli F.I, founder of the Franciscans of the Immaculate.
Those who do not submit themself to the pope and the teachings of the Catholic Church are also going to Hell.
Father Stefano Manelli F.I founder of the Franciscans of the Immaculate writes that Martin Luther who called himself Pope Luther 1 and condemned the pope of Rome, as going to Hell, was a great heretic.
Fr. Manelli in Il Settimanale di Padre Pio (Jan.20,2013 p.1) said that Christians today who follow Luther are also on the way to Hell.
Fr. Manelli in the Italian weekly , mentioned that Padre Pio said those Christians who believe they can speak directly with God are also going to Hell.
Luther believed he could speak directly with God. He was precipitated into Hell said Padre Pio.
Fr. Stefano Manelli in his weekly column Il Pensiero di Padre Pio,Pianeta Padre Pio, wrote that Padre Pio criticized those Christians who believe they can speak directly to God and receive instructions and do not have to submit to the authority of the pope.
This is also a dangerous road writes Fr. Manelli for Christians who believe they are in communion with God without his Vicar and the Catholic Church. They are mistaken and this is an illusion for them,as it is known, he writes, outside the church there is no salvation.
On this point, Padre Pio, with simple words, which were terrible, said that those who believe they can communicate with God directly, are on the way to Hell.
Luther’s end was horrible and frightening, he writes, but this will also be the same history of many Christians and Catholics who believe in the teachings of Luther. They risk also going to Hell like Luther, for not listening to the pope.
We need to understand the words of Jesus, in which he delegated St.Peter and his successors the guarantee of a unique Catholic Faith in the Church.(Lk.22,32).This is the guarantee and confirmation given to the popes which is secure and infallible and no one will be lost to Hell who remains with the pope in the Catholic Church.
‘Thou art Peter,’ said Jesus, ‘ and upon this rock I will build my Church,and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it’ (Mt.16,18).
Fr. Stefano Manelli, who personally knew the saint, said Padre Pio had kept a picture of the pope on his little working table..So always before him was the message,’After Jesus comes the Pope’.(Dopo Gesù viene il papa).
Even we, suggests Fr. Manelli, should quickly free ourself from everything which is far from the pope and not supporting the pope.Even we should value the motto of Padre Pio, ‘After Jesus comes the pope’
In 1883, Sister Maria Serafina Micheli (1849-1911) was beatified in Faicchio in the province of Benevento in the diocese of Cerreto Sannita 28 May 2011, the foundress of the Sisters of the Angels, was going to Eisleben, Saxony, the birthplace of Luther. The fourth centenary of the birth of the great heretic (10 November 1483) was celebrated on that day.
The streets were crowded, balconies included. Among the many personalities were expected at any time, with the arrival of Emperor Wilhelm I, who presided over the solemn celebrations.
The future Blessed, noting the great hoopla was not interested in knowing the reason for this unusual animation, wanted to find a church and pray to be able to make a visit to the Blessed Sacrament. After walking for a while, she finally found one, but the doors were closed. She knelt on the steps for serenity prayer. As it was in the evening, she had not noticed that it was not a Catholic church, but Protestant. While praying, the angel appeared, who said to her. “Arise, because it is a Protestant church” Then he added: “But I want you to see where Martin Luther was condemned and the pain he suffered as a punishment for his pride.”
After these words, she saw a terrible abyss of fire, where they were cruelly tortured countless souls. In the bottom of this hole there was a man, Martin Luther, which differed from the other: it was surrounded by demons that forced him to kneel, and all armed with hammers, they tried in vain , to shove a big nail in the head. Religious thought, if some of the people had seen this dramatic scene, they would not have made honors and other commemorations and celebrations for such a character.
Later, when the opportunity arose to remind his sisters live in humility and in secret. She was convinced that Martin Luther was punished in hell especially for the first deadly sin of pride. Pride is a deadly sin, brought him open rebellion against the Roman Catholic Church. His behavior, his attitude towards the Church, and his preaching were crucial to encourage and bring many souls to eternal ruin.
How can we submit to the likes of PF who we are told is a valid pope? Would we not seriously risk our own salvation if we did? No point saying he upholds the Doctrine of the Catholic Church (Christ’s Church), hasn’t changed anything, all is well – so far. All is NOT well. The list of his heresies, blasphemies & contradictory teaching are all categorised & written in stone for future generations to ponder over. PF isn’t a Catholic & should never have been ‘elected’ in the first instance.
This generation is facing a momentous schism & practically nothing of reasonable & sound instruction is given with regard to how the REAL Catholic Church will function in future. Will this imperfect council, if called, sort the matter out? Can a new conclave to elect another (and this time valid & licit) pope be quickly convened?
I hear your pain Ana, which I empathize with so intensely because I am feeling the same. This is PAINFUL!
Well, poor souls who are thus confused and live in fear they go to hell because [they suffer from self-inflicted torment that] PF is not a valid Pope! Oh dear. Why don’t they turn to Jesus instead, to the Supreme Pontiff and gladly forget about the squabbles in the Church? It seems that our dear Ana Milan has a distinctly masochistic worries, but she doesn’t need them! Leave them in Vatican!
Your tone is condescending and mocking, kindly cease and desist from making such posts against fellow posters, and please don’t waste my time explaining anything.
Thank you.
Your poisonous anti-intellect posts are a waste of bits. I vote you off the island.
Thank you for compliment.
Jesus said to Peter; “Whoever hears you, hears Me.” We struggle with the acceptance that Bergoglio is the Successor of Peter, all the while knowing that, when hearing him, we ARE NOT hearing Jesus Christ. Little wonder that so many are confused to the point of just switching off altogether.
I look forward to the exciting way in which the Holy Spirit is going to resolve this.
and that is exactly what the Evil one is waiting for!
There’s no confusion. The Cardinals elected a known psychopath, who left wreckage as a Jesuit provincial and as a archbishop. He is doing the same as Pope. It may not stop until he dies. We just need to practice the faith and hang on.
If you understand that he’s the problem, he can’t hurt you.
I am, personally, not in the least confused.I would suggest that “he’s the problem” is the wrong perspective. Benedict’s abdication and Bergoglio’s election were foreseen and permitted by God for the fulfilment of His own perfect purpose, which is the renewal of the Church. Popes Pius IX, Leo XIII and St. Pius X clearly understood that the ultimate purpose of the pernicious errors of Freemasonry and the post-French Revolutionary “enlightenment” was the complete destruction of the Catholic Church. Pope St. Pius X warned that this deadly enemy was now “the enemy within.” In 1923, within a year of his election, Pope Pius XI sought the advice of his closest curial cardinals about the desirability of a Council of the Church. They unanimously advised against it, since such a Council would be hijacked by the modernists and used for their own nefarious purposes. But in 1958, along comes John XXIII, and what did we get.
But Vatican II was, in the longer term, good for the Church, because the modernists emerged from the shadows and began to assert ever greater influence. We are now living the greatest crisis in the history of the Church, and it is Bergoglio’s permitted role to preside over the climax of this crisis.
It has to be that way, since the Church can only be rebuilt from the ground up; from the ruins of the old.
Modernism is like a toxic, festering boil whose deadly poisons threaten to kill the whole body. This boil must now be lanced, and every trace of its poison eliminated. But we must pray for Francis, because God does not desire his condemnation, but his salvation.
I think that’s an apt and accurate summary.
During his visit to Fulda, Germany in November 1980, Pope St. John Paul II was asked; “Why do you not reform the Church?”, to which he replied; “The Church cannot be reformed at this time.” He understood that it is the Church’s destiny, as the Mystical Body of Christ, to follow in the footsteps of her Head, ascend her own Calvary to be put to death, only to be gloriously resurrected and renewed in readiness for he Heavenly Bridegroom at the conclusion of history. And Pope St. John Paul II also understood that, at that point in history, the Church was still on the lower slopes of her Calvary. But the rate of ascent has been accelerating, and now, the summit is in clear view.
Within the first few months of the current papacy, while pondering Benedict’s abdication, it became clear to me that the answer could be found in 1 Samuel: 8; 7,8. Harken to the voice of the people in all that they say to the. For they have not rejected thee, but me, that I should not reign over them. According to all their works, they have done since I brought them out of Egypt until this day;as they have forsaken me and served strange gods, so do they also unto thee.
It was only possible for Christ to be put to death through His betrayal by an insider; Judas Iscariot. And so it goes with the Church. The Judases within her ranks, the “Sankt Gallen Group et al, set out to make Benedict’s job of governing the Church impossibly difficult. It is in this light that we can understand why Benedict, on his election, pleaded with us; “Please pray for me, that I do not flee for fear of the wolves.” But ultimately, echoing Gods words to Samuel, the Holy Spirit effectively said to Benedict; “Step aside and let them have what they want.” It has to be this way, otherwise this terrible crisis cannot reach its painful climax and thus be resolved, once and for all.
And of course, the deadly toxins of the festering boil of modernism have poisoned every single one of us members of the Body of Christ, to a greater or lesser degree. Therefore, while we feel great pain as the crisis reaches its climax, we should also rejoice, because we are assured that the patient will not only be restored to full health as before, but raised to a level of beauty and vigour that will exceed anything in her past history. Amen, Deo Gratias
Fr Menelli may have exaggerated and failed to discern the possibility of a bad pope back in 2013. He was was then persecuted and falsely attacked by Pope Francis and Volpi whom God punished. Francis sinned against the friars and is in the process of forfeiting his right to be pope through false teaching.
I was going to say “incredible,” but alas, nothing is incredible with this papacy. Koch and the rest of the gang either don’t know or don’t care that there are significant theological differences, that Luther hated the whole idea of the Church and the Mass, and didn’t merely want to “reform” them, and that in any case, a failed, foul-mouthed, sex-obsessed ex-monk was certainly not one to talk about “reform.”
But he’s probably right that Luther would have loved VII, because it was the wholesale adoption of, if not his specific ideas, at least his viewpoint. And Francis is just its full flowering.
Personally, I think there must be another Council and all of Vatican II must be nullified and abrogated. Like Luther, it has brought nothing but destruction and secularism.
A mere 5 years ago +Koch was singing a different tune. http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2012/06/500-years-of-protestant-reformation-we.html
But it seems Bergoglio has accompanied him on his path to full blown heresy.
Good find…what a change. Bergoglio has a toxic effect on anyone he “accompanies” (also known as “threatens,” I believe).
I absolutely agree with your last sentence. Bishop Athanasius Schneider would like to ‘revamp’ Vat 11, but personally, I would like to trash heap it and start all over, in an ORTHODOX CATHOLIC MANNER.
I can perceive that you read history, signora, but with a pretty hate-clouded spectacles. Do yourself a bit more favour and study – without any prejudice – the poor fellow Luther. he became his own victim by being hijacked by political forces. Luther was the last drop because CC did not hear the critique of Jan Hus and others much earlier…same with the current Dubia of the 4 cardinals…
Do yourself and your fellow readers the favour of not giving presumptive advice.
Why would advice hurt, Fr. RP? Never ever would an advice hurt. Particularly when it is perceived that the person who makes statements or evaluations (“But he’s probably right that Luther would have loved VII, because it was the wholesale adoption of, if not his specific ideas, at least his viewpoint. And Francis is just its full flowering.”) did not grasp the issue. On Luther, there is a small, substantial tractatus which would not hurt to be read and understood (Jacques Maritain: Three Reformers) before ever going into speculations on ML. Sorry, but with respect, take it or leave it.
Instead of giving us prayers to say for PF, it would have been better if the Kazakhstan Bishops told us they were urgently investigating where we could to attend a valid Catholic Mass & receive Holy Communion when the schism actually breaks, as it is bound to now. Satan is running amok. Will the four Cardinals please tell us if they have made the formal correction yet & what the next move will be?
Stop reading my mind!
Luther… He was right to criticise selling indulgences… Trent rightly condemned it as an abuse. Luther however claimed the Church could not give indulgences but only remit ecclesiastical penalties. Luther tapped into German nationalism. Yes there were German language translations of the books of the bible before Luther. He harnessed printing and then disseminated his own created doctrines. The joke that faith alone saves… Reducing faith to a personal opinion that will save you! He then canonising his own opinion refused to accept scripture that contradicted his doctrines… “Faith without good works is nothing… You show me you faith and I will show you my good works” . Luther married a Nun who had been thrown out of her monastery. Luther encouraged local rulers to confiscate church property and suppress monasteries. Luther doctrine of justification the mirrored his own problems.. Just sin more and have more faith… The utter depravity of humans. That we were not transformed by God’s grace but just covered up… The swearing vulgar satires of the Church and papacy using cartoons and mocking disgusting stories. The use of the story of a dead deformed calf found in the Tiber that seemed to have a tonsure. The use of poo and farting jokes. Luther acted as if he was our Lord and more of a Pope even a super hyper Pope who disguised and never admitted his teaching was not biblical or in harmony with the teaching handed down but just Luther’s ignorant opinion. Luther taught the Holy Spirit made each Christian and their interpretation of the scripture enlightened and infallible. Luther is the pathological egoist and individualist…. The icon of what modern an aspires to be… Luther was a demagogue… who encouraged the killing of peasants, concentration camps for Jews and subservience of the Church to secular rulers….so it would help his cause. look at where the egoism he left has led. Lesbian Lutherand bishops in Sweden… The scriptures reinterpreted out of existence and a Lutheran Church that complied with the governments of Lutheran countries as they filled their security agenda whether it be Germany and mass extermination in Ww2 and now. Even the Chuch of England English civil war and mutations of the Church of England now have their origin in the distortions of Faith and sin in imitation of Luther.
I don’t get it this obsession, unless it is driven by a desire to incorporate Lutheran theology into the Catholic faith.
The Lutheran “problem” will solve itself within this century. There are only 80 million Lutherans left worldwide and that number is shrinking by significant percentages every year. Lutheranism is highly concentrated in one country – Germany – which is the only country in the world with more than 10 million Lutherans (24 million).
Lutheranism is a dying faith that will soon evaporate. All we have to do is wait. Meantime, the Catholic Church stands at 1.2 billion and growing. Yes, that’s 15 times larger.
what is in CC growing? In Europe: disbelief. In Africa and Asia, the numbers who believe. There they have even martyrs now. In Europe and Australia? Faithless priests (unless they come from Asia or Africa). The Lutheranism is not a problem at all. The real problem is that only few believe in God and fear God. People only fear death (with small d). God bless and guide us.
thank you
What a lode of crap! Why is it always the Germans?
I think it was (again) Anne Catherine Emerich that Jesus communicated to her that ‘Germany is the enemy’.
Actually Prussia.
Ironic that here in Ct. We have a former Lutheran Minister now a Catholic priest-pastor in East Haven Ct.. A ex Anglican pastor of now closed Trinity church(built 1877) in Green Downtown ,Waterbury area is a priest along with his former congregation in next door Immaculate Conception RC Basilica. Lutheran church closed on Orchard and Grove St. in Waterbury. Their school and hall are now part of Catholic family services here. . Two Lutheran churches in Naugatuck nearby forced to merge because so many Lutherans left, many for the Catholic faith…………….. Not to Mention Evangel Lutherans in USA and in France forced to merge with dying USA Episcopal and Dying Calvinists of France due to Mass exodus from former Mainline now dying liberal Protestant sects………………. Shame on Francis for promoting fools like Koch, De Kessel and Cupich etc..
“In this broader context, it becomes clear that Martin Luther really did care. He absolutely did not want the break with the Catholic Church and the founding of a new church, but had in mind the renewal of all Christianity in the spirit of the Gospel. Luther was pressing for a substantial reform of the Church and not a Reformation that would lead to the disintegration of the unity of the Church. The fact that, at the time, his idea of reform was not able to be realized is largely due to political factors.”
What a load of ecumenical tripe and codswallop – truth is always the first casualty of ecumenism. The real reason his “reform” was not able to be realized is that he was an effin’ heretic and his “reform” was based on the mad ravings of an effin’ heretic. In fact it was not too different from the “reform” that the presumably well-intentioned psycopath from Buenos Aires is trying to inflict on the Church right now. Whenever you have a “reform” which is built on anything less than the full truth, then it will ALWAYS lead to disunity and schism.
This year will see the 30th anniversary of the abjuration of my former heresies and my entry into the Catholic Church. I became a Catholic – not an “ecumenical Christian” – and I will die a Catholic, so help me God. If they want me to be one of these lukewarm shitferbrains who pretends that he really, really wants unity with these aborting, contracepting, divorcing, sodomizing, fornicating, transgenderizing, IVFing, embryo-experimenting, wimmin-ordaining, pot-smoking heretics then they can suspend me, laicise me, excommunicate me, kill me, burn my body, scatter the ashes on unconsecrated ground – it aint ever happening!
I’m sure Jesus won’t put you on the vomit list!
“I don’t have to tell you things are bad. Everybody knows things are bad. It’s a schism. Most priest give communion to everybody because they’re scared of losing their job.
Churches are going bust. Priests carry a gun when upon the altar. Homosexuals are running wild in the street and there’s almost nobody who seems to know what marriage is and what to do, and there’s no end to it.
We know the Eucharist is sacred for those in the state of grace and the blood of Christ is for the priest, and we try to attend our local parish mass where the priest tells us that all are saved and sin is absolved if you’re at peace with God, as if that’s the way it’s supposed to be.
We know most bishops and cardinals are bad – worse than bad. They’re heretical. It’s like everything they say or write is heretical, so we don’t read or listen to them anymore. We sit in adoration, praying and fasting and slowly the Church we love is getting smaller, and all we say is: ‘Please, at least leave our mass alone. Let us just have holy priest and Gregorian chant and confession once a week and I won’t say anything. Just leave our Church alone.
Well, they are not gonna leave our Church alone. They want to bury our doctrine and feminize our Church. And I want you to get MAD! I don’t want you to protest. I don’t want you to riot – I don’t want you to write to your bishop, because I wouldn’t know what to tell you to write. I don’t know what to do about the sacrilege and the protestants taking over and the loss of faith. All I know is that first you’ve got to get mad. (shouting) You’ve got to say: “I’m a Roman Catholic by the grace of God! Being a Catholic has value!”
So, I want you all to kneel down now. I want all of you to get up out of your chairs and kneel before a crucifix and bow your head and pray, pray fervently. Pray for Holy Mother Church.
Things have got to change. But first, you’ve gotta get mad!…You’ve got to say, “I’m a Roman Catholic by the grace of God and I’m not gonna take this apostasy!’
Then we’ll figure out what to do about Vatican II and Amoris Laetitia and the Francis crisis. ”
(An adaptation from Network by Sidney Aaron “Paddy” Chayefsky)
why are u so upset? If “they want to bury our doctrine and feminize our Church” who cares? Church is only a community of believers, victims of self-hypnosis. However, in the first years (Desert Fathers!) it was a community of dedicated seekers of God, through Jesus. And that is what Church should really be. And it is not. Perhaps, in case u are not a woman, you may go to Mt. Athos and explore spirituality and way to God.
If you, Koch, Kasper, Pope Francis, et al, are so much into the Lutheran church, take your sorry asses and every other “catholic” who thinks the same way you do, over to their heretical church. I don’t care BUT GET OUT of the Catholic Church. I swear I am to the point of going to Rome and physically throwing you bums out. If you don’t like the Catholic Church, get out and I hope the door hits you on the way out. I understand if you don’t post this but I have had it with these so called “catholic” leaders.
Where’s the like button?
Not a charitable position. Why are u so sure of your own right? By being born to a Catholic couple? Imagine if you would be born not in the largely Protestant Hannover, but somewhere (to give my argument a soft note) in Adis Abeba? What would u believe then?
Oh okay. I guess I’ll just go across the street from my local parish and join St. John’s Lutheran Church. We’re all the same, we’re all going to be saved, right? That’s the message I get from the current “Vicar of Christ.”
We got a hint from Cardinal Kasper a short while ago about intercommunion and now we hear hints of it again. Deja Vu?
If Jesus Christ’s direct teaching on adultery can be completely re-cast, so can John 6. All that solemn nonsense about flesh and blood and letting all those disciples walk away without even trying to meet them halfway? Where was the accompaniment? We’re going to fix all that since, you know, it’s just bread and wine. Intercommunion, in this lousy person’s opinion, is the rejection of John 6 all together.
If we block out all of the jockeying and canvassing for all of these wonderful “surprises”, it becomes very difficult to avoid the conclusion that the whole thing’s as screwed up as you think it is. The gas lighting is epic. If you think these teachings are strange, it’s because they are. And if they’re not, our shepherds have done absolutely nothing to prove it to the contrary. Yes, that’s Martin Luther being honored for dragging countless souls off the ark and into the maelstrom. No need to adjust your antenna. It’s come to that.
These people’s sole objective is the destruction of the Church. What nonsense!! And they are most embarrassing. Who are these imposters, really?
I think VII would have went too far for Luther in terms of the possibility of salvation for non-Christians.
Yes, Steve, say it, IT’S A SELLOUT. And you and those who believe like you are HOLDOUTS standing athwart the Church yelling STOP, as Bill Buckley might say.
At what cost this Modernist diabolical Disorientation of Ecumenism? These wolves won’t stop until The Lamp Lights are out and The Tabernacles are empty!
“The great movement of apostasy being organized in every country for the establishment of a One-World Church which shall have neither dogmas, nor hierarchy, neither discipline for the mind, nor curb for the passions, and which, under the pretext of freedom and human dignity, would bring back to the world (if such a Church could overcome) the reign of legalized cunning and force…”
(Pope Saint Pius X, Our Apostolic Mandate, 1910)
I’m a revert, came back in 2005 and was shocked to see how Protestant the Catholic church has gotten and I do not like it so, twice a month, go to the Traditional Latin Mass of which I just can’t get enough of. After VII the Catholic church wanted so much to be loved and accepted by the Protestant denominations in America and so made so many awful changes. Instead of pleasing God, the hierarchy decided to please man
Good evening Steve,
Please bear with me as this takes some language to develop. You had this to say:
“Koch also says that the split Luther caused was a failure on his part;
it’s pretty tepid stuff, but actually a more severe criticism than I
would have expected. He then says,’ “In fact, the real and proper success
of the reform will only be realized with the overcoming of the
divisions among Christians that have been inherited from the past and
with the restoration of the Church one and united, renewed in the spirit
of the Gospel.” ‘
What Koch is doing, as is the principal weapon of the Modernist, is to establish the implementation of the Hegelian “Dialectic of Synthesis” and to cause this to occur from within the very essence of precisely what it is that they wish to accomplish. Then in praxis, the Modernist establishes the “thesis”, such that he can then propose the “antithesis”. In doing this, that is by establishing what they define as “the problem”, which is the “thesis” according to Hegel, they can then create ex nihilo, “the remedy” to the problem which they have created or identified, and this remedy is the “antithesis”, according to Hegel. This Hegelian dialectic always and everywhere places an absolute affront to the metaphysical law of non-contradiction, as it only ever can, because it suggests that man, not God, is the author of being. Hegel’s “synthesis” suggests that man can somehow cause “being” to be “non-being” and then from non-being cause “becoming” and that is the utter and precise basis for their perfect lie of “evolutionary thought”. The “becoming” of the Modernist is the “synthesis” of Hegel’s dialectic.
With that foundation, let’s now apply Hegel’s dialectic, the Modernist’s principle weapon of destruction, used by them to undermine the understanding of truth. This is their principle mode of deception, as it works so well, as it is Luciferian. As I quote you Steve saying above, “Koch also says that the split Luther caused was a failure on his part;…”. Koch thus defines “the problem” or the “thesis” (of Hegel) as being, “the split Luther caused”, as he proclaims the split to be “his temporary failure”. Koch also proffers “the remedy” or the “antithesis” (of Hegel) to be twofold. First, the “overcoming of the divisions among Christians”, and secondly, “the restoration of the Church one and united, renewed in the spirit of the Gospel.”
Koch establishes a great deception when he suggests that it was Luther as the “cause” of the split in the Church. In Reality, Christ Jesus is the “cause” of the split as He commanded that He did not come to bring peace, rather the sword, as it is in division that the truth springs forth and is plainly seen. The division that occurred as a consequence of Luther’s heresy was in truth, unavoidable, as the Church proclaims the heretic to be anathema and as thus his heresy can only divide as Christ promised. Remember though that as part of the Koch deception, he claims that “the split Luther caused”, is the problem or thesis, when in truth it is the split that must have, as it could only have, occurred according to Jesus Christ, not Martin Luther or Cardinal Koch. In that understanding, what Koch is actually and truly saying is that Jesus Christ Himself is the pesky problem with Luther’s “Reformation”.
The next grand deception that Koch proffers is his twofold “remedy” or “antithesis”, which is firstly, the “overcoming of the divisions among Christians”, and secondly,
“the restoration of the Church one and united, renewed in the spirit of
the Gospel.” This sounds good but it is only the surface of his double entendre’. The so called,”divisions among Christians”, can in truth only be dissolved by virtue of the free will assents of each and every heretical believer, each himself coming to the fullness of the Truth, by placing, each his own faith, fully into the One True Faith by virtue of utter submission and not by allowing the sacrilege of so called, “inter-communion” or reception of the Blessed Sacrament by heretical believers, which is perfectly contrary to Divine Caritas. When Koch proffers the second part of his remedy, “the restoration of the Church one and united, renewed in the spirit of the Gospel”, I submit that the most vital understanding of what he claims is actually known in what he didn’t say in that statement and secondarily by what he did say. Firstly, what he did say was VCII code language for heretical interpretation of text and that is found in the statement, “renewed in the SPIRIT of the Gospel.” The Modernist’s use of the word, “spirit”, is his code for giving his own desired interpretation of language, rather than that of the truth. It remains significant that his use of “spirit” is in the small case as well, consistent with his diabolical intentions of its use. Secondly, what Koch didn’t say is, “renewed in the Word of the Gospel”, as if he had one iota of intention to proffer truth in his remedy, he would surely and specifically have invoked the Eternal Word as the only means for any real and true restoration of the One True Church.
Lastly, the underbelly of the double entendre’, that which is not immediately visible, is indeed the “synthesis” of Hegel, and it is the amalgamation, as the final phase, in the formation of the deception of the new one world religion, the religion of man, all dressed up Catholic, while at once devoid of all things Jesus Christ. Their mass is the Novus Ordo Missae, that which was devised by a Freemason in the person of Annibale Bugnini for Lucifer’s purposes, which are clearly to profane that which is Sacred, and thereby causing the loss of the Supernatural Faith, first by the priests and then by the laity, writ large throughout the Universal Church. Pope Francis now preaches the anti-Gospel for this anti-Church, all in the preparation for the revelation of the person of the anti-Christ. May Almighty God help us and His Blessed Mother shelter us in her Immaculate Heart, the singular place this side of eternity, where we may find and receive the grace of perseverance. Amen. Alleluia. In caritas.
“I’ve often wondered if many of the Catholic converts from Protestantism since the Second Vatican Council would have converted to the pre-conciliar Church — and if not, why not? Did they convert to fullness of truth, or only to the heavily redacted — and frankly, dumbed down — version of this religious powerhouse that was the driving force of Western Civilization?” – I am going to have to say that is a great grouping of questions to round out this article. I am thankful I had parents who grew up in the church long before Novus Ordo. I was raised in the Novus Ordo. I remembered my dad’s stories of what the church used to be like when it was all in Latin and the liturgy was said with priest facing away from the congregation. When I was a kid I was enamored and confused, I couldn’t really picture it.
As a young 20 year old I ventured away from the faith, fully leaving the church when I was 25. For the next 18 years I would say I was fully protestant/evangelical (mainly Baptist). As I began my journey to the church, I found my way by studying Eastern Orthodoxy and ultimately early Catholicism. I returned to the church last year. Having experience the liturgy of St. John Chrysostom and then the Latin Liturgy I continued to find an uneasiness in the Novus Ordo. Some of it was very familiar, but it pales in comparison to the ancient liturgies. My point being, had I grown up in a church that never had Vatican II, I may have never left (I feel it left me as a low hanging fruit to be swiped at by Fundamentalist.) However, my return and the entrance of a cradle protestant I do believe would be different. I never considered how the the Novus Ordo makes converts more comfortable. I guess I saw this in my many disagreements with evangelicals over the years, “we’re making things too easy for the sinners to stay unconverted.”
Theirs is an issue of turning their places of worship in to coffee houses, dance clubs, work out gatherings, etc. I guess ours was turning the pre-conciliar Church into a very protestant friendly, dumbed down version of the faith. Lord Help Us.
I think that most would agree that, the Pastoral council called Vatican II, was the first in a series of breaks with Catholicism as it was known since the 1500’s. The Council is unique in that, in the history of the Church, this was the only pastoral council. It did not condemn error or declare doctrine. What it did was, like Luther, create a new religion. A new Mass, new Bible, new liturgical calendar, new Code of Canon Law, new Catechism, new rites for all the Sacraments. A “You’r okay, I’m okay” attitude toward those outside the Church – that you didn’t need to be in the Catholic Church to be saved. I believe this is the direct result of ignoring the third secret and failure to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. Our recourse as Catholics is to practice the Faith as we always had, attend Holy Mass (not Novus Ordo), go to confession weekly, receive Holy Communion, pray, sacrifice and fast. We cannot do anything about the tragedy that has become Rome, only God can do that. But that does not excuse us from living our Faith every day regardless of the difficulties and persecutions. “If they have persecuted Me, they will persecute you also.”