The following is Part III of a series. Read Part I, Part II, and Part IV at the links.
Asking Questions and Reading the Signs
The current confusion in the Church has been compared to the Arian crisis.
When priests, bishops, and other Church leaders start to do and teach strange things, each Catholic has to make some choices. Where will you go to worship? Will you go to your local parish or the cathedral, where heterodoxy or liturgical abuse may be the norm? Do you decide, “They may be heterodox, but they are the priests and the bishop, so I’ll keep following them”?
I guess that many, maybe most, lay Catholics during the Arian crisis did not know or fully grasp the theological issues at stake. Most people were probably illiterate and not well informed about theological debates. They had to make a practical decision about how to live the faith: where they would go to Mass, where to receive the Sacraments. Many of them may have had no choice; maybe in many dioceses, there was no alternative to the heretical clerics.
It is a terrible position to be in, when all you want is to be a simple, faithful Catholic. Should you stick with your validly ordained but heretical bishop, or follow excommunicated St. Athanasius in the desert?
I am afraid that a similar crisis is developing today, and has been developing for decades, as Paul VI’s and John Paul II’s quotes show. Tragically, rather than continuity, the historical evidence shows rupture from the past since Vatican II – a rupture in beliefs and practices, faith and morals. In my view, the “hermeneutic of continuity” is just wishful thinking. What good is it to say that Catholic morals as defined in the Catechism or other magisterial documents have not changed, but clerics do not teach the Faith, or they teach only selected parts of the Faith, from the pulpit, and thus lead souls astray? As Pope St. Felix III says, “Not to oppose error is to approve it; and not to defend truth is to suppress it; and indeed to neglect to confound evil men, when we can do it, is no less a sin than to encourage them.”
Cardinal Gerhard Müller, current head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, says all Church teachings, including those of Vatican II and since, “must be interpreted according to the Tradition, based on Revelation and on Scripture.” The problem is that priests, bishops, and theologians use their teaching office to spread ideas that directly contradict the past teachings of the Church, and they do so without being corrected or disciplined. While doctrine does not change, policies and practices of Church leaders today undermine doctrine and dogma, putting souls in jeopardy.
For example, a certain priest named Walter Kasper wrote a book questioning the miracles and even resurrection of Jesus, and John Paul II elevated him to the cardinalate. Why?
Sodomy is still a sin that cries to heaven for vengeance, so why, then, are “gay Masses” permitted in places like London, New York, etc., with full knowledge of the bishops? Why do a majority of American Catholics support “same-sex marriage”?
How is it that various bishops publicly say homosexual practices are positive and the Church should offer a rite of commitment for two people engaging in sodomy with each other?
How can the pope’s celebration of the Protestant revolt and praise of Martin Luther – and the post-Vatican II program of “ecumenism” as a whole – be reconciled with Pius XI’s Encyclical Mortalium Animos (1928) and Magisterium’s condemnations of Luther?
Why is it that Catholics are accused of grave sin by Pope Francis for trying to help non-Catholic Christians, or those of other religions, to learn about and enter the Catholic Church (i.e., “proselytizing”)? Was St. Francis de Sales sinning by proactively converting Protestants to Catholicism by preaching door-to-door and distributing pamphlets and tracts? Was St. Dominic in error when he confronted and told heretics they were wrong and should return to Catholicism?
Why are the Four Last Things almost never heard preached, and many priests do little or nothing to encourage parishioners to dress modestly for Mass?
Why is Thomistic theology no longer part of the curriculum, or at least neglected, in many (most?) seminaries today?
Regarding the liturgy itself, in an encyclical, Pius XII defended the use of Latin as “a manifest and beautiful sign of unity as well as an effective antidote for any corruption of doctrine.” Yet many priests and bishops so zealously push the vernacular in all their Masses that entire parishes have become hostile to the Church’s mother tongue.
Here are a few examples of recent papal statements that are quite difficult to read in light of Tradition or the Magisterium:
- In summer 2016, Pope Francis said something odd: “the great majority of our sacramental marriages are null.” He also said, defending non-marital cohabitation, “I’ve seen a lot of fidelity in these cohabitations, and I am sure that this is a real marriage. They have the grace of a real marriage because of their fidelity.” This is a confusing thing to say. If the preponderance of Catholic marriages are null, this is an emergency for most Catholics in the world. The second quote is also a disturbing rejection of the Church’s constant teaching on the immorality of non-marital relations. Taken together, the quotes make it sound as though the Pope believes that people living in sin have more valid and grace-filled relationships than (presumably) married Catholics.
- Recently, the pope stated: “There is a healthy secularism, for instance, the secularism of the State. In general, a secular State is a good thing; it is better than a confessional State, because confessional States finish badly.” This is a departure from the explicit teaching of earlier popes and the tradition of the Church that the state should favor the Catholic Church, in the interest of the common good of helping everyone get to heaven. Pius XI, like other popes, said the state has a duty to promote the true religion. Does Pope Francis’s teaching not contradict the 1925 encyclical Quas Primas?
- In the same interview, the pope said: “[N]o religion as such can foment war. Because in this case it would be proclaiming a god of destruction, a god of hatred. One cannot wage war in the name of God or in the name of a religious position. War cannot be waged in any religion.” This is simply not true, factually. One recalls Joshua and Jericho and other Old Testament examples. A more recent example is that the doctrines of Islam call for jihad. Mohammed himself was a warlord, and he is considered a model of behavior for Muslims.
Tradition, Doctrine and Magisterium
Has doctrine changed? Doctrine is supposed to be unchangeable in the Catholic Church, so I will not claim that it has. However, what is obvious is that many pronouncements by Church leaders, both written and spoken, appear to contradict the traditional doctrine of the Church. It seems there are many Church leaders who would like doctrine to change. Many conciliar and post-Vatican II statements are difficult (or, frankly, impossible) to interpret as consistent with Tradition and the Magisterium.
I am not an expert on these things, but I have done a little research, and here is what I’ve found about traditional doctrines that appear to be contradicted by Vatican II and post-conciliar documents and actions by Church leaders.
The Vatican II document Dignitatis Humanae says that humans have a natural right to religious freedom. Such a teaching was explicitly rejected by all Church fathers, doctors, and popes prior to Vatican II. There is no right to practice false religions or spread error, according to pre-Vatican II doctrine. Dignitatis Humanae says false religions may be publicly promoted – a position condemned in the past. In the past, saints destroyed idols and temples and legislated against pagan and heretical practices. According to Vatican II’s modern notion of religious freedom, it appears St. Louis IX was in error for promoting Catholicism in his kingdom, and St. Thomas More was wrong for using state authority to crack down on the publication and circulation of Lutheran literature in England. The modern view is well represented in the quote from Pope Francis above that the state should be secular.
The modernist ideas of religious liberty expressed in Vatican II documents were condemned by Pius IX in Quanta Cura, Leo XIII in Libertas Praetantissimum, and the Syllabus of Errors of 1864, among many other magisterial documents. Surprisingly, Cdl. Ratzinger claims that Gaudium et Spes is a “countersyllabus” to that of 1864: ”Let us content ourselves here with stating that the text [of Gaudium et Spes] plays the role of a counter-Syllabus to the measure that it represents an attempt to officially reconcile the Church with the world as it had become after 1789.” In other words, Vatican II’s Gaudium et Spes directly challenges the teaching of an earlier pope in a magisterial document.
Pius XI reminds us that Christ is King of the universe, which includes the social and political realms, and the state has duties toward God that include support for the Catholic Church. Pius XII negotiated a concordat with Spain in 1953 that made Catholicism the state religion, which Pius XII considered a model for other countries. After Vatican II, based on Dignitatis Humanae, the Vatican pressured Spain (and other similar Catholic countries) to change the constitution to recognize the new idea of “religious liberty.”
Questions about Amoris Laetitia
The big controversy of the moment provides a good example of how doctrine appears to be changing. But doctrine cannot change, and that is why there are so many questions about 2016’s apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia, which allows for the reasoning that people in adulterous relationships can be admitted to Holy Communion. This is how the document is already being implemented in many dioceses, such as in Argentina and Rome, with the pope’s approval. Such a practice threatens the integrity of the Sacraments and obscures truths about family life and morality.
The so-called “Kasper proposal,” which kicked all this off in early 2014, was to admit civilly divorced and remarried Catholics still in valid marriages to the Sacraments, especially the Eucharist. In a November 2015 interview, Pope Francis said, “This is bottom line result, the de facto appraisals, are entrusted to the confessors, but at the end of faster or slower paths, all the divorced who ask will be admitted.”
St. John the Baptist died for upholding the truth on marriage. So did Ss. Thomas More and Bishop John Fisher. And of course, Our Lord’s words in Scripture on adultery are clear. Absolution in confession depends on contrition and the resolution to avoid sin. The Eucharist should be received only by those in a state of grace. But A.L. appears irreconcilable with these doctrines.
Contradictory implementations of Amoris, such that Communion for adulterers is considered pastoral medicine in some dioceses but mortal sin in others, destroy Church unity. If the Four Cardinals receive no answer to their dubia and therefore issue some kind of public correction of the pope, will every Catholic – pew-sitter to prelate – be put on the spot to take sides in the controversy? If your bishop or parish priest defends Amoris and distributes Communion to public, unrepentant adulterers, consistent with the pope’s teaching, what will you do?
Benjamin J. Vail, OFS is a Franciscan tertiary from the USA living with his family in Brno, Czech Republic.
Sometimes it seems it takes a convert—such as the author of this piece—to rip the bandage off decades of equivocation and obfuscation and expose reality. The reality I doubt any of us want to admit—and I include myself in this, having been raised in the post-Conciliar Church and taught to believe that the JPII papacy was equivalent to the “true interpretation” of the Council—is that the documents of Vatican II seriously contradict the pre-Conciliar teachings of the Church.
No, it is not a question of “ambiguity”, as I tried to tell myself for the longest time. No, it is not a question of them simply being “misinterpreted”. Instead, we are facing a situation in which the men entrusted with leading the Church have formally codified teachings that cannot be squared, even with the best of mental gymnastics, with what Catholics before the Council were taught to believe. Now, with 50 years of a different Mass, different Eucharistic praxis, wholly different approaches to ecumenism, et cetera, most Catholics that even bother to regularly assist at Mass believe that this “neo-Catholicism” is what the Church has always taught, and are even embarrassed and downright outraged when told otherwise.
But surely this has all been by design. The Franciscan papacy is nothing more than the inevitable outcome of the gradual, meticulous plotting by diabolical men to align the Church with postmodern existential philosophy and secularism. Had it not been for the subterfuge that took place during and after the Council, there is no way Catholics would buy what Francis is saying, as it is wholly divorced from the deposits of Scripture and sacred Tradition. No; we collectively have lulled ourselves to sleep by refusing to believe that our prelates would ever want to harm the Church and wasted so much of our energy trying to convince ourselves that the teachings of the Church have not changed when all evidence in practice points to the contrary. Had it not been for Francis’s pontificate, I do not know if I would have awoken from this stupor.
More and more Marcel Lefebvre is being vindicated.
A true example of heroic virtue. I pray he is watching over the Society right now.
I want you to know that for people like me, who by the grace of God have not been living with cognitive dissonance, hearing words like yours helps. Many prefer the stupor, and will fight anyone who will dare challenging them. They will ridicule and patronize, finding confirmation and strength in the numbers of the like-minded.
Studying the papal encyclicals of the 19th century and listening to Traditionalist priest’s homilies at the Sensus Fidelium channel on Youtube has been incredibly eye-opening for me. It made me realize that there is a whole Catholic Church that post-Vatican II has been simply ignored and even outright denied. Now I look around at a Novus Ordo mass and wonder: “Why am I here? What’s Catholic about this?”
“Had it not been for the subterfuge that took place during and after the Council, there is no way Catholics would buy what Francis is saying, as it is wholly divorced from the deposits of Scripture and Sacred Tradition …”
Had there been no Second Vatican Council, with all of its false ecumenism, its obfuscations and sophistries, the world would never have heard of Jorge Mario Bergoglio. He would have remained an obscure Jesuit cleric in Argentina and the Church and the world would undoubtedly be all the better for that. Bergolio himself would have been all the better for that. He never would never have had his perspective on the Church and its relationship with the world shaped by the highly corrosive, counterfeit gospel of liberation theology which is essentially a pseudo-theological, overtly political “situation ethics” manifesto. Vatican II let the modernist/progressivist genie out of the bottle. The genie has been running rampant ever since, looking for willing collaborators. And he has found them a plenty
“By their fruits shall you know them.”
The attached video is what fidelity to Truth looks like; refusing to bend to the secular winds of “the day”. The fruit of St. John Fisher is martyrdom and eternal glory. I don’t want the other fruit, (UN applause, accolades for theological abuse and compromise, Muslim prayers in the Vatican gardens). I want what St. John Fisher found. Lay down the Cardinal’s robes in exchange for the axe. A real cross. A real death. Faithful to the end of the narrow path
In a world as debased as ours, there should be plenty of opportunity for martyrdom.
My dear friend in Christ,
How am I, or, for that matter, anyone be able to agree or disagree with your position without specific details of the serious matters that you allude too?
Please do us the good-service of providing such details so that we might have the opportunity to dialog with you.
God Bless you,
As I stated to friend of mine, the most important question to ask any Catholic laymen, priest, religious and bishop: “What is your answer to the dubia?” Every Catholic will have to answer. for the answer will decide where they go to mass and with which bishop/priest they will align. There is no longer any middle ground. To put it more biblically, the harvest is now on the thrashing floor, the wheat is being separated from the chaff.
Also important! We should never forget all other things, as “What is your statement about ‘mutual ecumenical’ prayers with heretics?”
Or, “What is your answer to that ‘mutual spiritual’ prayer with the buddhists, islamists, etc.?”
… And many other questions that we must ask. Unfortunately, for very great number of them, we can be sure for at least a few negative answers.
So then, the only answer is the TLM!
“The problem is that priests, bishops, and theologians use their teaching office to spread ideas that directly contradict the past teachings of the Church, and they do so without being corrected or disciplined.”
Yes, absolutely, but more importantly, they do so, not just using the authority of their teaching office, but using the ambiguities and errors within official Church documents, which is often why attempts at discipline — rare as they are — lack teeth; it is far too easy for the opposition to demonstrate that their interpretations, at odds with centuries of Sacred Tradition, are actually supported by the documents of the conciliar Church.
What will I do? I will tell them that they are wrong. I will quote for them what Jesus said about marriage.
I know they will accuse me of being holier than the pope, and of being judgemental, uneducated and lacking sophistication, but I am used to it now. The quicker they finish me off with the constant ridicule, the shorter my struggle. I am so tired.
It hurts to see what they don’t see, and yet to be accused of being a primitive. Also, I really DO want to help. I will not lie and sing: I don’t care what people say.
May the Peace of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, be with you, PlushGrizzly. I too, am tired. So tired. We all are.
“It’s like in the great stories, Mr. Frodo. The ones that really mattered. Full of darkness and danger they were. And sometimes you didn’t want to know the end… because how could the end be happy? How could the world go back to the way it was when so much bad had happened? But in the end, it’s only a passing thing… this shadow. Even darkness must pass.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Two Towers
“There, peeping among the cloud-wrack above a dark tower high up in the mountains, Sam saw a white star twinkle for a while. The beauty of it smote his heart, as he looked up out of the forsaken land, and hope returned to him. For like a shaft, clear and cold, the thought pierced him that in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
Always remember, evil is not the opposite of good. Evil is the absence of God, much as darkness is the absence of light. There is no force of darkness, no power of darkness, no speed of darkness. Merely the absence of light.
To that end, darkness wins not by overcoming or overpowering the light, but merely having the light withdraw. Once the light is gone, the darkness is there, unsummoned, unbidden. No further acts need to occur for the darkness to be absolute. All that is required is the light to be gone. Hence, why all that is required for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing.
All this does not mean that there are not dark forces out there, or forces aligned with the darkness. We must fight them constantly.
Always remember, too, that light is invisible unless it shines upon something, or you view the source directly (in which case, the light is shining directly on your retinas). The brightest flashlights when viewed from the side appear to not be on at all. It is only when the light strikes an object that the brilliance is unveiled, and the luminescence is apparent. We are each charged, therefore, to show up. The light cannot be denied as long as we stand. We reflect the Light, and the Light is the Truth, and the Way, and the Son.
Do not be afraid to walk in the Valley of Darkness, for the light is there, though you do not see it, and in you being there, you become a beacon of Light not of yourself, but because of the Light shining on you.
Go forth and represent the Light. Go forth and fear no darkness. Go forth and bear witness by your mere presence, and fight for Him and His Truth always, even if you can do nothing more than stand silently by and let the Light shine upon you to be reflected where it is impossible to ignore.
Look to Love, and be a beacon of Light and Love in this world.
Thank you very much. May God bless you.
That is just beautiful! Thank you so much.
The current Modernist crisis and apostasy is the worst crisis in the history of the Church. Worse than the Arian crisis. Cardinal John Henry Newman did a wonderful study of the Arian crisis. He found about 80% of the Catholic bishops fell into the Arian heresy. Today, 90-99% of Catholic bishops are Modernists. Cardinal Newman found that while some of the laity fell, for the most part, the laity kept the faith. He found the laity pre-eminent in faith, zeal, and courage. Today, the vast majority of the laity have fallen into apostasy. The worst crisis in history has affected everyone across the board. The Pope, cardinals, bishops, priests, and the laity have all fallen into apostasy. This is the time that Christ said of in Matthew 24:22 “And unless those days had been shortened, no flesh should be saved: but for the sake of the elect those days shall be shortened.”
Either fallen into Modernist apostasy themselves, or fail to see the crisis as a crisis. The latter are too calm in the face of an emergency of the scale you describe.
Where are the Cardinals in defense of St. Peter’s Chair? They wear red to symbolize their willingness to die in its defense; to put their head on the block alongside St. John Cdl. Fisher. Only 4 brave men stand on that mountain top alone. Where is the voice of the rest of the Holy Priesthood in defense of the Sacraments they administer, and defend?
If my wife’s honor were sullied by a lecher, I would not smile benignly upon that man and “wait for time to sort it all out”. Where are the Priests in defense of their Bride’s honor!?
I like the question raised by one of the commenters below: “What is your answer to the Dubai?” I know my own answer. I think I am going to ask that question of my pastor. And if he refuses to answer or if he answers in such a way that contradicts Jesus’ words and teaching, then I will walk away. I do not see how I can remain faithful to Christ, to his (true) Church and to authentic Magisterial teachings and remain in a place where Christ is once again mocked/ crucified. That Church and pastor no longer belong to/ follow Christ and no longer teach His truth.
Your bishop may have a lot to do with the answer you receive as well.
Many priests are told what not and what to say to issues such as these by their bishop.
It is a shame and a crime for a priest to be under the rule of a bad Catholic bishop.
This may not be your case, but you might want to check on it before deciding your current priest no longer belongs to Christ. He actually may be suffering very much for Christ.
Then we, the lay faithful, should be asking our bishops for the answers to the dubia. If a priest is silent because his bishop tells him to be, that is false obedience and he is neglecting his responsibility to uphold the truth of the Faith as a pastor of souls.
So much of what we are enduring now is directly related to the erroneous belief of priests and laity that they must obey superiors no matter what, without question. We must only obey that which holds to the Tradition. For 50 + years this has occurred time and time again and it has culminated to the breaking point in which we all need to make a choice: Christ or heresy. Our Lady of Good Success, pray for us.
I hear you loud and clear.
It goes back to the bishop and we should be asking and expecting answers regarding the dubia.
The vow of obedience is a very beautiful and humble act in the priesthood.
They have trashed that as well for them.
It just occurred to me that the likely answer I will receive from my pastor as to how he would answer the dubai will be something along the lines of “it doesn’t matter how I would answer the dubai; it is addressed to the Pope and it is he who must answer (not I)” or “my answer is unimportant and irrelevant because I am not the Pope.” What then?
“If you were Pope, how would you answer the Dubia?”
A Catholic is one who follows Jesus, in union with Saints past, present and future through His Bride, the eternal Church which will be raised up to heaven one day. We call our collected beliefs the Magisterium; from Jesus through His faithful disciples. Individual brilliant, innovative minds are less important than faithful, simple discipleship.
The problem with today is that so many, including our Fathers, have lost sight of the transcendent; the unity of Jesus’ disciples across time into eternity. Belief requires seeing through the present to the eternal realities. So many today are lost in the daily grind and can’t see beyond tonight’s meal; tomorrow’s election; next week’s Synod; our current Pope’s latest opinions; the new ways of an exhortation/encyclical; brilliant, shiny, fun, merciful innovations never before seen!
I am a Catholic for one reason only: I wish to follow Jesus in union with all the simple, faithful disciples who ever lived, not the charismatic genius of today. The path to Jesus is narrow, and straight, and very few find it. But it is a sure and certain road, predictable along the way. ALL must travel that road that Jesus trod. All on the path (through time) are in agreement. Innovation is a sure sign one is on the wrong path. Turn around!
Mr. Vail, your series of articles is fantastic. Keep up the good work! Kudos to 1P5 for finding and promoting writers like you. I will continue to support 1P5 financially. Hope it continues.
At my cathedral the pastor came out around Christmas time with scathing remarks (clearly alluding to the dubia) on those who exhibit a “Holier than thou” attitude starting with those in the upper echelons of the church who refuse to hear the pope because he “has a different opinion” and a number of them now think of themselves as holier than the pope. The whole thing made me sick and I could hardly believe what I was hearing.
I never went back, perceiving a strong chance that (objectively of course) the pastor is in schism. I wonder if such experiences are common now? I had to answer the question posed in your article and it hit me like a brick wall.
I don’t know, but a couple of weeks ago, the pastor related a poignant story of Jorge Bergoglio at age 16 and how he received his call to the priesthood. Apparently, teenage Jorge was planning to celebrate “Student’s Day” by partying it up. There was a visiting priest at his parish and he went to confession the weekend before the”Student’s Day” holiday. That sacrament changed young Jorge’s life and changed his plans. He heard God’s call — Jorge Bergoglio, once a young teen, then a priest is now Pope Francis.
I am sure I should have felt inspired and uplifted, but honestly, I didn’t. It struck a chord of cognitive dissonance for me. It would be akin to telling a heartwarming story about someone who later became infamous or notorious for all the wrong reasons. My perception is that Francis is betraying the Catholic faith, betraying our Lord, and betraying the truth. That is how I am feeling about this thing. I did not go to mass last weekend. Today is Saturday. I honestly do not want to hear the praises of Francis.
I have no idea where the Bishop of my diocese stands on this matter. I can find nothing in my research, and nothing on the website. The entire matter seems to be quietly swept under the rug. Shhh.
Susan- in solidarity with you, this is definitely a painful experience for those of us who are truly in love with Christ. We have a special opportunity for graces here through this situation that has not existed in recent church history. Knowing this is what keeps me going! We actually found a parish through this that was much better than the previous which has been a huge blessing in itself. Do you have any FSSP masses around? You can count on the priests of the FSSP to be solid. If not, I would suggest at minimum calling and getting advice from one of their priests before making the very serious decision to forego mass altogether. I have asked them many questions and it has been an enormous grace for me, hope this helps!
Page 117, of the pope’s book, On Heaven and Earth, in regards to same-sex unions:
“If there is a union of a PRIVATE NATURE, THERE IS NEITHER A THIRD PARTY NOR IS SOCIETY AFFECTED. Now, if this union is given the category of marriage and they are given adoption rights, there could be children affected. Every person needs a male father and female mother that can help them shape their identity.” -Jorge Mario Bergoglio
When one denies that God Is The Author of Love, of Life, and of Marriage by denying the Sanctity of the marital act, one denies The Divinity of The Most Holy And Undiivided Blessed Trinity, and thus one denies
Salvational Love, God’s Gift of Grace and Mercy.
This is evidence enough.
Great observation, judgement and example.
There is no “holier than thou”. That is the message of a man stuck in sin who does not see a way out. There is only the Way of the Cross; the path Jesus trod; Jesus’ teachings and His example, with earthly suffering and death as the goal; the grace he bestows as a product of His living victory over sin and death. In short, the narrow path that leads to life.
I do not wish to be stuck in sin. As Jafin said, “Hell does not seem pleasant, so I’ll keep trying”.
Jesus is the “living stone”: precious to those who believe, called to holiness; but a stumbling block to those who disobey.
I Peter 2:8,9
I want to be in communion with God and His saints. I would be lying if I said I didn’t care at all what men think of me, but it really doesn’t compare. What will I do? Follow Christ. Take the narrow path. I know I’ll likely slip here and there. But hell doesn’t seem pleasant. So I’ll keep trying. I hope you all do too.
That is a great line; it made laugh: “But hell doesn’t seem pleasant. So I’ll keep trying”.
I think it was Thomas More who said, “Heaven wasn’t won on a feather bed”. He would know.
Nothing fancy, just one foot at a time.
Comrades, we should remember in our prayers every single day the souls of the early Traditionalists who understood all of this from the mid 1960s.
That the likes of Steve Skojec and others are now seeing the truth of things is a great thing, and better late than never of course; but their work is that of dwarfs standing on the shoulders of giants, re-learning from scratch what those early Traditionalists knew in their Catholic bones from the beginning: the Vatican II religion commonly called “Catholicism” is not at all the Catholic Faith but something else altogether.
They understood “all of this”, yet these “giants” could not stop celestial forces arrayed against Christ’s Bride. I think what is betrayed in your opinion is an inflated sense of what knowledge and human power can accomplish.
I believe in unity, through Charity, in Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ our Lord, first, middle and last. Every good and perfect gift comes from God as a Grace. And one of the essential gifts God gives us is unity with a shared purpose surrounding the Eternal Throne.
John 17: 20-23, Jesus’ final recorded words before the Crucifixion were an urgent plea for unity with each other, and through each other with Christ, just as Triune God was unified. Unity is a biggy.
God HATES division and strife. We will find unity when we recognize that every good and perfect gift; every trial and tribulation … ALL of it comes from God for His glory.
Steve Skojec, like so many faithful Catholics, does his part today like our Fathers did their part yesterday. If one is “greater” or more faithful than another it is only by the Grace of God and only His glory matters.
I fully understand the V II crisis and it’s grave implications. Everyone reading 1P5 gets it. Yes, the Church and the Fathers have made grave mistakes and need correction. Yes, the Popes themselves made grave mistakes; were perhaps less than faithful. But it is not the “Giants” of old who will finally put things right. They were unable before, they would likely do no better than us today. God gave the world us. Not them. And it is Jesus Christ, in His power, and through His Grace, via the Faithful living NOW, who love Him supremely that will rectify error and bring unity back to His Bride.
Perhaps it will be our Holy Father, Benedict. Who shall we send?
Yes. It will be a miracle like that; whether in our time or another.
As with the stories of all the biblical heroes: Gideon, Moses, David, Jesus Himself (if I may) … God’s champion will likely be weak, old, young, poorly educated, of low “rank”. Because it is never the wisdom and power of men who advance the Kingdom of God; rectify errors; defend against enemies. It is pure Grace from sovereign God.
We will then give full glory to God because the schemes and lies of clever men will have finally been surprisingly defeated by a young “shepherd boy”; a frail 94 year old Pope; a quiet simple Priest from the hinterlands. Not power, but weakness will end the abuse and infidelity. A surprise; unexpected, hinting of further awesome power above, like the lightning that struck St. Peter’s Basillca.
Speculation, of course. But I look to God. I pray for His Grace.
What we are witnessing is a Great Apostasy.
One can only be an apostate from Christ’s One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. To deny the Sanctity of the marital act, is to deny that God, The Ordered Communion of Perfect Complementary Love (Filioque), Is The Author of Love, of Life, and of Marriage, and thus to deny Salvational Love, God’s Gift of Grace and Mercy
The problem is that priests, bishops, and theologians use their teaching office to spread ideas that directly contradict the past teachings of the Church, and they do so without being corrected or disciplined.
This is more than a problem, its evil
very good series. Thank you.
If your bishop or parish priest defends Amoris and distributes Communion to public, unrepentant adulterers, consistent with the pope’s teaching, what will you do?
confront. Then leave! Find a holy priest that believes in God.
It truly is a different Church. Vatican II was only the culmination of many years of planning. The architects of the post VII Church were put into position to do the damage by pre VII Popes who wrote against their ideas, very puzzleing. Pope Bergolio is now working on his new “modern” mass. Lord have Mercy. He and his minions finish off the ancient dogmas to create a one world religion to go with their hoped for one world government.