Since the publication of the Four Cardinals Letter, the Catholic world is in turmoil. While there are some harsh rebukes of the four courageous cardinals – who have done nothing but defend the traditional Catholic teaching on marriage and the family – there are also some encouraging new voices coming forth in their support.
In the following, I shall give just two examples of the ongoing debate surrounding the Four Cardinals Letter — though more are yet emerging — with a contrasting third example added at the end to show also the growing sense of heterodoxy in the Church.
First, Cardinal Christoph Schönborn has made some comments about the Four Cardinals Letter that are derogatory and depreciative. As the well-respected French Catholic website Riposte Catholique on 21 November 2016 reports, Schönborn made a comment on the matter of Amoris Laetitia on 18 November, during a meeting with the Roman Rota Tribunal in Rome, saying that this document is “magisterial.” As the French website rightly observes, this comment stands in direct contradiction to Amoris Laetitia which, “in its introduction, takes great care to affirm the legitimacy of a free discussion.” According to Riposte Catholique, Schönborn claimed that The Four Cardinals Letter is “an attack on the pope,” because the cardinals “have to obey the pope.” As the French website comments: “To request a clarification is thus from now on already a form of disobedience….” For Cardinal Schönborn, moreover, this document has thus already become “a super dogma.”
Also important to note in this context is that this same French article reveals that Cardinal Schönborn had originally been (in 2015) the twelfth author of the now-called “Eleven Cardinals Book.” However, his contribution had not been accepted by its editors, because he was “too unpredictable and too fickle.” As Riposte Catholique concludes: “Just as with the Apostles, the twelve cardinals found themselves to be eleven….”
A second example of the growing conflict — as well as the loyal resistance — within the Church is coming to us from out of Germany. Hans Hoping, a professor of theology at the University of Freiburg, has now expressed his own grave reservations and explicit objections to the post-synodal exhortation Amoris Laetitia. As the Austrian Catholic website, Kath.net, reports on 21 November, Hoping has recently raised in the German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung the following piercing and very logical question: “Can remarried divorcees be married in two valid marriages at the same time?” The theologian adds: “The text Amoris Laetitia leaves open the answer to this crucial question that it itself has provoked.”
Hoping argues that – since Amoris Laetitia has not put into question the indissolubility of marriage – “one has to clarify how the marriage of remarried divorcees is related to it.” Some argue, according to the German theologian, that this new marriage is a form of a natural marriage. But he objects that even “such a non-sacramental, natural marriage” can also be, in the eyes of the Church, a valid marriage, for example in the case of a mixed marriage.
With reference to Cardinal Walter Kasper – who claims that Amoris Laetitia does not change the teaching of the Church but, at the same time, is somehow still a “paradigm shift” – Hoping says that this cardinal is trying to avoid “the impression of a breach with the previous magisterial tradition.” However, says the theologian, Amoris Laetitia not only “re-adjusts” the pastoral care, but also considers – depending upon the circumstances – “a sexual relationship outside of an existing marriage not any more as being in all cases illicit (Al 301).” Hoping sees that this new approach thus departs “from a crucial point made by Pope John Paul II’s teaching on marriage and the family where he, along with [Saint] Thomas, held firm to the decisive magisterial tradition.”
Thus Professor Hoping now adds his own resistant voice to those voices of many other theologians who have so far already publicly criticized Amoris Laetitia.
Just how far the confusion in the Church reaches and spreads nowadays is shown by the third event coming to us from the German-speaking world. Cardinal Karl Lehmann – one of the members of the progressivist “Sankt Gallen Group” – has recently made another stunning commentary in which he now invites all bishops to an act of disobedience toward the Church. As Peter Winnemöller, author at Kath.net reports:
“For that matter, what, then, is hindering us from taking married deacons – who perform a great service in the Church – and then ordaining them so that they may also take over priestly duties?” Such is the question, according to a KNA report, that was raised by Cardinal Karl Lehmann, the bishop emeritus of Mainz, in a discussion with the head of the ZDF [German television]. He [Lehmann] invited the bishops, in a provocative way, to use the freedoms which Pope Francis purportedly is granting. With reference to the fact that all religions [in Germany] are now inundated up to the neck, there should finally come some reforms, the cardinal himself stressed.
Winnemöller then asks the very good question:
Why has the cardinal, during his long life as a bishop, not already performed this act [of disobedience] himself? The question could very well give its own clear answer by itself. For, still also under Pope Francis, any bishop who performs such an illicit consecration would himself be immediately suspended.”
This Catholic author is rightly indignant about Cardinal Lehmann when he says: “It is unclear why a retired bishop now calls upon his fellow bishops to risk their own offices. […] It is of very little help in a situation of crisis to promote a further split and to call upon fellow bishops to violate the law and to be disobedient.” Winnemöller also highlights and emphasizes that “all Protestant communities ordain married persons. The lack of ministers in the EKD [Evangelical Church in Germany], however, is far more dramatic than the lack of priests in the [Catholic] Church.” Thus, in his eyes, Cardinal Lehmann’s proposal would not even slightly help solve the current problems of the Church. Winnemöller concludes:
Thus, the cardinal has done nothing else but to throw a populist [an alluring] stink bomb [or some Mainzer Stinkkäse?] into the already crisis-ridden ecclesial landscape. To speak out at a Theological Faculty [of a University] – and thereby to increase there the anyway already existent lack of sentire cum ecclesia – is irresponsible and it also promotes the latently existing inner split of the Church.
Thus, Cardinal Lehmann – one of the very men who, as it now seems, has helped Jorge Bergoglio attain his papal office – is currently further helping to undermine that same office. In light of all of this disorder and infidelity, may we keep our own heads clear and stay strong. This demoralizing time of “confusion worse confounded” – with its conflict and with its chaos – will also, we hope, soon pass!
Praise God for these events!
In this we see the culmination and necessary result of the disregard for Church teaching, the words of Christ and indeed, Christ Himself. It HAS to be.
We do not know what is going to come to pass, but we DO know that God has protected the Church in the past. And He will now.
He WILL.
As a convert, I have only had to deal with this horrific state of affairs for nearing 4 years. So I have heartfelt compassion on all those who have waited thru the dark years since Vatican 2, watching the horrors unfold, the weeds grow. But now in this Pope the weeds have reached their full height.
But we now have a different plan in place. The 4 Cardinals have determined it. The fight is here and we will see the struggle unfold. And I for one and eager to see it and be a part.
I’ve been here for 6 1/2 years now… Yeah… imagine watching it grow for all that time…
You eagerness to do battle for the LORD and His Church and His Word and His Laws is inspiring. Surely God did not misplace his trust in you when he called you. Thanks be to Him and my he grant you strength and perseverence.
RTHEVR, your post brings these words of Jesus to mind. I see them, now, in a very different light — *fire* light.
“Do not think that I have come to bring peace upon the earth. I have come to bring not peace but the sword. … [O]ne’s enemies will be those of his household.” (Matthew 10:34, 36)
“I have come to set the earth on fire, and how I wish it were already blazing! … Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division. From now on a household of five will be divided, three against two and two against three….” (Luke 12:49, 51-52)
As one who received a solid catholic education over 70 years ago, I have been suffering for years. The current situation brings tears to my eyes and breaks my heart. However, in the end Christs church wins!!!
Stories like yours are heartbreaking. You and so many others have been stuck in a Babylonian captivity for so long.
Hang in there and may God give you the desires of your heart!
Mary you speak like my parents do, but do not fear, we will always have Jesus and Mary with us. Those who are on the side of Truth will never be forsaken. Say your rosary, pray, pray, pray. We have God on our side, yes we are suffering to see the Truth being decimated but God always win.
Best wishes! May Jesus bless you abundantly!
Soon the Lord of the Harvest will separate the wheat from the weeds
The Reaping is at hand and His winnowing fan is in His hand!
Cdl. Schönborn…how sad…. Years ago, I thought he was one of the “good guys.” I thought the same of Cdl. O’Malley, Cdl. Wuerl, and Cdl. Dolan. One good thing, perhaps the only good thing, that seems to be coming from this papacy is that those who are truly faithful to Christ and the Church are being distinguished from those who were merely sucking up. Problem is, Pope John Paul II was extraordinarily easy to suck up to. He appointed to the episcopacy every bishop I just named, and Pope Francis too. He also appointed Cdl. Burke.
We are to be “wise as serpents and innocent as doves.” Unfortunately, people in the Church sometimes get the “innocent as doves” part right but totally miss the mark on “wise as serpents.” They may be personally virtuous, but they are naive and allow wicked people to carry on in positions of authority and influence (Marcial Maciel, who under John Paul II was invincible, just to give an example) because they think along the lines of “how could someone whose words are so inspiring really be bad?” When someone tries to point out the danger, they are accused of “rash judgment.”
I never trusted Wuerl and I was often back and forth on O’Malley. Dolan does disappoint me and it took me a long time to accept that I had reason to be disappointed. I think Dolan’s problem is that he is a likable guy who likes to be liked. He thinks that is important to evangelization and fails to realize he is watering down the Faith and weakening his witness. I still think he is, deep down, a good guy and O’Malley is too.
As for Pope John Paul II, he really had no choice but to play the hand that he was dealt. Also, remember the parable of the wheat and the tares? The Reaping is at hand, methinks, but during the pontificate of Pope John Paul, he was certainly under orders to let the tares grow with the wheat, so as not to uproot the wheat.
Thomas, you are very, very generous in your interpretation of John Paul II’s pontificate. For a year, or even two, one could have given him the benefit of the doubt – that he had inherited a mess – but decades? I think not. Once one has lost his faith in the One True Church the wheels start to come off.
Decisions are made for the wrong reasons – keep everyone calm, loving Jesus, tolerant of the intolerable and all will be well. What we see is the result of this loss of faith in our popes. No matter what they do, or how often they pull back from the brink of apostasy, the result is massive loss of faith.
When John Paul II talked about a massive apostasy in the Church what did he mean? What did he DO to bring millions back to the true faith? He just muddied the waters more and more. He allowed exceptions to almost every rule with NO stopping anybody from doing anything….so please, I don’t expect anyone to ‘bad-mouth’ a man they admired but let’s have a respectful silence about how good they were for the Church.
And can anyone think that Pope St Pius X would have settled for an easy answer that he “had no choice”. Not possible. He would have moved heaven and earth to stop modernism in its tracks. Do or die. Yet he still failed, but not because he lied to himself, like John Paul did.
Did JPll really believe that things would improve if he just ignored the massive internal problems in the church. He was a modernist. Which means his papacy was compromised from start to finish. We see the evil fruit with the non-stop internal collapse of the church with no end in sight. And now we have the renegade, Bergoglio.
As hard as it is to believe all the Vatll popes were seduced by modernism and the modern world. They forgot Original Sin.
Well, the man IS a canonized saint so I tend to give him the benefit of the doubt.
You are on the right track Barbara – I learned a lot from the following researcher and author -Russia, Fatima, the Pope, and World Government
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=cornelia+ferreira+-+socialism+in+the+catholic+church+-+youtube&view=detail&mid=48B9268D50AEAA628B3C48B9268D50AEAA628B3C&FORM=VIRE
This is precisely why JPII did not remove these wayward bishops/cardinals. He feared a massive schism.
The only prelate he removed was back in the 80’s. That was Archbishop Raymond Hunthausen of the Archdiocese of Seattle. That move sent shockwaves through the USCCB. Because of that, he never, to my knowledge, removed another prelate from their position.
Cardinal O’Malley and abortion:
June 4, 2009
More on Boston Caritas Christi and abortion
Here’s some follow-up to this post.
http://www.whatswrongwiththeworld.net/2009/06/
Dolan is more than a likeable guy, he is a huge part of the problem that exists in the US – turning a blind eye to clergy abuse, chumming up with “gay” activists and even including them in a recent St. Pat. parade, sucking up to Killary, on and on. See: http://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/special-report-gay-new-york
I still think it all goes back to not wanting to be disliked.
Dolan is a stooge of Francis’. It all part of the NWO plan.
What isn’t?
You’re right – all around us is deception and godlessness even in the Vatican.
Thank God faithful voices are speaking out –
Cardinal Sins: Resisting Pope Francis (Episode 11)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaJfd_Yi8vk
Could PF BE an anti-pope? What’s the official definition of anti-pope?
His actions speak for themselves.
Anti-pope –
a person established as pope in opposition to one held by others to be canonically chosen.
If you read the parable closely Jesus explains it later that the field represents the world, not the Church. That the field (world) may have tares in it, does not follow that we must allow the tares to flourish in the Church. It is a gross error that we have to sit back quietly and allow sin and unrepentant sinners to flourish in the Church.
.
You automatically grafted this parable onto the internal affairs of the Church, where it has no place.
.
Likewise the reaping you assume is done by church members, is actually a task given to the harvest workers only who are , by Jesus’ interpretation, the angels, and not us humans. The parable therefore is telling us about the end times only.
.
The point of the parable is that Christians don’t need to be too worried about persecution from their enemies outside the church in the world; they (the Christians) will survive and will be vindicated at the Final Judgment.
.
The parable is not about the internal affairs of the church, and has no bearing on such questions. We are free to be as zealous as we want in safeguarding the holiness of the church.
Good point.
Leopards change their spots and the serpent in the garden of Eden is another example of deception. These progressives were biding their time for the “right” pope to occupy the Vatican – now they show their true colors just like their leader.
I’ve just read that the Roman Rota have threatened to strip Cardinal Burke of his red hat. We are beginning to see the sheep and the goats being separated here.
Can the rota do that? Isn’t that the prerogative of the Pope himself only?
Apparently, they don’t need the Pope’s permission:
“Pinto [head of the Roman Rota] also made clear that he himself does not need permission from the Holy Father to undertake the course of action.”
That’s… annoying… do you have a link to that? I’d like to read the whole article if possible.
http://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/head-of-vatican-court-cdl.-burke-could-be-stripped-of-red-hat
Suggest reading this article too by canon lawyer Ed Peters:
https://canonlawblog.wordpress.com/2016/11/29/cardinals-in-the-church-have-rights-too/
Well, they’re now saying that it was a mistranslation of what he said. However, he still hates the four cardinals. However, he is a Freemason! 1P5 has an article on it.
That’s Pope Francis for you. Say ‘careers’ ought not matter much, yet through his surrogate threatens to take away the cardinalate from the Brave 4.
I think it’s the pope’s option, him alone, not a Monsignor in the Rota!
Take heart. MUCH more trouble to come, no doubt.
God’s promises in Scripture are not null and void and in history we have proof of it.
Read this and be strong. {If you don’t have a background in historical theology, no worries, just read the portions that makes sense. They well sum up the situation. I marvel, as I studied the Arian controversy as a Protestant and never connected the dots to the Petrine promise and working of God in the Catholic Church, but I sure get it now!!}
http://www.aemaet.de/index.php/aemaet/article/view/40/pdf
It’s going to be OK, guys. Heads will roll and much trouble on the horizon, but Jesus promised us trouble, too, don’t forget! Don’t lose heart!
“All shall be well” — I have this on a small magnet that I bought when I visited Julian’s cell (refashioned in 1953 after the original was bombed in 1942) some years ago. Hers is a great promise!
You are blessed! Heaven will be a wonderful place where we get to meet these sisters and brothers of ours.
Heads will likely LITERALLY roll before this is over
It will all begin to surface now. Those who oppose the four cardinals by offering up only straw-man arguments such as “they’re against the pope” will finally be exposed in the light.
Separating the wheat from the chaff.
Precisely!
More like the wheat from the tares…
His winnowing fan is in His hand!
Following a conversion a year ago, I have been catching up on the recent and historical church politics, including this situation with the Dubia. Perhaps the question is not important at this time, but I hear many folks mentioning the possibility of schism pending the answer of PF. Forgive my limited knowledge in this area, but at exactly what point would a schism happen, or how would we know? Would it have to be announced by the four cardinals or could a undesirable response from PF cause it? If that were to happen, would it then be a sin to attend mass in diocesan churches? I would appreciate your thoughts!
Donald, These are great questions! I “think” (but could be wrong) that this declaration must come from the Holy Father.
These are questions I have been starting to ask myself as of late because of all this quandary. I know what Jesus says in the Gospel about marriage is very clear. The article shares some really way-out thinking to try and muddy up the waters we little ones drink from. It’s interesting how all this marriage situation is coming mainly from German clergy who seem to be trying to stretch things so more people would return to the Catholic faith. German parishes have lost a lot of money from people leaving. But getting back to the questions of schisms, splits, and divisions. If the pope doesn’t respond to the Four Cardinals, then perhaps it is because the Four Cardinals are correct and the pope can’t say anything to upset other issues we know nothing about and the pope is aware of these things. I mean the pope came out in total clarity about women priests not ever happening. Why not be clear regarding what Jesus said about marriage? What is holding back a response? If the Four Cardinals get a response and that response is a heresy or denial of the Gospel, what then? The Four Cardinals will have to say, “Heresy.” Then a schism? Then will the pope say – The Four Cardinals are heretics when they are not? I’m not saying the pope will say that, but it is very clear that we individually will have to crucify our own selves to stay clear and obedient to Jesus in spite of what comes of this horrible debacle. God tests us all in all matter of Love and Faith. I pray for Holy Hope all the Way for all of us.
If the Pope answers with orthodoxy then he loses his heretic buddies {and all that luscious Kirchensteuer}. If he answers with heterodoxy well, he makes history. The latter is not the kind of history the Pope wants to make and the former must be too terrible a thought for him to ponder!
If Francis replies with heresy, the Four Cardinals will have no other option but to declare him an apostate and that the Chair of Peter is vacant. Of course, what a can of worms that would open. What course would the remaining College of Cardinals take is anyone’s guess. We have never experienced this before in the entire history of the Church.
“We have never experienced this before in the entire history of the Church.”
Technically that is probably true, but there HAVE been severe conflicts within the leadership where Popes have held questionable doctrines or failed to discipline heretical doctrines or where synods or bishops fell astray and taught that which goes against Church teaching and a fight ensued. Catholic history of theology is NOT a smooth and level path. There are many exciting fights and upheavals that have occurred. In addition, we have had doctrines addressed for reasons of lack of clarity that took many years to finally settle. The Arian crisis comes to mind.
I agree that this one is unique because unlike many of the crises that took place in the first 3 centuries where issues rose to be debated because the right doctrines were simply not yet known, we are discussing doctrines that have been ruled on over and over again and really SHOULDN’T offer much confusion.
The confusion seems to be pouring from those who demand “more mercy than Jesus offered” in order to prop up their sagging revenues and diocesan memberships.
We have had numerous antipopes throughout the centuries, but none, short of Honorius, taught heresy, and, at least did not recant and repent later. We will not get this from Francis.
I don’t want to close the door to possibilities, so I pray for Pope Francis every day…and his replacement.
But I certainly get your drift…
Thank you, I’m getting it, truly getting the picture.
Well, not from this pope. Maybe a future one, but not this one.
I’m not sure we’ll actually be alive when it’s officially declared a schism… or when it’s clear to the rest of the world which side is right. In all reality, there’s already a schism in the Church. The lines are simply unclear at the moment, because the breaking is just now happening. The way prelates are lining up in regards to the dubia seems to be a fairly good measure of things though. As for attending mass at diocesan churches in the event of schism (or schism manifesting)… well, that depends on the diocese, and what the bishop is doing. It also depends on what the diocesan priests are doing and saying. And, I know this isn’t what you wanna hear, it’s gonna have to be a call based on a properly formed conscience.
The thing is, a schism isn’t going to suddenly make things more clear. It’s gonna muddy the waters even more and it’s us poor faithful who will be left to drown. In places like Poland, or Kazakhstan (thank God for Bishop Schneider!) things will be much more clear. Germany as well. But the United States, most of Europe, and parts of Asia… things are going to split in many different ways and there will be fractures even within parishes. It’s going to be messy…
Yup…usually schisms are determined in hindsight.
“Oh hey, that was a schism wasn’t it”
“Yep…whoops.”
Welcome home, Donald! I know that the Church is going through stormy waters now, but remember, Our Lord was in the boat – He awoke and told the winds to be still. One day, the crisis in the Church will be over, but not yet. In the meantime, we have to stick together. Good sites like 1P5, the Fatima Center http://www.fatima.org and the Remnant http://www.remnantnewspaper.com will help also.
Most of all, we need to pray and work for the Collegial Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. That’s the only way we’ll get out of this mess.
Meanwhile, I strongly suggest that you get 1) the Douay-Rheims version of the Bible, 2) a good Catholic catechism like the Roman Catechism of the Council of Trent, and 3) True or False Pope? A Refutation of Sedevacantism and Other Errors by John Salza and Robert Siscoe http://www.trueorfalsepope.com. It’s not an easy read (100s of pages).
I hope this helps you.
Margaret
Without ever answering the dubia, the Pope will continue his attacks on the Four Cardinals. I believe the only limit to the severity of his persecution of the Four will be what he thinks he can get away with. Think FFI.
Blinding arrogance to their destruction. It seems that the end of Commissar Volpi doesn’t make an impression on them.
Thank you Dr. Maike Hickson/1P5/@skojec, thank you, thank you, thank you.
If someone in the Vatican is reading this site — and I suspect, given the Stasi-like atmosphere that seems to exist there now, that someone is doing just that — please inform the pope in his own language that “ha llegado la hora de llamar al pan pan y al vino vino,” to finally answer clearly that question in the old Florence Reece song, Which side are you on, which side are you on? It’s past time he acted like a man and announced in unambiguous terms what he believes. No more hiding behind surrogates, no more ducking away from the 4 cardinals. Al pan pan y al vino vino.
He can’t answer. Cf. @disqus_gzMW90h8vS: https://onepeterfive.wpengine.com/confusion-conflict-and-chaos-increase-in-the-wake-of-the-dubia/#comment-3027145246
Johnny, please translate “ha llegado la hora de llamar al pan pan y al vino vino.”
I expect it means “The hour has come to call bread bread and wine wine” but perhaps Johnny can correct me if I’m wrong.
As far as meaning, it’s pretty much like the line that follows in English in my post (hows_the_boy below has it right). Literally, it says “the time has come to call bread, bread and wine, wine.” It’s an old Spanish adage that means to talk straight.
The confusion spread by Amoris Laetitia has to be viewed as intentional, since the document is full of latent and manifest unclarities and inconsistencies which must have been noticed by those who prepared it. The intention may very well be to set in motion a development in the Church that will step by step completely demolish all foundations of Catholic sexual morality. This works in a similar way as with abortion and euthanasia. As soon as a government permits abortions, the logical end-point that comes in view is abortion-on-demand, no matter how restrictive the initial permission may have been. The same is true for euthanasia. When therefore the Church starts to make exceptions on the universal applicability of the moral law or implicitly denies the existence of intrinsic evils, the logical end-point will be that anything goes which doesn’t harm others, according to the same criteria as are held by the modern world. This implies nothing less but complete sexual freedom, which is the real goal of Cards. Kasper, Schoenborn and many others. This was already the agenda of the heretic moral theologian Bernhard Haering (a peritus at Vatican II) who is so praised by the current Pope. All these high clerics know that once you have punched a hole in the walls that protect the system of Catholic morality, it will only be a matter of time before the rot begins to spread everywhere.
It was never about the divorced + civilly remarried and communion. It is about destroying the Church.
Cf. (link:) With #AmorisLaetitia, Pope Francis Expands Kasper’s Proposal
I totally agree with your thoughts. What is Christ asking of us all at this time? To defend the teachings of the church and to pray and suffer for her.
The Pope’s non-answer is itself an answer. He cannot give an orthodox answer, because he’s not orthodox. If he could give an orthodox answer he would have done so long ago. The fact that he hasn’t answered shows he’s heterodox. The Church has its answer, and it’s not pretty. We have an heretical Pope. The “mystery” of what Bergoglio really believes is over. The Dubia smoked him out.
We have an (arguably) heretical pope who is nonetheless prevented by the charism of his office from officially promulgating silence. Even since the end of the Synod, I have said that the silence of Pope Francis is the Holy Spirit keeping him infallible. The doctrine only says that the pope is prevented from promulgating error, it does say HOW he is prevented.
Papal infallibility isn’t a purely negative charism (I.e. can’t promulgate error) but rather a positive one, in that the pope can speak infallibly under certain conditions. When those conditions are met we can be certain he is speaking truth. There is a difference.
That said, you could still be right and the Holy Spirit is constraining him.
That’s what I was thinking. I just read something about the Pope giving a green light to the Argentina bishops for 2nd marriage communion and that is why he is not answering the 4 Cardinals. When I reflect on this and the Akita Prophecy about the Church being destroyed from within, I am thinking this pope is dismantling everything he can from within. I also read the pope’s current teaching on Hell which is so thoroughly ambiguous and almost saying – don’t worry, Hell doesn’t exist. This is actually very frightening stuff because we don’t know exactly what Jesus is going to do about it. With a lot of us, He is so brightly and lovingly indwelling within and around us for real and Mary Immaculate has been so close with her apparitions…something’s up for sure. When you look at how justice can turn into judgment real quick, perhaps these clergy in the Vatican should remember the horror of the temple priests when things of the underworld started walking around and spirits are not so invisible when the world kills its Creator. Order of things seen and unseen is also non-existent also God withdraws Mercy and Grace. This whole thing is really tragic. The mystic Maria Valtorta wrote about a star falling from grace during our times and many have said it would be a pope. Hold tight to the Cross and Pray very hard for all involved.
The position of the modernists is absurd. Comical. How can this “mafia” insist that a pope can change Church teaching? They are like some absurd wrecking ball, smashing the furniture.
Actually, come to think of it, they LITERALLY smashed the furniture many years ago!
Yes, the destruction began approx. 40 years ago.
The image I have id Bergoglio and us (as the wait staff in something like this)
https://youtu.be/74YLwinLT7M
I would caution against categorising some Bishops and Cardinals as “progressives”. If they do not believe the Catholic faith they are not Catholics. It really is that simple. To progress infers improvement. How can they improve on perfection? The Catholic faith contains the ‘fulness’ of truth. We don’t need enlightenment from “progressives”, any more than from Lutherans. We have Christ and his teachings. Christ is truth, and doctrine is truth defined. Doctrine like Christ does not change. If they want to believe in something other than what the Church believes then they should get off their rumps and go start their own heretical church. It has been done before by those with the courage of their convictions, and a whole lot more integrity. In happier days they would have been defrocked and excommunicated. Sadly I cannot even defend my supreme pontiff.
I agree. I have had a great deal of trouble calling Lutherans “progressives”. What I see as an ex-Lutheran is sweeping Lutheranism in the Catholic Church;
Polls tell us belief in the Real Presence is held by a minority. Belief in universalism is rampant and anything like an orthodox understanding of the 4 last things seems to have withered away many years ago. Religious indifferentism is sort of the norm and as for extra ecclesiam nula salus, well, no less than ex-Pope Benedict has said it has been abandoned in the years since Vatican 2. Stroll thru any Catholic church besides a Traditonalist parish and and you will see the requisite 2.4 children sitting between Mom and Dad just like exists in the Lutheran ecclesial groups and that is assuming there is a Mom and/or Dad between which they can sit! Bible knowledge barely register a blip on the screen.
I laugh out of embarrassment sometimes at the state of affairs, but what can anyone expect with the leadership culture of wholesale capitulation in the face of socialism and Freemasonry that exists, and in truth, must have existed even before Vatican 2. Good grief it wasn’t priests ordained AFTER Vatican 2 that ushered Vatican 2 IN!
So those are SOME of the problems.
But we are now entering a new era.
We are seeing history made with the confrontation of Lutheranism that the Big Four have made. I do not believe they will give up, either. This whole thing will be done in typical glacial Catholic time but in reading again the struggles that existed during the Arian crisis it took a LONG time to settle THAT doctrinal dispute and truth be known, many of the current Lutherans wearing Catholic vestments are likely Arians anyhow, and that is assuming they believe that Jesus existed at all and that if he did, He was in any way related to divinity. I’m not prepared to bet the ranch that every Catholic bishop even believes THAT.
So WHAT.
The church holds the truth and MANY of us believe. so do many priests and even bishops, gutless as the latter may appear to be.
So when the day comes that a man of God’s choosing rises up to lead the Church and in manly fashion, there will be many of us Simeons and Annas waiting in the vestibule of the Temple. And if we don’t get that man but rather have to wait for the Lord himself to return, well, all the better.
Keep your lamps lit!
just backing up a bit, “no less than ex-Pope Benedict has said it has been abandoned in the years since Vatican 2”. I didn’t know what to make of B16’s remark? Is he merely stating that the general consensus amongst theologians and Bishops disowned it (which is merely stating a fact)? I don’t think he necessarily was in favour of its abandonment…..?
He seems to lament the chaos and incongruous reflection that gave is the situation. Yet…as usual with post-Vatican 2 prelates, he doesn’t just spit it out and condemn with clarity and decision the situation, so we are left with yet more chaos in what he says. I do not think he applauded it, but he certainly didn’t name names and forcefully condemn the situation either.
Speaking as an observer of the Church when I was a Protestant, I steered clear of the Catholic Church largely because of what I saw as universalism and religious indifferentism in Pope JPII and never for a moment did I ever see one speck of Rottweiler in Ratzinger. These men both seemed to me to be so deeply traumatized by World War 2 and the spectre of a nuclear war that they sought to avoid conflict at any cost, even the cost of ignoring ancient doctrines of the Church.
The thing is, EENS still remains a dogma of the Church. Modern Catholic prelates have soft pedaled it and polished it up almost into incoherence, but it still remains.
As does the indissolubility of marriage. In theory and on paper at least if not, now with the Bergoglian changes, in practice.
This is the fight that must occur, the fight to preserve the faith in its fullness. With the Great Commission, Jesus didn’t say; “Teaching them to observe SOME of the things whatsoever I have commanded you”, He said; “Teaching them to observe ALL things whatsoever I have commanded you.”
Last I heard, it was the Pope’s main job to do just that.
Possibly there is an ink smudge on Pope Francis’ job description and he missed that part…
You watch your family and friends be carted off to concentration camps, your fellow seminarians executed simply because they are study to become your priests and your nation remove the right boot on its neck only for it to be replaced by a left boot and see if you aren’t traumatized. You watch your nation be taken over by a madman who drives it to a war that leaves the nation proverbially raped, its women literally raped, more of its men dead and that national infrastructure leveled and see if you do not try to avoid conflict.
Let he who is without sin…
Facts are facts, and observations are observations. I looked at some facts and made some observations.
I can totally understand WHY those men did what I THINK they did. In fact, my wife’s family faced exactly what you just described. Interestingly their experiences didn’t change their beliefs. But it is the extreme trauma that brought them HERE. I didn’t belittle JPII and B16 for being traumatized. Tens of millions were and have been.
But does that justify the alteration of doctrines? And what does that say about previous generations when horrific trauma was simply part and parcel of life itself? And what about all those who lived through the exact same experiences of the wars and communism but did NOT come out of them with novel ideas about the Church, Hell and soteriology in general?
Personal experiences impact personal theologies. I personally happen to believe that the trauma of World Wars 1 and 2 have had immense and lasting impact not just on Western society but on the thought and teaching of the Church since. Add the nuclear age and you see the potential for dramatic change to even doctrine as at least a temptation. And we do see it. Add the population explosion and another factor creeps in; the teeming masses, all living and dying by their billions. The common denominator in all this is billions who are at risk or have died “through no fault of their own”. How could God condemn them to hell because they lived and died outside His Church? How could there even BE a hell? How could all those other religions be wrong? Questions the leadership of the Church since Vatican 2 seems unable to answer in ways of continuity with the past.
Isn’t it true that modern thinkers always seem possessed of a gigantic hubris as if “this generation” is the one with the clearest insight and past thinkers be damned? For after all, WE are so “compassionate” and they…why they must have been knuckle-dragging oafs…
But in fact, as all of these negative factors have entered the world scene, other factors have disappeared or dramatically changed for the better. Infant mortality rates even factoring in the wars have declined, plunged in fact, life expectancies have skyrocketed. Medical technology has improved and all of this has even trickled down to the poor societies of the world where though great suffering still exists, the benefits of modern advances have made great impacts as we see in the population explosion.
Now think for one moment. Let’s stop thinking like we of this generation are the most important, most intelligent, most caring, most generous and most theologically astute of all people of all time.
Take that trauma issue. Is anyone going to tell me that intense personal trauma did not exist prior to the 20th Century? When disease and wars ravaged vast and sweeping regions of the globe? BLACK DEATH?
Why during the Black Death did Church prelates not sweepingly introduce all the modern ideals and start “reflecting” in such a way as to downplay the existence of hell and gain a new understanding of other religions and essentially adopt a new soteriology and ecclesiology as so many have done in recent years? In FACT, the Church did the opposite; She desperately warned and taught the need for conversion FOR THE WOLF STOOD AT THE DOOR. And this wise teaching can clearly be found in Scripture and in the lexionary even today!
No, something much more happened to these men and not just these men, but many others, something other than merely experiencing severe personal suffering. A change in belief happened. We can observe it. As for judging it eternally, that is God’s job, not mine, but I am charged in Sacred Scripture to discern the spirits, to judge in that way, and that is all I am trying to do.
How is there a new soteriology?
Disregard for sacramental theology. Lack of necessity for the Church in salvation. Diminishment of gravity of sin. Rejection of hell. Affirmation of multiple paths to eternal life {other religions}. List goes on.
Indeed, the biggest changes in “street teaching” {as opposed to the unchangeable dogma of the faith} of the Catholic Church have pretty much all had soteriological implications.
Just to be clear, I was not challenging you. I was simply wondering what you meant. I thought by soteriology you were referring to a difference in the understanding and conception of the Savior Himself and His Mission rather than an understanding of salvation itself. Thanks for clarifying.
Well, you bring up a good point. Following the notion that heresy always eventually comes down to the person and work of Christ Himself, even THAT has been altered, hasn’t it?
For if we are sinning when we seek to convert others, what was Christ doing when he issued the Great Commission?
Not that it is impossible in the mind of the Pope, see…you know…since the Pope has said Christ needed to “beg Forgiveness” when found at the Temple by Mary and Joseph.
Yes, this Pope is VERY troubling.
I just consider progressive to be a synonym for heretic
It is so human and week that when you don’t like the message and cannot refute it, attack the messengers. The cardinals attacking the four cardinals are showing how very human they are.
The plan was to govern the Church by wink-wink-nod-nod. AL has little bombshells in it. The heretical bishops (Cupich, McElroy, Tobin, Farrell, etc.) will, as planned, run with the Pope’s intentions–Communion for adulterers, gay couples, and abortionists.
The plan was that, though the orthodox might resist (Chaput), they would participate in the pretense that there was no smell emanating from Amoris. Eventually, these foot-draggers would die.
The Four Cardinals have thrown a gigantic monkey wrench into this plan. No more winking and nodding. Answer the questions–no, yes, yes, yes, yes–or admit that the Pope has no clothes.
We should not pay for a poor quality product. Money talks. Only support orthodox Catholicism and those who support it.
Right on. We have a responsibility to care for our pastors. Direct your $$ to those who are worthy.
The more I reflect on this current situation, the comments made by PF and those that would defend his actions, I have come to the conclusion that they believe that in order to be compassionate and also pastoral you should, at times, based on the so called levels of grey, ignore the sin. This form of compassion, if you want to call it that, however, is not truly compassion and is never ever helpful.
If we are to take the words “…be perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect ” seriously, then we also have a responsibility to help our brothers and sisters in this quest. In other words, we should want what is best for everyone and what is best for everyone is not to continue in sinful behavior.
That is because sin is always black and white. It is always wrong to sin. The reasons that we sin can be varied and in that there are shades of grey, but sin itself is something that should not be.
In addition to your post, this is about good and evil not black and white. the black and white lingo detaches any recognition of the spiritual forces behind our behavior. We say this is a battle of good vs evil because the Genesis account tells us so. In that account there is no grey. Throughout all Church history I can’t recall this theology ever being taught (although it has been a philosophy taught in the secular world). One is either involved in behavior that will produce more good behavior or behavior that will produce more evil behavior. This is the war we fight and it is composed of the forces of light (God and His Army) vs. the forces of dark (Satan and his demons) and once again, there is no neutrality
Stepping stones to a church of the laity. Stepping stones. In the words of Ratzinger, “raze the bastions of the Church.”
Francis tested, Benedict approved.
Bergogolio, Schonborn, Kasper et al are stone cold modernist heretics at best and full blown apostates at worse. The “Dubia” was inspired and brilliantly crafted. It smokes them out. There is no place to hide. It requires either a “Yes” or “No”. Silence/No Response is a “No”. They either affirm the doctrines or they don’t. “No” and or continued “Silence” is “pertinacity”….a condition..for formal declaration of and conviction of heresy….and removal. There is No wiggle room. Either Please God or Please Man. Heretic or Not. Pope or Anti-Pope.
Game over except for the formalities and the usual “shoot the messenger” snarky, nasty, delay, deflect, denounce, persecute, belittle etc the defenders of the Faith and Truth.
Thank God for the 4 Cardinals and Bishop Schneider. Any Prelate, Priest, Religious or layman that doesn’t support them is denying the One True Faith, It’s Source, Church and Founder. We are required to have the faith of a child. This is no more complicated than…”Why do you believe that?”. Answer? “Because Jesus Christ, the Son of God, said so”
Another great article by Dr. Hickson.
But, honestly, and not to brag (how could it be bragging when no one here even knows who I am, right?). Not to brag, but I too have an earned doctorate in Philosophy and another Masters, both in the thought of St. Thomas Aquinas.
But really it doesn’t take a Ph.D. to sift through the nonsense here. Great, some fancy “German theologian” (Oooo..wow…German) comes out and states THE OBVIOUS about AL.
But we all have eyes in our head and we can all read. What Francis states in AL is patently heretical and everyone worth a lick knows it.
So, I say, save the fancy German “scholarship” for another venue. Who needs it? The pope has publicly spoken heresy. It is plain to see. No need for another involved “hermeneutic” to figure this one out.
My two cents.