In a new interview with the Catholic daily Avvenire, on the eve of the consistory and as the Jubilee of Mercy comes to a close, Pope Francis at last addressed — although offhandedly perhaps even flippantly — the dubia presented to him in the Four Cardinals Letter:
The Jubilee? I made no plan, said the Pope, I simply let myself be led by the Spirit. The Church is the Gospel; it is not a path of ideas. Francis continued, in his conversation with Stefania Falasca, ”I like to think that the Almighty has a bad memory. Once he forgives, he forgets. Because it is blessed to forgive. For me, that’s enough. The experience of forgiveness teaches one to shift the Christian conception from legalism to the Person of God, who became mercy.” “Some, as with certain responses to Amoris Laetitia,” the Pope said, “persist in seeing only white or black, when rather one ought to discern in the flow of life . But these critiques – if they’re not from an evil spirit – do help. Some types of rigorism spring from the desire to hide one’s own dissatisfaction under armour,” the Pope said. No one is selling doctrine.
The Holy Father also referenced the 500th anniversary celebrations of the Reformation in Lund as not a fruit of the Year of Mercy, but rather, of Vatican II. He reiterated again two of his favorite themes — “the ecumenism of blood” and the notion that proselytism is a “grave sin” which he referred to as a “cancer in the Church”.
It seems a very minor response to such a major confrontation. What is interesting is that Edward Pentin, the Rome correspondent for EWTN, appeared on The World Over Live today. On the program, Pentin offered an insight that confirms our suspicions — that the pope is quite upset about the letter:
“…I do understand, from sources within Santa Marta, that the Pope is not happy at all, in fact he’s quoted as ‘boiling with rage,’ so he’s really not happy at all with this, but he had been given two months to respond to it, he chose not to respond to it, so the Cardinals went public.”
The video portion of Pentin’s remarks are below. (If it does not begin at the marked segment, you can find them at at 28:59 in the timeline):
Considering how infrequently Pope Francis chooses silence, it is astonishing that he can’t answer five simple questions.
(English translation provided by Jonathan Arrington)
Edited on 11/19/2016 to include World Over video, correct transcript, and update related portions of post text.
how does the college of cardinals work, I ask, because, it may come to a point the Cardinals may have to ask for his resignation regarding this, and wondering if the college is like our congress with majority rule and can go as a group and demand his resignation for such response and heretical teachings in his magnum opus on the false sense of mercy.
The grave difficulty is that numbers matter. We have four (maybe more but how many? Ten, a dozen, out of over 2,000?) Cardinals against the party machine. There will be no Collage of Cardinals taking Francis to task over his errors. There will only be a handful of true leaders for us to hang on to while we suffer.
So the question is: Where will the true Catholic Church reside? After a major schism (and is most certainly coming), I can see more than one pope elected to the Chair of Peter- one by the truly faithful cardinals, the other(s) by the other faction of cardinals loyal to the Modernist heresy.
I seem to recall that it may move to Fatima. Didn’t Our Lady request a Basilica to be built there with reputedly that in mind? Maybe someone here can verify?
That comes from a dubious seer who stated that “the Vatican” will move to Fatima.
Thank you.
There are only slightly over 200 cardinals. 5,000 or so bishops.
I believe the current count is around 95 not counting the newly created ones.
From Wikipedia, List of Living Cardinals.
“As of 18 November 2016, there are 211 cardinals, 108 of whom would be eligible to vote if the papacy fell vacant today. There are two living former cardinals: Joseph Ratzinger and Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who were cardinals at the time of their respective elections as Pope Benedict XVI in 2005 and Pope Francis in 2013. (Ratzinger is now Pope emeritus Benedict XVI.)”
Thanks for the update. I was not too far off in terms of the number eligible cardinals that could still vote as of today.
Europe alone has 107 cardinals. There are 211 living cardinals as of November 2016.
http://www.gcatholic.org/hierarchy/cardinals-alive-country.htm
I heard maybe the highest is 13 out of the full college, Our Lord must want us to keep diving deeper into his Passion, I wonder what part we are on regarding Our Lord’s passion.
The U.S. Constitution prescribes the order of things. A derelict president, judge, etc., is impeached (indicted) by House of Representatives and tried by the Senate, with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presiding.
In the Church, a “manifest heretic” pope excommunicates *himself* and disqualifies *himself* from his office, by the act of manifest heresy. A member of the “College of Cardinals” only votes within the context of a formal conclave. I wonder: Does “someone” or “someones” have the power to “recognize” a heretic pope’s “self-exclusion” from his office and call a new conclave? We are in for some interesting times.
”I like to think that the Almighty has a bad memory. Once he forgives, he forgets. Because it is blessed to forgive. For me, that’s enough. The experience of forgiveness teaches one to shift the Christian conception from legalism to the Person of God, who became mercy.”
That needs some unpacking. Maybe the Cardinals should be keeping these kind of quotations should they need to investigate some of His Holiness’s more ‘nuanced’ quotes for heretical nonsense.
For instance when God became man did he ‘become mercy’?
When God became man in Jesus Christ, God Himself as far as we taught underwent no change or alteration. That which he was not, flesh and blood, humanity, he assumed, but that which He was, divine, the fullness of divinity, he retained.
Jesus Himself condemned the legalism of the Pharisees (and much more) but Jesus Himself made plain the divine law on marriage contradicting the Pharisees ‘legalistic’ enthusiasm for divorce. He Himself condemned divorce and remarriage as adultery! He Himself instituted the Sacrament of the Eucharist. He Himself raised Marriage to a Sacrament. He Himself FOUNDED THE CHURCH ON PETER.
Francis’s concentration on ‘legalism’ is just an excuse to abandon the Faith of Jesus Christ and throw HIS OWN WORDS to the wind in favour of his personal ideology which will see sin excused, adultery exonerated and sacrilege institutionalised. How much evil can be encouraged simply by saying, ‘Don’t be legalistic’?
‘I’m considering having an affair with my secretary’.
‘Response: Well, whatever you decide, don’t be rigid or legalistic about it.’
‘I’m considering having an abortion’.
Response: ‘Well, whatever you decide, don’t be rigid or legalistic about it.’
‘I’m considering several terrorist atrocities in several locations’.
Response: ‘Well, whatever you decide, don’t be rigid or legalistic about it.’
It’s ABSURD! Quite rightly, Francis is being challenged by his own Cardinals (who he refuses to meet because he does not want to be confronted with his errors.
Jesus does not abolish DIVINE LAW. Only Francis and his sycophants wish to do that.
What Francis is really saying is: “Did God really tell you not to eat of any of the trees in the garden?” His shades of grey ideology have been used by Satan from the beginning to lead man into sin. He should be known as the “Pope of the 50 shades of grey.”
Soo apt. You captured that Genesis text so well.
Microphone: DROPPED
Exactly………………….A spade is a spade!
Excellent analysis with the Garden of Eden.
Here we go, the new name for this Pope: Jorge, The Fountain of Heresies.
You know Deacon, with Pope Honorius if he was alive today, I can fax, email or tweet him and complain about his ONE heresy.
But with Francis, what human can possibly stop Francis’ mouth from uttering 1,000 heresies per day?
There is a very good reason why Pope St Pius X dubbed modernism as the “synthesis of all heresies” – it is. Popes like Honorius, John XXII etc. although they believed, promoted or permitted the teaching of error, its not as though they didn’t believe in truth itself. Modernists like Francis do not believe in objective truth – period.
Concepts like truth are only ideas which do not have an objectivity or reality as we understand them. They are chains which imprison people in the realm of black and white – the realm of “ideologies”. For them truth is a changeable thing which is subject to the vicissitudes of history. As Kasper has “taught” even God should not be imagined as a being who stands outside of and above history – according to him such a being would be a vile tyrant dictator which we could only despise. They see “God” as being in history and consequently history itself becomes a means of revelation of the divine will. So just as history changes, their “god” changes, the revelation of divine will changes and truth changes. How that “truth” is experienced in history by man becomes the only determinant of what truth is at any given point in time.
As they do not believe in objective truth then questions of acts which are intrinsically evil are completely irrelevant to them. The morality of acts depend entirely upon the circumstances and intent of the actor as there are no absolutes which can judge the morality of an act itself. The main reason why Francis hasn’t answered the four cardinals is that they have posed dubia which are just irrelevant according to his world view. The way he sees it is that they have just missed the point entirely. He believes Vatican II legitimized modernism and they have just not caught up with that fact yet. The dubia they pose are just irrelevant to peoples’ lives on the ground or the peripheries. You cannot apply and impose abstract ideas to people’s real lives.
Obviously if somebody does not believe in objective truth, if they believe that truth is subject to constant change, development and evolution then their minds are quite capable of embracing multiple heresies at once because a) they don’t believe in the concept of heresy b) their experience of “truth” is the only truth that matters to them and c) other peoples’ experience of the truth is what is true for them. So obviously “proselytism” is a “solemn nonsense” or “poison” in the Church because it devalues the other’s experience of truth.
Francis is unusual in that he is almost a caricature or parody of every worst stereotype of modernism that you can think of. Truth, law, integrity, clarity, honesty just do not matter to him – they are mere ideas which he can take or leave as it suits or pleases him. Which is why he utters more material heresies than it is humanly possible to keep up with. To all practical intents and purposes modernists are just pious atheists. And that is what we have for our Pope.
This is a tragedy! These modernists are JUSTIFYING SINS with situational ethics! They are crazy!
So when Jesus said, “Go and sin no more” what is their response?
They don’t read the Bible? They just make up stuff according to their desires. They are just like John Kerry when he said that abortion is a “gray area” because we can’t judge the circumstances of these women who had abortions.
These pro-choice/modernist people make me sick, because they JUSTIFY SINS. THEY JUSTIFY THEIR HOMICIDES!
Very appropriate !
But how God must weep when his own turn away from him.
If he wants to rely on the “God has a bad memory” device, flawed as it is, so be it. But, in the situation at hand, he’s suggesting that God not only has a bad memory but bad vision.
“Jesus said that Moses allowed divorce because our hearts were hard, but that in the beginning it was not so.”
“Eh. I wouldn’t trust it. God has a bad memory!”
I thought God was omniscient.
God IS omniscient.
Possibly, it’s quite difficult to decipher the words of our current Pope. He attacks rigid Catholics but at the same time as a revert I could agree with some of the things that he has said, however on the opposite side of the coin there is too much anger towards those that know no better. Interesting times I say! To us Pope Benedict was actually more precise in everything that he said and everything made sense.
Nicely done, Laurence.
Caro Papa Jorge,
There are many shades of grey. So true. But there are no such shades without black and white.
Perfect, perfect, perfect!!!
Out of all the things that are a cancer in the Church…proselytism? Where are these Catholics engaging in proseltyism and has anyone encountered them?
What does it mean to “discern in the flow of life”?
Rather negates most of the New Testament, dosn’t it? What was St Paul thinking – going into all those synagogues trying to convince the Jews that Jesus was the Messiah? What an evil cancer he was spreading in the Church! Thank goodness we now have infallible Jorge to put them all right.
Some flibby flabby goober gobble wishy washy non-sensical Crap that he goes on with. He sounds like all the idiots in the Catholic Church and Catholic Education departments that have destroyed Catholic attendance amongst many in the younger generation in Australia. They said the Francis-effect would fill the churches again. Not happening here.
Aah but you’re wrong. The Francis effect is happening. Your error was in thinking that the intended effect was getting people fired up about the faith. It may actually be that the intended effect all along was this : emptying of pews and schism.
“emptying of pews and schism.”
That’s his goal ! He’s a Double Agent!
One word: Relativism
Yes, they must have a muzzle on Pope Benedict.
He can write books though. Could always let something slip in code if he wanted to. I guess he just doesn’t want to.
And I would ask why he will not say anything. Let me answer that: I think he is being blackmailed into silence. What skeleton did Benedict have in his “closet?”
No matter what skeletons he might have, the abandonment of the Papal Office far exceeds them. He knows the Third Secret but will not fully disclose it. He could have consecrated Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary but chose not to. He is a Modernist at heart. He knew about sodomy in the CC well before the laity at large did & could have publicly spoken about it & dismissed those responsible for these vile acts before they overran the seminaries. And that is just for starters!
You and I know all this. However, many pew-sitters do not.
Then they must be totally disinterested and questionably Catholic.
Not totally. Many post Vatican II cradle Catholics simply do not know their Faith. And, it is not entirely their fault. Very poor catechesis is responsible for a great majority of them. Our bishops, priests, and religious really threw out the baby with the bath water over the past five decades.
And it was intentional – a sop to False Ecumenism that has been thrown back at them. It is all part & parcel of the Modernist philosophy. Soros & his gang were around at the time but they are all visibly ageing now. We must look to the future & who is likely to succeed PF. Of those who wish to serve Christ & guide his sheep, then Cards. Burke & Sarah are the most prominent. Both have publicly suffered under him. Probably Bishop Schneider at a future date.
Yes Al, it is their fault. Cradle Catholics think that they deserve a better result in their lives against those that convert or revert “I was here before you” is their mentality, however it is not the case. God pays the workers in the vineyard the same amount.
Dear Ana, Rubbish, sit at the back and you will see the faith in action.
If you mean witnessing people taking ‘phone calls during the consecration I would rather pass.
Dear Al, Most PEW SITTERS as you called them sit at the back of the mass. They are the dejected, rejected and unaccepted. However they know their faith more than the SUPER CATHOLICS that sing, give readings or anything else that involves looking good on a Sunday! Our family sits at the back because we are reverts, so please do not insult the “intelligence of the heart” of those that attend mass.
That sounds like the guests at the wedding feast where Our Lord instructed the ‘lowly’ to take the seats that were occupied by the ‘lofty’ & vice versa. You shouldn’t feel compelled to sit at the back of the church, especially with young children who like to see everything that’s going on at close hand.
Christopher, I did not intend my remarks to insult anyone. I was making the point (perhaps not well enough) that most Catholics remain truly catechized in their Faith. No insults intended!
Dear Ana, Why is there so much of an obsession about the 3rd secret? Mass, Confession, Prayer and Adoration is the right path and IFthe 3rd secret is that we will confront a global civil war starting on the 19th of January 2017 just before Trump signs in, so be it. There is nothing that you or I can do other than pray the rosary and follow the sacraments.
I imagine that it would be a lot easier to depose the present lot if we knew exactly what was in the Third Secret. The fact that this knowledge has been kept hidden from us is what intensifies the hurt & anger felt by lots of Catholics who feel they could have been more prepared had it been disclosed in 1960 as Our Lady requested it to be. Also the snub to Her doesn’t say much for the integrity of the Popes & Hierarchies since VII.
Re your last sentence: Not so. There’s much that we can do. Please check out http://www.fatima.org. They’re the best resource on Fatima. 1-800-263-8160.
CC = Catholic Church?
Correct.
My understanding is that Pope Benedict XVI, who will be 90 in April and is in the twilight of his life, spends his days praying, perhaps playing a few bars of Mozart, resting, walking a bit in the Vatican gardens, but not “working” (as in “writing”).
I wonder what Cardinal Sarah thinks about this sentiment. He came to the faith as a child when French missionary priests traveled to his remote village to bring the Gospel. Was that a bunch of proselytism? If not, I really need somebody to explain what it is in clear terms before I can even begin to understand why it’s so cancerous
“The experience of forgiveness teaches one to shift the Christian conception from legalism to the Person of God, who became mercy.” ”
How does he understand the book of Wisdom which was the first reading in the NO Sunday Mass only 3 weeks ago:
Wis 11:22-12:2
“Yet you are merciful to all, because you can do all things and overlook men’s sins SO THAT THEY CAN REPENT…..Little by little, therefore, you CORRECT THOSE WHO OFFEND, you admonish and remind them of HOW THEY HAVE SINNED, so that they MAY ABSTAIN FROM EVIL and trust in you, Lord.”
Perhaps that was an example of OT legalism which has been changed by Christ so that we no longer have to repent or abstain from evil? Or maybe Francis is more merciful and more powerful than Jesus Christ because he has the power to forgive people their sins in anticipation of them committing them:
“Father, bless me for I am going to sin – I am going to commit adultery on Wednesday, Saturday, Sunday and then probaly several times again each week thereafter…just in case I feel like murdering my boss, can I throw in a murder too, but it probably won’t be too serious as he constantly provokes me…”
Thank you.
Francis honestly seems to believe what you wrote in your final paragraph, namely, that one can confess a mortal sin in the confessional and be forgiven while still intending to commit said mortal sin after leaving the confessional. We used to call that the sin of presumption and teach that absolution in such circumstances would be invalid. But that was before Francis arrived to teach us the error of our ways, that we were being too legalistic, and that absolution can be both retroactive and proactive (i.e., applying to any and all future instances of said sin). Oh, happy day!
(sarcasm off)
It may be sarcastic, it may be silly and absurd, but this is the clear implication of his preferred interpretation of Ch. VIII of AL!!! Hence the dubium about whether intrinsic evils exist anymore. This is what he will not contradict by answering the dubia.
I don’t know why BXVI feels “safe” under his wings. He is about as safe as the entire magisterium of JPII. So many prophecies of the saints seem to be lining up for fulfilment at the moment.
Deacon, I have always believed that Pope Benedict’s “resignation” was made under duress, hence, invalid. There is a reason why he chose not only to retain the wearing of the white papal garments, and the title of pope emeritus, but why he did not return to his native country of Germany. He is a prisoner inside the Vatican walls. Yes, I am saying that Francis’ election is invalid and that Benedict is still the pope. Do we not now have enough corroborated, public evidence to substantiate this?
I wonder the same thing. Was the election of Pope Francis valid?
Why is it so hard to accept that Benedict XVI is a man of the council, and a priest theologian who drank the cool-aid of Modernism? Francis says good things once in a while, as did Benedict, as did John Paul II, as did Paul IV, as did John XXIII. But for the most part they spouted the Modernist party line.
Benedict may have simply been too cowardly to go all the way. He may have been held back from the brink by God’s inspirations. But Francis has no off button. The Spirit who might stop him, he has denied – Francis ‘spirit’ is Satan.
No.
These are falsehoods.
Benedict is not a Modernist, nor was John Paul a Modernist. You say that Benedict and John Paul “[said] good things once in a while”? What of John Paul’s encyclical letters, which express orthodox teaching at every turn? What of Veritatis splendor, the first papal encyclical ever to explicitly outline the basic principles of fundamental moral theology, which is cited repeatedly by the four cardinals in their dubia letter to Francis? What of Dominus Jesus (CDF declaration, 2000, written under the supervision of Ratzinger and signed by John Paul), which repudiates Modernism and upholds in the strongest terms the divinity of Christ and the fact that he is the one and only Savior of all mankind, the Son in whom alone we can come to the Father? Fides et ratio, which repudiates the Modernist claim of shifting, perspectival ‘truth’ and reiterates that the Church declares the objective truth, and holds up Aquinas as the permanent model of uniting faith to reason?
A Modernist could never write such things. Please don’t trot out the tired “He kissed a Qur’an.” An error in judgement does not make him a Modernist, any more than the orthodox things Francis sometimes says take away from the Modernism of Amoris laetitia. Read Veritatis splendor from beginning to end and then try to tell me that a Modernist wrote or approved the writing of that text. Read Dominus Jesus and then tell me that a Modernist approved it. Would you ever see a text like Dominus Jesus from the CDF under Francis?
If John Paul was just one more Modernist pope in a post-V2 roster of Modernists, why is Francis going to so much trouble to systematically dismantle and destroy the John Paul II Institute? Why does Amoris Laetitia deliberately contradict the entire content of Veritatis splendor?
You have clearly bought into the narrative that V2 was wholly and completely an evil thing, and that therefore all the Popes after, who acknowledged the Council and cited from its documents, are complicit in the evil. But this narrative does not express the reality of things. The Council was certainly a struggle between Modernism and the truth, but the result was mixed. The Council documents were orthodox, but the net result of the Council was the gutting of catechesis and liturgy. The post-conciliar period has dealt a grievous wound to the Church.
The pontificates of Paul VI, John Paul, and Benedict have all been defined by the way they each sought to deal with the ongoing battle between the factions at the Council, which battle did not end with the Council but continues now.
John Paul II was not part of the Modernist faction at the Council. He was in favor of the move away from Neo-Scholasticism, but not any move away from Tradition. When he took on the responsibility of St. Peter he used his pontificate to fight the Modernism infecting the Church at various levels. But he was not able to fully solve the problem, because it is too big for any one pope to fix. Benedict also tried to deal with the problem (one example being his encouragement of the Latin Mass), but it remained.
In the election of Francis, the Modernist faction from the Council, which never truly died but laid low during John Paul II, biding its time and waiting, has finally gained the chair of Peter, which it sought for so long. We are watching unfold a literal coup of the Church.
If John Paul was merely a preliminary to this coup, just one more Modernist Pope, then why is Francis going to so much trouble to destroy the John Paul Institute, and to openly contradict (and attempt to replace) John Paul’s teaching on marriage, on the Eucharist, and on the objective content of human moral action? Why so much effort to get away from John Paul if they are both allies in Modernism?
That would be too easy 🙁
But Al, what happens to you if your opinion is incorrect?
Nothing. I am allowed to be either right or wrong in my personal assessment. I know I am not a cardinal or a bishop. They get to make the final determination.
It may be that his resignation was invalid. However, as Salza and Siscoe state in True or False Pope? A Refutation of Sedevacantism and Other Errors (www.trueorfalsepope.com), any defects in the election of PF were “healed in the root” by the peaceful and universal acceptance of Francis as Pope.
I strongly suggest that you get True or False Pope as well as The Keys of This Blood by Malachi Martin. Imho, Malachi Martin wrote the Third Secret in a veiled way in the chapter entitled The Judas Complex.
Margaret, I am already familiar with the book. Furthermore, I disagree with some of their conclusions. The main problem I have with their conclusions is that my position (and that of many others) is that JPII’s apostolic constitution was indeed violated by many of the cardinals both before and during the conclave. There was an obvious and otherwise provable conspiracy to elect Bergoglio. I am not making any arguments for Sedevacantism. However, it is quite apparent that Bergoglio’s election pursuant to Universi Dominici Gregis seems, likely, invalid. Others disagree, and that is fine. Good people can agree to disagree. In the end, it now appears that, if he was validly elected, he is surely on the road to losing the papacy thanks to four brave cardinals. The Church simply cannot have a heretical apostate on the Chair of Peter.
Points taken. However, please get the book by Malachi Martin. If you can’t find it at a used book store, try Amazon. Yes, it’s 25 years old, but the chapter entitled The Judas Complex alone is worth the price of the book.
I’ll ask for it as a Christmas gift from my family:)
Well, if you get extra copies, give them to people who really need to know the truth and will appreciate them. ?
You wonder if Pope Francis has the intellectual capacity to be pope or even a priest. He apparently is completely driven by his feelings and is flabbergasted by precise logic.
“It is blessed to forgive. For me that is enough.” Well, empty the prisons and repeal all the laws and disband the courts.
“But that wouldn’t be fair or smart!”
Exactly…
No justice. No mercy. No peace.
I contend (and am probably backed up by proper ecclesiastical authority, i.e.- the four cardinals) that Francis is in BOTH a state of MATERIAL and MANIFEST (OBSTINATE), un-recanted, and un-repented HERESY. Additionally, and most likely, at this point- APOSTASY as well.
And…please tell me, Papa Bergoglio, what this false ecumenism (and your pathetic joining in the 500th anniversary commemoration of the Reformation) gotten the Church in the last five decades? NOTHING. Absolutely nothing. Instead of celebrating, he should have implored them in the name of Christ to come back into the fold of the One, Holy, and Apostolic Catholic Church! But, no, not this pope.
At this point, I no longer pray for him and his intentions. But I do pray for his immortal soul and his repentance.
I don’t know what other conclusion can be logically drawn at this point, Al. We may not be able to officially declare such a thing, as we have no such authority, but that doesn’t mean we have to be willfully blind and ignore the obvious. Hopefully, the cardinals going public will be the tipping point in this battle, as Francis looks more and more like a petulant, spoiled child with each day that passes without him responding to the dubia.
Agree, and I would go a step further and proffer that he may be the False Prophet. Barnhardt is moving in that direction as well. I believe the end game is to desecrate the Holy Eucharist in mini-steps, beginning with this issue of communion for the d & r “in special cases”, moving on to a blanket approval for all d & r, then opening up of communion to practicing homosexuals in the name of “accompaniment” and “mercy”, and then to cohabitating unmarried couples because, as pf has already stated, they have (I’m paraphrasing) many elements of a sacramental marriage. And of course, with his zeal to reach out to all matter of Protestant denominations, of course our Holy Communion would be offered to them as well. God Himself only knows what kind of Church we will have at that point, or any real Church at all…not to be pessimistic, though, Jesus Christ will be present in the remnant of faithful religious and laypeople, who may very possibly have to go underground…
The Schism is coming.
I fear so. However, there will be clarity. We will know which bishop is orthodox and which is not. A tough problem for me since I suspect that my chances of being in an orthodox diocese is at best, 50-50. Fortunately, there are some Eastern rite churches near by.
Being in the Byzantine Rite is not a guarantee of orthodoxy. We have problems, too, although not so bad.
Fortunately, our bishop is orthodox, as well as the Metropolitan, and both are fairly young. I’ve heard from the bishop’s own mouth, publicly in a sermon, that there were “enemies” within the Church. And he was referring to the usual suspects.
Which Archeparchy/Eparchy do you belong to?
Passaic. Bishop = Kurt Burnette.
Slava Isusu Christu!
My mom is Byzantine Catholic and my late father was Ukrainian Catholic. I get the Eastern Catholic Life every month since The Way (the archeparchial newspaper of the UGCC in Philadelphia) became totally online. (And I save the Bishop’s columns too!)
You can always move.
Or maybe the truth will win through?
If we pray and fast we will destroy the lies.
We need to pray, fast, and work for the revelation of the Third Secret of Fatima (I.e. the exact words of Our Lady which follow: “In Portugal, the dogma of the Faith will always be preserved…”) and the Collegial Consecration of Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. That’s the only way we’ll get out of this mess.
“there will be occasions when everything will seem to be lost and paralyzed. This, then, will be the happy beginning of the complete restoration.” Our Lady of Quito. Her Triumph is close to hand. Centenary of Fatima next May.
Dear Ana, good to see you here. In reality we have already won. That is what the Mother of God said to Lucia via a letter to Cardinal Carlo Caffara.
And I believe Her. Also in Her Son’s promise that He will be with His Church until the end of time. Many people seem to find it hard to absolutely trust but that is what is required.
Dear Ana, Exactly, So can I ask you why so many Catholics are obsessed with things that are not relevant to us e.g. the third secret being correct? Why are so many Catholics lined up attacking Pope John Paul 2? The guy is dead and as approved by the church a Saint. I for one accept his sainthood, my family and I are a product of Saint John Paul 2. satan for the moment is very strong he wants Catholics to give up!
If the Third Secret had been disclosed in 1960 when Our Lady asked for it to be it would have helped Catholics to prepare for what was to come. Pressure would have been put on the Vatican not to hold VII which has been a disaster for the church. Our liturgy, sacraments, catechesis, swept aside in favour of a Lutheran mass & personal conscience against Divine precepts, new against Tradition.
JPII seemed at first a change from the Italian mafia who seemed unmovable but he was entrenched in the politics of Communism. Not to say that wasn’t necessary at the time but it took over from his governance of the church & keeping a watchful eye out on his clergy, hence the stench of sodomy engulfing our seminaries and institutions. Good honourable men were sent home as not being suitable for ordination & consequently we were given a rainbow priesthood, unheard of prior to that. Also, I have to say, most of us were revulsed at his kissing of the Qur’an & the message that sent to the world, especially given the history of Muslims v Christians. That view has been borne out by IS in the ME & the huge infiltration of young Muslim men into Europe aided & abetted by PF. I should point out that JPII was made a saint by PF which doesn’t help his cause. It was a rushed job to bless VII by its usurpers.
“unheard of prior to that?”
You’ve obviously never heard of the Liber Gommorhianus, written by St. Peter Damian, almost millennium ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liber_Gomorrhianus
Perhaps I should have said ‘in the past thousand years’? Obviously the popes, cardinals & bishops didn’t read Liber Gommorhianus either or they would have been better prepared.
Our Lord sees all things. He knows more than we.
Don’t worry…..He makes all things new again.
We shall just stay faithful and offer to HIm any sufferings we may have to endure.
Dear Al, It’s easy not to pray for an enemy, Is this where we are really are as obsevant Catholics? Why can we not pray that if someone doesn’t have the faith that they are booted out or converted?
For us, our reality is that we would prefer not to have fire from the sky (AKITA) or the two Popes (Anne Catherine Emerich) all we would like to have is Jesus Christ restored to his exact and truthful place. The last prophet was Saint John the Baptist not the profit mo.. hammed etc.
No disagreement from me:-)
In my Rosary, I pray for the ***traditional*** intentions of the Holy Father in order to gain the indulgence.
‘Persist in only seeing white or black’ can otherwise be written as ‘persist in only seeing right or wrong’. That’s right, Francis, the path to heaven which is narrow, or the path to hell which is wide.
In the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius of Loyola, the meditations on the Two Kingdoms and the Two Standards strike me as being “black and white”. You are either under the standard of Christ – I.e. the Cross – or the standard of the Enemy.
Maybe he needs to redo the Spiritual Exercises (with a TC priest who will really stick to the spirit of St. Ignatius).
Well Steve, this at least answers the old maxim of what it must take to ‘p***-off the pope’ even if the question ‘is the pope catholic’ remains unanswered.
Unfortunately our leader is choosing the path of ecumenism –
One World Religion:
Pope Francis Says All Major Religions Are ‘Meeting God In Different Ways’ (video)
http://www.infowars.com/one-world-religion-pope-francis-says-all-major-religions-are-meeting-god-in-different-ways/
What happened to :
John 14:6
“I am the way and the truth and the life. No
one comes to the Father except through me”
God became mercy?
So before He became mercy he was not?
My, he seems not even qualified to teach RCIA.
GOD does not change your right
From what I’ve heard about RCIA, he seems very qualified to teach it.
LOL!
Perfect observation!
First of all, despite the anthropomorphisms of the God in the Scriptures to help man understand the Divine: God literally cannot forget. If God forgets something that thing no longer exists and it has never existed. When God ‘forgets’ something someone did it means He doesn’t hold them to it anymore, He absolves them of the guilt for the sin.
Secondly, we all already knew that Pope Francis was having a temper tantrum over at his posh suite at Santa Marta. Not only have the Four Cardinals publicly out-ed PF as being a petty tyrant (petty tyrants have fits about their power and refuse to do their job when someone ‘lesser’ than them asks them to) and a man with an agenda that he is trying to smokescreen with all the talk of ‘not changing doctrine’ when that’s exactly what he is doing which could possibly lead him to be proven an obdurate manifest public Heretic.
Thirdly, Cardinal Dinardo was elected President of the USCCB and he was one of the signatories of the 13 Cardinal’s letter back at the Synod for the Destruction of the Family, which sent Pope Francis into a tyrannical hissy fit over at Santa Marta’s, so he is getting to revisit that anew due to Dinardo’s election (not to mention that he wanted Hillary to win the presidential election too!)
Fourthly, PF can’t handle the fact that they have outmaneuvered his Jesuit Bana Republic goons. Francis is simply endorsing casuistry which is the fruit of denying the existence of intrinsic moral evils: and that is what the dubia are really getting at.
Therefore: Papal temper tantrum and canceling the meeting with the College of Cardinals.
Father, does Francis’s statement of “when the Almighty forgives, he forgets” not imply that temporal punishment for confessed sins, which the Church teaches must be paid either in this life or in Purgatory, no longer exists?
Not exactly, it is a popular anthropomorphism even found in Sacred Scripture, what it means is God no longer holds the offense against the person. If they still have a matter of Temporal Justice to settle, then settle it they must. Man needs to be reconciled to God above all but He also needs to be reconciled to the Church, that is the Redeemed Humanity. Temporal justice is about man’s debt to man, not to God.
Thank you, Father. I just wanted to make sure Francis hadn’t opened yet another (unintended, perhaps, but then again, who knows with him?) can of worms with that statement.
I have always treasured the story of St. Claude Colombiere, the confessor of St. Margaret Mary. Skeptical of her report of visions of Our Lord and of the revelation of the Sacred Heart, he asked her to request our Lord to tell her what Claude’s last mortal sin was. When asked, Our Lord said that when Claude had confessed it, He had forgotten it.
Brilliant! in every way, thank you Father.
You know the Novus Ordo Church is getting exactly what you deserve. All of the damage Pope Francis is doing, it’s cathartic in a way. It’s cathartic because you already compromised with the liturgy. I was raised with the Novus Ordo liturgy and I feel like I’ve been psychologically abused by the Novus Ordo Church. Now it feels like the chaos inside me is making itself present in the Church at large.
May God have mercy on you and deliver you from sin and evil. May He not give you exactly what you deserve…
God’s going to give the Church exactly what it deserves, the next persecution. Doesn’t take a genius to look at the state of the Church and the state of the world to see what’s coming.
Really Raguel……….. Ye with little faith.
Little faith? No I do have faith that God will punish the evil men running the Church today.
Okay Raguel, However can we agree that with every breath that we breath there is the opportunity to accept the truth? So therefore are you trying to say it is finished for those that are where they are? So therefore we should be trying to convert those through prayer to stop trying to destroy the faith of Jesus Christ.
Let Him be God then.
Your anger may stem from a sense of betrayal of the Church. I understand that. I have had my moments as well. I believe many on this forum have as well in all honestly.
Try to think of Christ’s Passion and particularly during these times His
moment in front of Pilate. Our Lord could have really whacked him one?!
But, He did not. He stood.
That’s what we have to do. STAND! Not in retribution, fueled with angry and hateful thoughts at those who have greatly disappointed. That is our Cross, I think.
God may very well chastise the Church (in my opinion He already is) and if He does then it will have been well earned; however don’t think that you will escape the coming wrath, you won’t. The measure with which you measure is the measure that shall be met out to you.
I’m fine with that. Down with the Novus Ordo and all who support it. But I mean, you’re already self imploding yourself. It’s almost like my words are meaningless because you’re already persecuting yourself. You’re all heretics anyway, the old die and the young leave the Church. And you keep up with the Vatican II no turning back mantra. March on, the protestant Catholic Church marches on.
SO the simple layperson in the pew who doesn’t know anything else…down with them! They donated to the Church! They supports it! Down with them….?
Sometimes nuance is important.
PS: and you won’t be fine with it, really you won’t be. Wanting Justice for those who refuse to repent and are harming others isn’t evil, unless of course we don’t want them to repent…that is. We need to pray and ask God to lead them to repentance, just like we want Him to lead us to repentance, and to assist as many as possible to Salvation.
Yes, the lay person in the pew, who after a TLM funeral mocks the participants for “using that old Mass.”
Don’t worry though, the lay people in the Church will die off soon enough, and boom there goes your support. That’s because you’ve turned the Mass into a banal social event and you never preach truth from the pulpit. The result is young people are also leaving the Church in droves because they can get better social events elseware, they only come for Christmas and Easter with family. The tipping point is going to be reached sooner than you realize and you’re going to realize just how alone you really are.
Raguel, I am must interfere with these discussions here.
STOP THIS! PLEASE! Do not let this anger justify your condemnation of priests, parishioners. At the end of the day……it will be between you and God. Pray, pray. pray.
Have pity on those around you as our Lord has taken pity on you.
He will take care of the rest.
I’m imploding? I’m persecuting myself? I’m a heretic? I keep up with the no turning back mantra?
You may be in a psychotic state for you perceive me to be the embodiment of something you hate: which I am not.
I hope and pray that you come to your senses and stop saying such stupid and evil things. I am going to end the dialogue now. Feel free to have the last word.
In Sincerity: May God Bless You and Deliver You from Sin and every evil afflicting you.
Excuse me, but exactly who chose you to judge a priest??? Did you ever meet him? If not, then be a gentleman and publicly apologize to Fr. RP. He’s not perfect, but he’s trying to do his best.
I suppose you will be looking for compensation then?
I should sue the diocese for psychological abuse.
When all is said & done, so could a humungous amount of people – many have sued & been given compensation from the donations of the faithful given to upkeep our priests,churches & schools. There are a good many others who have not as they feel it would prolong the duration of their suffering.
The less money that goes to support the Novus Ordo the better. Bring on the lawsuits.
Sorry for your abuse and chaos Raguel. I understand it.
Dear Susanna why would anyone apologise?
I thought I was being sympathetic to someone who felt abused, that’s all. Maybe too Christian for this conversation.
100% correct… do not have sympathy for your Christian brethren on this forum, or show any sign of love/mercy/compassion for a struggling member of the Church. You will be roundly chastised for your folly.
(Sarcasm–in case you didn’t notice)
We simply must stay strong right now and stay in the present moment of our Church.
I understand all you have expressed. And I am truly sorry,, so many laity and their priests have been led in such ways. But…..our Lord is present at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. OK?
Do not turn your back on our Lord, God because of the Satan and his infiltration in the Church.
Do you have a TLM close by or within one hour drive? If not, may I suggest you purchase a 1962 Roman Missal, and bring it with you to your parish ( NO). Arrive early to Mass, read the beautiful prayers found at the beginning of the Missal. Our Lord’s Son and His Mother have been abused for too long now. May you bring them comfort with your sacrifice and may you find Christ’s peace with that.
Bringing my pre-1962 missal doesn’t help, it just reminds me of all the elements of the NO that are a blatant break with tradition. More than that, it’s a protest of tradition, it’s protestant.
You are a Protestant in my opinion.
Your heart is stubborn Raquel.
Pray. Do Penance and make reparations for the world.
God will judge all.
In the meantime, don’t allow Satan to tear you away in your anger.
Please.
CS, I’m not going to apologise to Raguel for something that I have not participated in and I’m 100% not going to use our Holy Priests as an excuse for this persons attitude. Why would someone blame the priests it’s actually unbelievable to see such a comment. If the guy or gal cares about the faith they will get off their backsides and stop whinging!
Deleted after some additional reading.
I put that poorly (though the argument you employ doesn’t necessarily follow either.) When I said hold to it, I should have said ‘doesn’t hold them to it’ that is he absolves them of the punishment due to the action.
I am going to amend the above so it isn’t confusing.
Father, Cardinal Dinardo is Modernist heretic as well. The USCCB is simply electing one of their own to continue their liberal dominance and influence in the U.S. Signatory or not, he is in Francis’ corner.
I didn’t say Dinardo was awesome, I pointed out the Dinardo signed the Letter that put PF in a rage back during the synod. So, PF doesn’t see Dinardo as his buddy.
Fair enough. 🙂
Dear Father RP, In reality, wouldn’t it be wonderful if Catholics stopped the potential of some kind of chastisement that we deserve? Throughout history from the beginning we have had victories and failures. I read your post yesterday about fasting and prayer and thought “YES” We are possibly in the biggest battle ever but we can win.
Of course it would be wonderful if Catholics actually earned a stay of execution by humbly repenting of their sins and actually doing penance for their own sins and even for those of others. Jesus Christ commands us to Love our enemies, love does not mean like them, it means truly desire the authentic Good for them: doing penance for the conversion of one’s enemies is Love. Having Masses said etc…
And Trump building walls too
Disavow any thinking or interpretation at odds with the Catholic Church’s Teaching.
*
They way I have recently understood this is that he takes away the sin of the world [Cf. Jn 1:29]. But to where does he take it? To Hell! – the outside. The devil is left holding all the evil he instigated. God no longer calls to mind our sins. [Cf. Jer 31:34]
*
As with everything that relates to God, we are always faced with a mystery as he is the Being who is infinite and infinite in all of his perfections. 8 He who commits sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil. – 1 Jn 3:8
*
PS In Rev 20 death and hades get thrown into the lake of fire.
Let me get this straight: he does not have time to answer the Dubia (5 tiny questions which can be answered in 5 minutes) but he has time to do another interview?
It’s interesting what he’s saying here because it is sounding very much like gossip – that sin which he supposedly abhors.
Seriously, he could have said to the 4 Cardinals whatever he said to Avvenire, but that he would have really dug a hole for himself if he did that because these Cardinals can very well rebut and refute his “shades of black and white” argument.
Faced with the truth, he scuttles and gossips.
Priorities, Marc. Priorities . . .
Plus, you have to remember: Those are hard questions, after all. Restricting one’s response to only “yes” or “no” . . . Such binary thinking cannot be of the Gospel!
(sarcasm off)
Communist Vientam’s Head of State and Party Chief: “Guest of Pope Francis” @eponymousflower.blogspot.com.es.
As “It is the Communists who think like Christians” he must be holding talks as to how to respond to the Dubia.
I hope not!
“Once He forgives, he forgets. Because it is always blessed to forgive.”
What a self centered abuse of God’s mercy, His Cross, His Mother’s sorrows.
Go away Francis. We have really had quite enough of you.
God forgets what we confess. I’m not a defender, however every observant Catholic should know what is being said here.
Yes. What is being skillfully communicated by PF is the sense there really is no sin at all, no need for penance, reparations in my opinion.
And if one takes this to another level…….No belief in the Sacrifice of our Lord for the salvation of souls.
Sadly yes, Sadly yes again and Sadly yes. I say this because my life was changed by being told the unadulterated truth of the faith not the watered down junk that is being floated around today. My Wife and I took a long journey from the UK to France trying to find the truth of the faith, however we never knew that it was the truth of the faith that we were seeking.
Ultimately, Holiness, it is just black and white. Heaven or hell. There are no other options. We serve God or we serve Satan. We enjoy eternal life or we suffer eternal damnation. The commandments of God do not offer exceptions. We accept Catholic teaching in its totality, or we do not.
“But let your speech be yea, yea: no, no: and that which is over and above these, is of evil” Matt 5:37.
It sounds like you made the Spiritual Exercises? ?
The pontiff who so breezily diagnoses the murky and labyrinthine motives of others sounds like he himself might benefit from an extended moment of repose upon the psychoanalyst’s couch.
Weirder and weider. The Church is the Gospel?
“Go, and make disciples of all nations” is a cancer on the Church?
The thing that Pope Francis’s response seems to misunderstand here is that his desired “ambiguity” still has concrete ramifications, still needs to be able to be expressed concretely. He is confusing his desired “open-ended” outcomes with giving ambiguous explanations.
For example, suppose I ask “Is there any way to win a game of basketball without scoring more points?”.
The answer MUST be yes or no. If you think only counting points is too “rigid” or inflexible, then fine, we’ll debate from there. But if you beleive “winning” is flexible, your answer to the question still is not. It would be concretely YES.
You can’t call the question itself rigid, or refuse to acknowledge that you hold your answer as rigidly as your opponents hold theirs.
That is wholey unrelated to the actual rigidity of declaring a basketball winner, and furthermore, your refusal to provide a concrete answer betrays more than anything else that you aren’t able to defend your position. SO you are hiding behind an ad hominem attack on the very premise of discussion the implications of your equally rigidly held ideas, because you are afraid of committing to untenable conclusions that may be drawn.
[BTW: in case anyone thinks I’m attacking Francis’s conclusions rather than his apparent method of defense, I’m not. The answer to the basketball question is actually YES. You can win through a forfeit]
“Modernism”: Every participant deserves a trophy.
[I like to think that the Almighty has a bad memory. Once he forgives, he forgets. Because it is blessed to forgive.]
Fair enough, but this needs clarification or else it’s just platitudes. Everyone agrees that once absolved, sins are forgotten. But:
1. What does forgiveness require? Repentance?
2. What does repentance require? Amends to reform? An intention not to sin anymore?
3. What does forgetting include? Forgetting Sacramental grace?
4. What does forgetting include? Removing any of the temporal damages of sin?
All these things need to be explained for that statement to have any meaning. And the Traditional Church teaching already provides answers which seem to me quite incompatible with what that statement appears to be trying to argue.
The Four Cardinals = The Four Horseman of the Vatipocalypse
The end is neigh!
Thanks, I needed that.
The end is neigh!
The horses were saying that! Lol.
Steve, his “very minor response” was not so minor. It revealed the colossal arrogance of this man. Fits very easily with Ann Barnhardt’s “diabolical narcissism” as long as the spiritual takes precedence over the psychological.
“I simply let myself be led by the spirit.” No self doubt, no need to discern, “test the spirits”. He had “no plan” to take the church in the direction he has. And he certainly rejects the “rigid” Teaching Church. He’s following his own vision. The church’s understanding that one of the functions of dogma is to guide the flock to avoid the ever present dangers of private judgement. But I guess the consequences of Original Sin, weakness, blindness, subjectivity, Protestantism, are just “annoyances” for this man.
Jorge will not be dissuaded from his globalist dream no matter how many petitions and letters are fired to him.
No, but they urge those who are on the fence as well as those who are opposed to him to get their act together, which now seems to have started with the public Dubia, a Traditional way of correction in the CC.
If apologetic accommodation with an absurdity like Jorge’s “year of mercy” and concern for “progressives” is “traditional”, then I’m all for it. Unfortunately, it reveals the Fab Four don’t see Bergoglio as clearly as truth requires. They are modernists, which is a heresy, and prevents them from seeing their own need for repentance. Consequently, they don’t really know it in their souls that as bishops they should speak with the power and authority of Christ. They are spiritual pipsqueaks.
Well yes, they are all Modernists to some degree but at least acknowledge that what should have occurred years ago is at last being set in action. There is no use going over old ground. We must look to the future & I certainly pray that this Dubia is the beginning of the end of the NWO Church which usurpers brought into being at VII at the behest of George Soros’s deep pockets. Let us not forget that Modernists are all over world governments & institutions – it is not confined to the CC.
You’ve said here what I’ve been thinking.
Maybe there is some symmetry to political and ecclesiastical events? The Four Cardinals are bringing things to a head with Pope Francis just as Trump the Outsider has swiped the presidency from the Heiress Presumptive. Oh, what jolly shows, were all of it not so consequential!
I don’t see it happening without a great public struggle between Jorge and the 4 Cardinals. It’s too optimistic to hope that by going through the proper channels and following church protocol, the 4 can persuade him to resign or recant. He is a megalomaniac and is utterly convinced of his own rectitude. So he won’t give up. I just don’t see this maniac surrendering peacefully. He has nothing but contempt for those bishops who oppose him.
He should be deposed. And will it come down to having him forcibly removed from the the Vatican by the Swiss guard and taken to a monastery to live out the rest of his days? I’m all for that. But who would have the authority and courage to issue such a radical directive? I don’t think those cardinals have the fortitude to take such drastic steps.
Well, I hope, by hook or by crook, this Bergoglio will be gone very soon.
Whatever it takes & with God’s Blessing.
I am trying to get a Rosary Campaign like ANF’s started here (with their assistance) as I believe it is the way to get everything sorted. Maybe others could also try in their countries to get the show on the road, especially leading up to the centenary next May.
Pope Fransissy obviously thinks he Beloved One did not know what He was talking about.
Yeah, must be so frustrating to be bound by Scripture and Tradition.
Pope Francis is unhappy that we’re a little slow on the uptake, in following him into the Lutheran church.
Francis: “Make a mess!” Reply: “The Church is in one big mess thanks to Francis.”
“Legalism”??
After 50+ years of liturgical, doctrinal and catechetical anarchy, we need a little “legalism”. What world does Francis inhabit? He speaks as if the Church has been suffering under some sort of Jansenist inquisition for the last half century when in fact, the exact opposite is the case. The Church has been thrown into chaos at the expense of numerous souls who been scandalized and left the Church.
This is typical of Francis. He never acknowledges the suffering of the Catholic pewsitter who has endured 50 years of these shenanigans. On the contrary, he ridicules and derides faithful Catholics. Francis is the embodiment and the fulfillment of all the post-Vatican II crapola that has turned the Church upside down. This is the end game, folks. It’s the final showdown. May those cardinals and bishops who truly love the Church, supported by the Catholic faithful, have the courage and wisdom to face down this charlatan.
I’m convinced the schism will happen and I think the Pope gave a clue in his interview with Avvenire today on what basis he will excommunicate his opponents. From the somewhat awkward translation, ” As for opinions, we must always distinguish the spirit in which they are spoken. When there is not an evil spirit, they also help to walk. Other times you see right away that they take criticism here and there to justify an already taken place, they are not honest, are made with evil spirit to foment division.” Buckle up.
No, in the end, Francis is the excommunicated one.
I just wanted to say: The greatest evil of Amoris Laetitia is that it actually encourages people to sin and even goes so far as to claim that it may even be God’s Will! God willing someone to sin…and being honored by the Sin. That is what Amoris Laetitia says and that is truly Diabolical.
That’s why he likes Luther so much with the “sin boldly” theology. He said that Luther gave us “gifts”. Lord have mercy!
I don’t know Francis’ theology, or could he even explain it logically what his beliefs are.
He is The Fountain of Confusion!
Pope Francis will not recant. The humility of ages past that allowed John XXII to correct himself is mostly absent in modern discussions as a whole, and completely absent in Pope Francis. Make no mistake, he is a tyrant. The real and only question is what will Cardinal Burke do? I am nervous thinking about it – I can only imagine how he feels. The thought of me getting in front of these people and calling out the Holy Father…. I can’t ever picture myself doing that. There is tremendous weight on his shoulders and I think he knows it. Pray for him.
Here’s the reality Truth is Black or White, something is either correct or incorrect. I remember Pope Benedict XVI saying at some point during his papacy, that today we use moral relativism as a method of avoiding the acceptance of our sins.
As we excavate ever deeper we are getting to the heart of the dilemma. Last evening I heard Edward Pentin quote sources close to the Holy Father describing him as “boiling with rage” over
this situation.
Eureka. Finally a moment of unvarnished truth.
The referenced “boiling rage” has been fueling the metamorphosis of Roman Catholicism for decades. We all get that way when found to be up to our necks in duplicity. Given that predicament it become crystal clear as to why the Holy Father is not going to meet with the College of Cardinals this week.
This morning we read in the Catholic Herald that Antonio Spadaro SJ denies Mr. Pentin’s reportage – this the same Mr. Pentin who produced the video of Cardinal Kasper “not saying” of the African episcopate “they should not tell us too much what we have to do,” implying that Mr. Pentin is feeding us a lie.
Why would we believe that? Anyone who got through the sophomore year of high school already has a degree in this facet of human relations.
Pope Francis would find a great peace if he were simply to correct himself. And so
would we. Even more peace were he to resign.
God willing we will soon see there are more than four Cardinals willing to put all at risk and display Christian fortitude in the face of aberrance. If that does not come to pass, may God provide refuge for them and uphold them in the effort to bring a raking light to this most unpleasant pontificate.
Perhaps the deconstruction envisioned by the St. Gallen Group, underway with the Bergoglian cohort, is finally beginning to “splash back?”
Rage and lies are quite the corrosive.
Let those possessed of the Truth continue to speak. May God bring their good work to perfection.
Light indeed is the best disinfectant.
Someone else was reported to be in a violent rage last week – closer to home in the US on election evening.
Wouldn’t you give a million for a Clinton video?
Your equivocation is serious. An Italian scholar, Roberto de Mattei, did an op-ed (provided by Rorate Caeli earlier this week) entitled – “With Democrats’ loss in the US, Francis becomes the leader of the Global Left,” with the strapline “After Trump’s victory, has Pope Francis become the leader of the international left?”
This is magnified by Pope Francis’ staggering remarks about Communism last week. All of this is transpiring within a kind of web.
Actually, I’d give a million for the scene at the Vatican as well. I wonder if it would come sub-sub-titled?
Wow. Maike Hickson is reporting that Pope Emeritus Benedict has decided not to comment on the letter of the 4 cardinals? It seems to me schism would be averted if he took a position one way or the other.
Where is she reporting that?
In the article about her publicly releasing the letter she sent to Benedict XVI
The Organization Man.
When one sits in the biggest office….in the grandest chair…surrounded by Heepish acolytes and scurrying Yes Men….there is no need to do, really, much of anything. It is all quite clear. Your job (all of you who are not Me!) is to execute the mission of the Organization (please reference the standards established in this year’s Objective Planning sessions); and my job is to define the amorphous scope of the mission according to the relevant priorities of Today (Diversity, Inclusivity, MultiCulturalism, Globalism, and Economic Equity).
A question asked…5 questions asked…no matter. File 13 everything we wish to unsee and move on assuredly down the road …which is the Gospel.
You ask, “What is the Gospel?” Well clearly it is not a “path of ideas”….it is not a rigorous analysis and interpretation of the truth revealed through Jesus Christ (for that reeks of legalism and logic)….rather it is, I like to call it, discernment in the flow of life (or, as the Beatles said, Relax and Float Downstream). And who better to discern the flow of life than, as Bill Murray put it in Groundhog Day: me, me, me!
As for those benighted few who carp & criticize… well, obviously such insistent ‘rigorism springs from their desire to hide their own dissatisfaction (and doubt!) under armour.”
***
Insight, of course, can be found in strange places. Perhaps, sometimes, even in the nonsense rhymes of Seuss:
“You hush up your mouth!” howled the mighty King Yertle.
“You’ve no right to talk to the world’s highest turtle.
I rule from the clouds! Over land! Over sea!
There’s nothing, no, NOTHING, that’s higher than me!”
Ha! The levity much appreciated!
Pope Francis know he loses this debate pursuant to logic or reason. Therefore, he refuses to engage on the substantive issues and instead does the following:
1. Attacks the motives of those who question him.
2. Suggests that they may be mentally unstable.
3. Suggests that they do not know God.
If anyone is mentally unstable it will be PF. We already know he has a black spot on his brain. Only God knows if it has the ability to destabilise him to the point of “boiling with rage”.
And of course, he always will speak to a journalist, but is terrified of his brothers in the faith.
Are there Safe Spaces in the Vatican? I think somebody’s triggered, and how.
I worry that PF may have a bunker, and that Eva Braun is waiting for him there.
Or Emma Bonino?
With his silence and then his dismissal of these four good Cardinals, Bergoglio shows himself entirely unfit to be Roman Pontiff. He is a heretic whether he believes himself to be or not.
Perhaps there is a thin line of purpose we are missing. Bear with my explanation:
“For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him might not perish but might have eternal life”. (Jn3:16-17)
I have a good friend, raised Catholic, educated by religious brothers in a Catholic college. He is divorced (>20 yrs), but not remarried. He lives with his companion of almost a dozen years whom he has offered to marry, but they are not. He has no continuing secular legal responsibility to his ex and their adult son, but….
Although a man of ‘modest’ income he responds with no resentment to provide financial support for his ex and their adult, out of work son who struggles with depression and substance dependency. His companion and he would take his son into their home were he willing to relocate. My friend rarely attends Church and fully respects that he not participate in the Eucharist. He recognises his brokenness and simply trusts in the Good Lord’s grace. All whom he comes into contact with can rely on him to provide whatever support he is able to offer (including the homeless vagrant recently found with packed suitcase on a local park bench! I kid you not 6 weeks+ of difficult engagement with little social co-operation, even from the vagrant.)
Now here is truth – my friend’s situation means that he is able to reach into the lives of people who can identify with him, but would hardly identify with me (an unworthy Extraordinary Minister of the Eucharist for some 25 years now). As surely as the Good Lord is able to work through me, the Good Lord is able to work through my companion.
Given the large number of divorced and remarried (or possibly cohabiting Catholics), could it be that Pope Frances is reaching out to them, to reassure them that they are indeed still/always welcome in the community of Catholic believers. And could it be that he trusts enough that when such people explore their circumstance with a truly faithful priest (or even without) that the HS will lead them to the “informed” conscience decision that the sacrament of reconciliation must be entered into with sincerity of repentance and sincerity of reforming future behaviour before proceeding with fear and trembling to receive the Lord in the Eucharist. This is a long held teaching and the Holy Spirit convicts us
“when the Spirit of truth comes he will lead you to the complete truth, since he will not be speaking of his own accord, but will say only what he has been told; and he will reveal to you the things to come. He will glorify me, since all he reveals to you will be taken from what is mine.”(Jn 16 13-14).
Can we trust that the HS will convict them (interiorly) of the gravity of their divorce, will (interiorly) affirm the gravity of adultery, will (interiorly) affirm the sin of simony, but will also impart grace – for some to continue participating in the Mass (but not partaking of Holy Communion); to others progressing to live in true continence, repenting and thus partaking sincerely in the sacrament of Reconciliation and Holy Communion; to other proceeding to regularise through annulment. For a few it may be that they choose to partake of Holy Communion, but could it be that the HS will convict them here too that
“Everyone is to examine himself and only then eat of the bread or drink from the cup; because a person who eats and drinks without recognising the body is eating and drinking his own condemnation” (1 Cor 11:28-29)
– slowly helping such too to repent, turn from their afront-ary, and seek too the Lord’s will and grace. And can it be that the witness of faithful Catholics who confess that their circumstances prevent them from receiving communion can be the true witnesses to those of similar condition as to the Lord’s will so that others are not lead into error
“Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea” (Mat 18:6).
There is so much divorce, so much disregard for fidelity – how can this adulterous generation, but nevertheless His people be brought back to His warm embrace?
Roman Catholics have been deprived of authentic catechesis for close to fifty years. Instead of offering what remains of the faithful a lethal placebo, maybe Pope Francis could put his head down to some serious business like restoring Catholic education and adult religious instruction. But that would require work and the demonstration of results, and that might not be so easy as giving them a pat on the back.
Bergoglian koochy-koo katholicism in the kasperian key is so much easier.
They don’t regard themselves as accountable, which says to me they might not even believe, because we will all be accountable someday.
One of the criticism by Card. Burke [God bless him and defend him] of Pope Francis is that he doesn’t understand how the papacy works. Why resort to these methods in responding to a very respectful and systematic manner by which the 4 brave Cardinals have sought clarifications over AL?. It is as if he wants popular/secular support whilst he should be serving the LORD and his Church even when all alone, to the point of martyrdom.
I think Ann Barnhardt has correctly assessed the situation. It is the only explanation that makes sense to me.
That somehow even guys wearing red hats can’t elect a second pope when the first is still called pope afterwards? That therefore even calling Bergoglio “pope” is an assault on the papacy?
Yes, something along those lines. Does the canon law of the Church even allow such a thing as “Pope” and “Pope Emeritus”? I think of it as “fundamental error” which negates the election made by the Cardinals. Ann writes at barnhardt.biz and she explains it far better than I am doing here. Is “Pope” Francis the Pope? Or is “Pope Emeritus” Benedict XVI the Pope? Why would the leadership create such a quandary for the Church? This is entirely unprecedented.
Of course cannon law does not have any consideration of multiplying Peters. And you would think that the guys who do cardinaling for a living might have grasped that a living guy with the word pope in his title is a roadblock to electing another guy and adding the word pope to his title too.
And you can’t just fix it later by saying that Benedict isn’t pope and even if he dies the problem doesn’t go away.
If the Dubia had Francis “boiling with rage”, that could be ascribed solely to its obvious unwelcome nature in his eyes. But could the Pope going nuclear also be down to the fact that such serious opposition was TOTALLY UNEXPECTED. Perhaps he and his fanatically modernist fellow-travellers were so certain of their control of all the ecclesiastical levers of power that such a riposte did not even enter into their plans. I would call that a very major and encouraging miscalculation on their part.
“persist in seeing only white or black, when rather one ought to discern in the flow of life”…can someone much more knowledgeable that this simple lay Catholic tell what the H__L this statement means???
No. No, they can’t. Your take is as good as any!
Yes. He’s saying that there is no Truth and that if you see Truth (black and white) then you’re limited (only) and you ought to interpret the thing that made you see Truth from the turbulence of life.
He’s saying truth is limiting (nonsense) and the chaos of life is the place where you find the greatest clarity (also nonsense.)
God have mercy on us!!
Yes, the Pope has been unusually silent. Not to worry. Just get him at a cruising altitude of around 31,000 feet and within earshot of a few reporters. Much easier to talk to them than those funny guys with the red hats.
No, he hasn’t – check this out:
http://www.cfnews.org/page88/files/0d8766d950e478edb28e22df39248a59-656.html
And I thought Jesuits were supposed to be intellectuals, are they using affirmative action in the Jesuit schools now?
Heretic antipope
That’s being too kind. Just say he’s not Catholic and be done with it. 🙂
I don’t think Francis is merely angry over the references to AL in the letter. I think he understands that the other questions are directed not at his potential heresy, but his potential apostasy.
He’ll do nothing until the hounds surround him, if the hounds surround him.
The reference to “black and white” reminded me of this quote:
“A quarrel is always a mutual appeal to conscience. Under the shock of it
the most fantastic paradox-mongers put their trust in the eternal
truisms. The poet, when in an ecstasy, will cry out that nothing is
forbidden, that everybody is justified. But the poet, when in a quarrel,
will not so easily cry out that his publisher is justified. The artist
may claim all colours in a rainbow subtlety, fading into each other; but
the artist, when disputing an arrangement with the art-dealer, will
develop an interest in black and white.”
-G.K. Chesterton, Illustrated London News, January 8, 1916
Thank you. I needed some GKC.
‘The Pope said: “No one is selling doctrine.” ‘
That’s it. That’s the key. Francis doesn’t want to sell the doctrine of Jesus Christ:
“And it came to pass when Jesus had fully ended these words, the people were in admiration at his doctrine.” – Matthew 7:28
The Black/White quote really suggests that this Pope sincerely doesn’t understand how far from the Christian faith he makes himself out to be.
Does he really believe NOTHING is Black or White, that everything is Gray?
His words seem to indicate just that. Like his constant classic “Jesus never excludes”. Excludes…WHAT? Excludes WHAT from WHAT/WHOM? What does the phrase even mean? Is it a reference to universalism or just his own way of restating Rev 3:20? Does HE even know?
Or is this his pedagogic method: teaching simply that the Christian faith is made up of endless confabulation with no ultimate truth presented to the hearer and certainly no point of crisis decision ever warranted or required since “proselytism is a grave sin”?
It’s hard to see why those like Francis who argue for this “new approach” to divorce and “individual treatment” of every case don’t see where this would inevitably lead, viz. to the Church’s being forced to condone every sexual sin imaginable. Or perhaps they do.
Why stop at sexual sin if there is no longer any such thing as an act which is intrinsically evil?
You’re quite right. I was thinking only in the near term, but long term, this mischief really abolishes entirely the concept of sin. Blaise Pascal thought the Jesuits of his time were up to no good, but even he never imagined anything like what seem to be afoot in Rome today!
What is wrong with him? There is so much confusion in the world and he adds to it. Heh holy father—If you don’t stand for something you will fall for anything
Many of our Time honored Doctrines have been tested by “Fire”, and are set in Stone, if you will. Therefore, there are no 5 shades of gray in between, and maybe that was what the 5 questions represented….the 5 shades that cannot be, and needs to be answered in the Black and White.
What’s remarkable is that the four Cardinals have such little outspoken support from the clergy. This alone tells us the degree of corruption in the Church. The Catholic Church is becoming a wraith of it’s former self. This should be considered a blessing considering the damage being perpetrated by the corrupt (Protestant) theology of Vatican II and especially in the person of it’s most vocal advocate, Pope Francis.
Bergoglio is such a vague imprecise man. He is trying to use his position to undermine, confuse, and obviscate. He needs to go because he is a bad bishop and so typical of his generation… Just a big hippy.
I think that he may be extremely precise – just not in a pro-God kind of way. It’s tricky to be this tricky.
“The Church is the Gospel; it is not a path of ideas.” Simply put, Francis’ philosophy rather than his heresy is per se the problem.
I want to say to him: “I know what you’re saying, bro. You don’t want people to trust their reasons and reasoning too much. But your understanding of “too much” seems to be equivalent to trusting anything with any certainty at all. Do you like Heraclitus?” If we can’t know anything until we “look in the flow of life”, then we can’t have ideas that are permanent, just like Heraclitus thought. That’s why Francis himself is such a dogmatist: If you “destroy” ideas (we can’t), our ability to act as rational animals is destroyed and since religion requires belief by reason, then religion is destroyed. We’d LITERALLY be *still* believing and acting based on feelings…feeling like we’re in an apostolic tradition — that every tradition belongs to somehow.
For that reason (supported here: http://www.crisismagazine.com/2015/can-pope-heretic), I question whether he is per se a heretic. Certainly it is in the external action heretical. But he doesn’t seem to have the ability or even belief in reason (like many other moderns) and since theology takes the form of reason, he doesn’t properly speaking have theology. Its like if you accused a handicapped or drunk person of heresy…
Ironic tbat Francis attempt to gerrymander family synod was Rejected. Even though he deliberately excluded Ab Burke and Cordilieone he still did NOT get the result he wanted. Contact Francis and point out that Anglicans disintegrated when local nations like Scotland and USA Episcopal bishops gave communion and marriages to homosexual agenda………. Sadly Francis reminds me of Infamous Bishop Spong of the USA. Anglicans Episcopal leadership.Spong like Francis so undermined basic Christian morals sexual and otherwise that the Anglicans Episcopal Church collapse along national lines…….. Very. sadly Francis has surrounded himself with Radcliffe, cupich, weuerl ,Daniels Schoenberg and R Marx who have their liberals RC faith dying in their respective nations. ALl of the countries RC faith is imploded with weekly mass going down to si gle digits. Sadly even Francis in Germany Schoenberg in Austria and Dutch bishops have noticed this . ….. . Amoris latita and & Francis are a disturbing return to the destruction of Spong brought to the Anglicans in RC faith today…… …. . Sorry to hear the Vile comments of Francis and Farrel etc.on the faithful Ab like Pell, Burke and Chaput pointing out actual faith and morals, canon.law 915 that Francis and the liberal clowns he has surrounded himself with. Roisica ,Daniels Schoenberg and R Marx preside over Dying faith in their respective ex Catholic nations. Shame on Francis to say the least.
I wrote this post on my own blog last night regarding this mess and offer a few ideas for solutions https://cardinalallennephew.wordpress.com/2016/11/20/the-pope-and-the-heretical-cardinals/
Bishop Jan Wątroba, the Chariman of the Council for Family at the Polish Episcopate for greater clarity of Amoris Laetitia and answer from the Pope to the Dubia of Four cardinals
Bishop Jan Wątroba the Chariman of the Council for Family at the Polish Episcopate stated “ It is a pity that there is no universal interpretation and clear message of the same document (Amoris Laetitia) and you need to add Exhortation’s interpretations. Personally – perhaps out of habit, but also with deep conviction – I prefer the communication at least such as that of St. John Paul II, where there was no need for comments and interpretations of the Peter’s teaching. How reads Polish Catholic News Agency KAI Bishop Watroba believes that publishing the letter four Cardinals to Pope Francis it is not reprehensible, but rather an expression of determination and concern for the proper understanding of the teaching of Peter.
As he noted, the Polish Episcopate carefully reads the exhortation – both at the individual level and at the level of Council for Family at the Polish Episcopate which was obliged to prepare draft guidelines and guidance, especially in view of priests and confessors; it was formed an informal group of theologians who are in the process of preparing such a document.
The Chairman of the Council for Family noted that there is a lot of pressure and expectation to present as soon as possible to the priests a kind of manual regarding the so-called irregular situation. Here haste is not a good thing. The proposal will be presented probably at the March Conference of the Polish Episcopate.
I’m waiting for an answer, for clarification, the more that I am bombarded with similar questions like other bishops or priests said in an interview with Polish Catholic Agency – KAI – Bishop Watroba, the the Chairman of the Council for Family at Polish Episcopate.
Source: Polish Catholic News Agency KAI https://ekai.pl/diecezje/krakowska/x105254/ks-prof-bortkiewicz-o-liscie-kardynalow-do-papieza-w-sprawie-amoris-laetitia/
This interevntion was then followed d an auxiliary bishop of Archidiocese of Lublin and lecturer of Ethics at the Catholic University of Lublin (where Karol Wojtyla taught ethics in 50-ties and 60-ties) clearly stood in defence of the 4 cardinals and thier letter as stated in the interview for Italian newspaper La Fede Quotidiana (The Daily Faith) http://www.lafedequotidiana.it/vescovo-wrobel-la-amoris-laetitia-non-stata-scritta-bene/
He said “Amoris Laetitia is not well written,” and “The four Cardinals did well in asking for clarification about Amoris Laetitia. It is evidently necessary to answer them.”
Regarding the voices presenting the dubia, Wróbel explained: “They [the Cardinals] did well and have exercised correctly what Canon Law provides for. I think it is not just a right, but moreover a duty.”
Wróbel remarked that it is not just for the Pope to withhold answers from them. “It would be just to respond to their observations. They did not ask about the weather of tomorrow, but about questions that regard the Church’s doctrine and therefore her faithful.” A response, he added, is a matter of charity. “The primacy of charity begins with those that are closest.”
This is a great quote in the article. Bergoglio:
I see no ambiguity here. It is completely in line with the rest of his noises.
There are no facts or even Truth. There is only some kind of flowing thing that allows discerning.
It’s absurd on its face. For him, consensus and feelings trump facts and truth.
Yet he takes the opposite course in his own defense. There’s no flow or connection to the dubia – just denial and nonsense.
Ultimately what are his innovations routed in? A denial of Truth – that it even exists.
I don’t know quite how you can be less Catholic than this.
Yes indeed. And this apparently means that Bergoglio does not believe in infallibly defined dogmas, which would be a case of “all white”, which in his perverse worldview simply cannot exist. So it is no wonder he can traipse over to Lund and heap praises on the heresiarch Luther, despite the Council of Trent condemning 46 heresies of that devil.
On the plus side (if it can be called that) this means Bergoglio will never try to infallibly define any of his errors, because he simply does not believe in infallibility in the first place!!!