Browse Our Articles & Podcasts

Interview – Roberto de Mattei Discusses the Escalating Church Crisis

Editor’s note: Last month, Dr. Maike Hickson began a correspondence with Catholic historian, author, and speaker Professor Roberto de Mattei on the nature of the escalating crisis in the Church. Although her husband’s recent sudden illness has necessitated that she take a leave of absence from her work here at OnePeterFive, she and her husband both asked that we proceed with the publication of this important and timely interview.



Maike Hickson (MH): Many Catholics around the world had hoped that the Dubia Cardinals would publish their public correction of Pope Francis concerning his Post-Synodal Exhortation, Amoris Laetitia. What would you tell those among the faithful who are now disappointed and even discouraged in the face of the silence of the princes of the Church? With which words would you try to encourage these faithful to persevere in their hope and in their Faith? 

Roberto de Mattei (RDM): The present crisis in the Church did not originate with Pope Francis, and it is not focused in one single person; rather, it dates back to the Second Vatican Council, and, going back even further, to the Modernist Crisis [of the early twentieth century]. Today a large part of the college of cardinals, of the college of bishops, and of the clergy in general, are infected with modernism. The few cardinals, bishops and priests who resist ought to take account of this situation, and it is our job to help them. But above all one must not imagine that a single act by one of these players, for example a correctio fraterna of the Pope announced by Cardinal Burke, can, by itself, resolve the crisis. What is needed is a convergence and focus of action by diverse groups of both clergy and laity, each one at their own level and according to their own capability. The sensus fidei can guide the cardinals, bishops, religious, and simple laity how to react [to the present crisis]. The importance of the correctio filialis, signed by 250 scholars, both religious and lay, was that it expressed this sensus fidei. The reaction may be different from one country to another, from one diocese to another, but its characteristics are always those of a profession of the truth and a denunciation of the errors which are opposed to this truth. 

MH: But how can this situation be resolved?

RDM: It will not be men who save the Church. The situation will be resolved by an extraordinary intervention of Grace, which however must be accompanied by the militant commitment of faithful Catholics. In the face of this present crisis there are some who think that the only thing to do is to wait for a miracle in silence and prayer. But it is not like this. It is true that we need a divine intervention, but grace builds on nature. Each of us ought to do the maximum that we can according to our ability. 

MH: The 2016 letter with which Pope Francis gave his approval to the guidelines laid out by the pastors of Buenos Aires was published in Acta Apostolicae Sedis, with a note written by the Secretary of State, Cardinal Parolin, according to which the Pope himself wanted the two documents – the guidelines and the letter – published in AAS.

RDM: The fact that the guidelines of the Argentine bishops and the approval of the Pope have been published in AAS has made it official that “no other interpretations are possible” of Amoris Laetitia other than that of the Argentine bishops, which authorizes communion to be given to those divorced and remarried people who are in an objective state of mortal sin. The letter was private, but the publication in AAS transforms the position of Pope Francis into an act of the Magisterium. It seems to me that this confirms the thesis expressed by Fr. Giovanni Scalese in his blog, according to which we are entering into a new phase of the pontificate of Pope Francis: moving from a pastoral revolution to the open reformulation of doctrine. Pope Francis’ discourse of October 11 [2017], on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of the promulgation of the new catechism, seems to call for the beginning of a reinterpretation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church in the light of Evangelii Gaudium and Amoris Laetitia.

MH: In a recent essay, in light of how Luther is now being reinstated within the Catholic Church, you stated: “In short, every Catholic is called upon to choose whether to side with Pope Francis and the Jesuits of today, or be alongside the Jesuits of yesterday and the Popes of all time. It is time for choices and to meditate precisely on St. Ignatius’ two standards (Spiritual Exercises, n. 137)* which will help us make them in these difficult times.” Would you explain these words a little more to our readers, not only in light of the question of Luther, but also in light of Amoris Laetitia?

RDM: There are moments in our life and in the history of the Church in which one is obligated to choose between two sides, without ambiguity and compromise. The Spiritual Exercises of Saint Ignatius and theology of history of Saint Augustine in The City of God do nothing other than emphasize the Gospel maxim according to which “no one can serve two masters; either he will hate the one and love the other or love the one and hate the other” (Matthew 6:24). Seen in this light, the recent publication in AAS of the letter of Pope Francis to the bishops of Buenos Aires reduces the matter to two diametrically opposed positions. The line of thinking of those cardinals, bishops, and theologians who maintain that it is possible to interpret Amoris Laetitia in continuity with Familiaris Consortio 84 and other documents of the Magisterium has been reduced to dust. Amoris Laetitia is a document which serves as a litmus test: it must be either accepted or rejected in toto. There is not a third position, and the insertion of Pope Francis’ letter to the Argentine bishops [into AAS] has the merit of making this clear.

MH: There are those who deny that the publication of the letter to the Argentine bishops is an act of the Magisterium, because it proposes an erroneous, if not heretical, position. 

RDM: Whoever thinks this, it seems to me, begins with a false premise: the idea that the pontifical Magisterium can never err. In reality the guarantee of inerrancy is reserved to the Magisterium only in specific conditions, which are clearly spelled out in the Dogmatic Constitution Pastor Aeternus of Vatican I. The existence of errors in the non-infallible documents of the Magisterium, including the pontifical Magisterium, is possible, above all during periods of great crisis. There can be an act of the Magisterium which is both authentic and solemn, but erroneous. This was the case, for example, in my opinion, with the declaration Dignitatis Humanae of Vatican II, which, apart from its pastoral character, is undeniably a Magisterial act and almost certainly contradicts the doctrine of the Church on religious liberty, in at least an indirect and implicit way.

MH: Do you see a formal schism coming, and what would it practically look like? Who would be the creator of that schism, and what would it mean for simple lay people? 

RDM: A schism is an internal division of the Church, such as happened in Europe for forty years between 1378 and 1417, when it seemed that one could not identify with absolute certainty where the [legitimate] authority of the Church was to be found. This tearing apart known as the “Great Western Schism” was not a matter of heresy. Generally however, heresy follows schism, as occurred in England at the time of Henry VIII. Today we find ourselves in an unprecedented situation in which heresy, which in itself is more grave than schism, precedes it rather than following it. There is not yet a formal schism, but there is heresy in the Church. It is the heretics who are promoting schism in the Church, certainly not faithful Catholics. And the faithful Catholics who want to separate themselves from heresy certainly cannot be defined as schismatics.

MH: You seem to suggest that the Pope may be promoting schism and heresy in the Church. What would be the consequences of this most grave situation? Would not the Pope lose his authority as Pope? 

RDM: One cannot sum up such an important and complex problem in a few words. On this point it is necessary to have a theological debate, on which topic one may refer to the volume True or False Pope by Robert J. Sisco and John Salza, to the writings of Abbott Jean-Michel Gleize in [the French journal] Courrier de Rome and above all to the study of Arnaldo Xavier da Silveira, Ipotesi teologica di un Papa eretico [Theological hypotheses about a heretic Pope], the Italian edition of which I edited in 2016 and also the next edition in English. The author, whose basic position I share, develops the thesis of the medieval decretists, of St. Robert Bellarmine, and of modern theologians like Pietro Ballerini, according to whom, while there is a basic incompatibility between [holding] heresy and [holding] papal authority, the Pope does not lose his office until his heresy becomes apparent to the entire Church. 

MH: And finally, what would your outlook and encouragement be for our readers, at the end of the 100th Anniversary year of the apparitions of Our Lady of Fatima? 

RDM: Discouragement is a sentiment which the militant Catholic cannot permit himself. The first weapon to employ against enemies who attack the Church is the use of reason, in order to demonstrate the contradictions in which these enemies live, and by which they necessarily die. Then we need to turn to the invincible help of Grace. One hundred years ago Our Lady of Fatima foresaw the crisis of our time. She announced a chastisement for humanity if it was not converted, but she also made an unconditional and irreversible promise: the triumph of her Immaculate Heart. For his part, Our Lord has promised us to be with us always, until the end of the world (Matthew 28:20). What more can we ask for?

183 thoughts on “Interview – Roberto de Mattei Discusses the Escalating Church Crisis”

  1. Not IF but when one finds oneself engaged in the “solemn nonsense of proselytizing” – {Bergoglio}
    our “lukewarm” fellow Catholic’s – some choice words from Roberto de Mattei :

    “Generally however, heresy follows schism, as occurred in England at the time of Henry VIII. Today we find ourselves in an unprecedented situation in which heresy, which in itself is more grave than schism, precedes it rather than following it. There is not yet a formal schism, but there is heresy in the Church. It is the heretics who are promoting schism in the Church, certainly not faithful Catholics. And the faithful Catholics who want to separate themselves from heresy certainly cannot be defined as schismatics.”

  2. I admit, I’m having a decidedly negative frame of mind right now.
    The Orthodox Church is looking better and better. We are ants trying to maintain courage while a rhino rolls over and scratches his back on our ant hill.
    I am profoundly sick and tired of him, them, and this.
    Maybe Kenny Rogers said it best.

    • You know the saying about the grass being greener?
      We are all sick and tired of the serpent Bergoglio. But after Peter denied Christ, the Virgin and Saint John the Evangelist stayed with Jesus right to the end.
      As for the Orthodox Churches, they have a reverent liturgy, but thier doctrine has long been compromised. Remarriage 3 times, brith cotrol okayed. Note also their abject failure to evangelise outside their geographical home soil. In Russia only 6% of Orthodox go to Mass on Sundays.
      This isn’t the time to walk away, nor the time to run. But we can still count our blessings while we’re sitting at the table :+)
      God be with you sister.

      • And people insist that “Russia is converting” consequent upon the consecration of the WORLD, (with no explicit mention of Russia) by Pope St. John Paul II in 1984. We are also told that Russia will play a great role in the re-evangelisation of the West. And I can envisage that this will be so. But regardless of the current state of Orthodoxy in Russia, only a CATHOLIC Russia, in full communion with Rome, can have the authority and spiritual capabilities to revitalise the faith of a miserably fallen West.

      • I have been attending the Byzantine Catholic Devine Liturgy. I have tried to find out where their bishops stand on all this but haven’t had much luck. But moving to the Byzantine Rite would be like changing seats on the Titanic. So I’m gonna stick it out.

      • Stay or not, I think you have not researched the Orthodox Church. A good argument could be made as to which Churches have compromised.

    • Holy Mother Church is certainly lying in a deep ditch, beat up and bruised.

      Don’t walk by for the prospects of more attractive surroundings.

      Slide down the bank, lend your arms and back and help us carry Her up to the road and hospital.

    • Too much negative information, while of course some is necessary to stay informed, too heavy a dose is destructive for many. A steady diet of it non-stop kills the spirit through discouragement, depression and disgust (all the Enemy’s preferred tools). Prayer, spiritual reading and developing an Interior Life with Christ will keep the individual strong, his prayers effective and enable him to give witness because he’s living a peaceful existence in complete trust of Our Lord’s promises. We have to keep our spiritual batteries fully charged and support one another – it’s all temporary.

      • I fully understand and respect what you are saying, but of course, you speak only for yourself. No one is compelled to read “too much negative information”. We all perceive things in our own way. A good general, preparing his army for battle, would not conceal or downplay the magnitude of the job at hand. We are the Church Militant, and what some would call “too much negative information” keeps others on their mettle.

      • Wrong!! It just fires me up, Anna! I’m charged up and ready for spiritual battle…along with some real live protesting of these weaklings known as bishops and priests!! How is it that we only have one real man, Auxiliary Bishop Athanasius Schneider?!? Good grief! I’ve been waiting on these fools long enough!!

      • The inner pace of Christ is only found, when one, though faith and prayer, understand that there can never be peace without Truth.

        All you have written will lead one, laity and clergy alike, to remain in His Truth…..and never compromise, not for anybody or anything.
        Our Lord, we pray will give us what we need not to be lead into the temptation of despair, or to be seduced by a false peace.

      • Yes, but we are made soldiers of Christ through our Confirmation. We MUST fight. In order to fight we must know what we are fighting.

    • What would be gained by that, Evangeline? They allow for divorce and remarriage, and as I understand it, they are permissive toward abortion. Granted, they have not “modernized” their liturgy–to their credit, but in the above examples they already have what we are resisting being established in the Catholic Church. We have to stay and fight for Mother Church during this most vicious attack on her from within and from without.

    • DON’T do it, Evangeline! Stay with Our Lady of Sorrows and St. John at the foot of the Cross. The Church is going through its own Passion like Our Lord. It will be crucified, die and be buried. “And on the third day…” You know the rest.

  3. “In short, every Catholic is called upon to choose whether to
    side with Pope Francis and the Jesuits of today, or be alongside the
    Jesuits of yesterday and the Popes of all time.”

    I’d take this a step further and say that every Catholic must choose whether to side with the post-conciliar popes, their new doctrines, and their new religion of man or the Popes of all time and the Catholic faith.

      • The canonization of John Paul II is highly doubtful and you should be careful about treating him as a saint. Before you mention that canonizations are infallible the process changed completely with the 1983 Code of Canon Law from the previous method in the 1917 code. Since the method has completely changed from what it used to be one can raise strong doubts about its infallibility. Even by just looking at his life and his pontificate neither are good examples of sanctity.

        • I won’t debate your points concerning the life and pontificate of JP II; that’s beyond my knowledge and research skills. However, to assert that a change in procedure somehow puts ecclesiastic matters in doubt is more problematic than perhaps you imagine. Lots of things like the age of first Communion, order of reception of the sacraments, proper penances to be dictated in Confession, rules for election or selection of bishops and popes, etc., have been revised over the long history of the Church but no one harbors any doubt about the validity of these changes.

  4. “Amoris Laetitia is a document which serves as a litmus test: it must be either accepted or rejected in toto. There is not a third position, and the insertion of Pope Francis’ letter to the Argentine bishops [into AAS] has the merit of making this clear.”
    -Professor Roberto de Mattei

    So true, There really is not a ” third position”. The laity cannot wish it away or make theological excuses for anything otherwise, in my opinion. If one does not recognize this, it will be impossible, in my opinion, to ” stand”.

  5. ” And the faithful Catholics who want to separate themselves from heresy certainly cannot be defined as schismatics.”
    Ah-hem *SSPX* Ah-hem.

    • As I’ve said ad nauseam, if the SSPX is “schismatic”, then they’re the only “schismatics” who pray for Pope Francis BY NAME in the Canon of the Mass, Benediction, Rosary etc. I guarantee the priests of the ROC (who are schismatic) don’t pray for him.

  6. The same degree of scrutiny and critical evaluation which has been applied to Amoris Laetitia now needs to be applied to each of the 16 documents of Vatican II. Much work in this direction has already been accomplished, but the results have not been widely propagated and popularized. Also, this kind of work needs to be taken a step further – from the level of observation, documentation and critique to that of evaluation and concrete proposal for action. The last 50 years – and especially the last 5 – have given us all the insight we will ever need to draw the evidenced and well-reasons conclusions which are necessary to bring the beginning of this crisis to a close.

  7. The sad truth of the matter is that after fifty years of compromise and the placement of promoters of heresy in positions of authority, most Catholics have no problem with the Pope. If we wait for the day when his heresy is apparent to the entire Church, it will never come. Most agree with him or don’t care.

        • All of PF’s stuff is primarily ghost written modernist nonsense. Modernism by definition and practice is meant to confuse. On the positive side? Reading every word should qualify as sufficient penance for next 5 years.

          • Readings removed any remaining doubts that “we got a problem “. About 180 paged as I remember. Kept waiting for the good part, but it never arrived. Oh well, the Polar Bears don’t know they are dead, and we still got “mother earth “. Afraid I’m still using the ac in the summer also.

          • I can’t remember which of those books came first but it was passed out at Mass. This has never happened before that we all the sudden had plenty of money to purchase and give away hundreds of books to all the parishioners. I tried to read it but it made me so angry I had to throw it away.

          • The precise problem is it seems to say a whole lot of nothing and requires creative interpretation of footnotes to get to the issues that are in contention.

          • Reading LS has never crossed my mind. The pope’s remit is to strengthen
            his brethren and to shepherd and tend his flock, whatever the season,
            whatever the weather.

          • I kept looking for the remit, as you say . It was not found, unless one subscribes to a radical agenda on climate change ( formally known as global warming.

      • How about the priests and clerics? We must know that there are too many (I mean, really a lot!) even priests who haven’t seen a letter of heretical document called AL. Wonder why?
        The reasons why not, are a few, but are very simple; they have not time; they does not want to read; they cannot to read it;…
        This cannot is not accidentally but a planned part of the seduction by the seducers.
        Just take a look and see in how many languages Rome officially have has translated such ‘important’ apostolic exhortation.
        Since we know too many IIVC-afterward, novus ordo priests are ‘Latin-free’, we shouldn’t expect neither that their knowledge of other second language is that good so they want to read AL in some second language.
        So, who can give us explaination WHY is AL (which seems to be so important for a greater pastoral work of bishoprics and the priests!) translated into just eight languages, even now after 18 month’s?

      • The Blessed Majority? It is interesting to note that seemingly few priests (beyond the obvious Francis flacks like Jimmy Martin SJ) ever wade into the intellectual swamp that is Amoris laetitia. They mention it about as often as they do The Communist Manifesto.

      • Which is the way it should be. Traditionally, bulls and encyclicals have always been addressed to “Patriarchs, primates, bishops, and Ordinaries in Communion with the Apostolic See” and not even to simple priests or religious, much less laity. The role of the Pope was never to be bishop to the whole world, after all. There were twelve Apostles and all bishops are their heirs. The pope is supposed to be the guardian of the deposit of the faith.

        • I hear you, and when we have rotten Popes, i agree with you, but as a convert, I can tell you that the word of a Pope are VERY important to some of the mere faithful, especially those who had the great hurtle to clear of Popes.

          Thus from the start {I converted right before his election} I have read the Pope and watched the Pope.

          Can’t say I like what I see and hear, tho.


  8. It makes no sense to say “I’m going to become Eastern Orthodox” over PF and AL when they already allow communion for the divorced and remarried.

      • Forsooth’ That’s about the maximum number of times one would simply have the time for in an average lifetime (if you weren’t Elizabeth Taylor!) to arrange such ‘serial marriages’!

    • And they already have de facto schism with ‘autocephaly.’

      A crucial program for a future pope will be to reign in the national episcopal conferences. The Church and Popes always went to great length to avoid ethnic and national churches… as they inevitably lead to schism eventually. We see this now with the Germans especially. Reinvigorating the Metropolitan archbishops and the Ecclesiastical provinces is the traditional Catholic organization.

  9. “The pope does not lose his office until his heresy becomes apparent to the entire Church.” It is impossible that this “becoming apparent” will be precipitated by Amoris Laetitia, since most of the bishops and priests who are ill at ease with it remain silent, and the vast majority of the laity know nothing about it, and seem to care even less. Professor de Mattei observes that, “generally, heresy follows schism. Now there is heresy in the Church but not [yet] a formal schism.” But he quotes Fr. Giovanni Scalese; we are entering “a new phase in the pontificate of Pope Francis: moving from a pastoral revolution to the open re-formulation of doctrine.”

    As this “new phase” develops, the bishops will be compelled to speak out, either of their own volition, or because of the demands made of them by those among the laity who are best qualified to articulate the causes of the widening gulf in the Church; that is, its most immediate causes. To wit; the heresy being proclaimed by the current holder of the Petrine Office.It is also impossible that Bergoglio will change tack. He has already stated that history may record that he split the Catholic Church.

  10. “The letter was private, but the publication in AAS transforms the position of Pope Francis into an act of the Magisterium.”

    No, it does not. As I’ve been explaining (as a canonist) here and elsewhere, Francis has no power to upgrade his personal opinions (cfr. AL, n. 3-4) to authentic magisterium, much less through a mere rescript (cfr. CIC 1983, c. 59, § 1). Defending the opposite is in itself a complete absurdity.

    • I agree that it is not an act of any authentic magisterium – he is simply hijacking AAS which ordinarily would be the mouthpiece of authentic Papal authority. When will people wake up and realise that Rome has fallen to the enemy? How many in the last 150 years have warned that this would happen? Our Lady of La Salette, Pope Leo XIII, Cardinal Manning – need I go own? Just ignore what comes out of Rome and keep the faith.

      • Most Catholics today don’t know — or so it often seems — what the Real Presence is. They’ve got a bad case of the Real Absence — of knowledge. And that, I firmly believe, was a feature, not a bug, of the “Spirit of Vat 2” revolutionaires. They wanted it so, in order to more easily achieve their goals.


    • Unfortunately, most of the laity, including myself are not Canon Lawyers. Thankfully, I come to find the knowledge I desperately need right now here at OnePeterFive so as to sift through what Francis is attempting to do – CHANGE.

      I understand what you are saying and am in no position to agree or disagree with you.

      The problem, from a laywoman’s point of view here, is that Bergoglio is giving the perception, the direct perception that the Magisterial teachings have changed in regards to Communion for the D&R. He is banking on the ignorance of many, the willfulness of the rebellious, and the cowardice of those who hide under this ” technicality”.

      IT is not for the laity to understand Canon Law. What you have stated should be declared by bishops. But, it won’t.
      For they will cry,” Oh, but CanonLaw states that Francis has really not changed theMagisterial teachings of the Church.”


      • Exactly, cs. You have it. All this is about “cover” for the Modernist Progressives. It isn’t about the actual facts, and especially the actual law. It’s about the infamous “smoke and mirrors” revolutionaries conjure when they start their coup. What Robert Mueller is doing is a good parallel.


      • I fully agree with you here. But there is more to it. Shortly after and long before this ‘rescript’ was laid down (October 2016), the Episcopal Conferences of Canada and Poland delivered their own pastoral guidelines, not allowing the divorced and civilly remarried catholics to the sacraments. Neither Francis nor his henchmen uttered a word of reproach against it. So, what happened to the “authentic magisterium”?…
        Incongruent norms are, by their own nature, irrational and, hence, manifestly unjust. According to Aquinas and Suárez, we are all bound to *desobey* them, even if it looks scandalous. Those who will obey this so-called “authentic magisterium” will objectively become mortal sinners — and they must be denounced as such!

    • Having the power or not, PF has indeed done what you say cannot be done. You are correct it is not legal but the Popes minions will act as if it were technically legal. Relevant movie quote: “He can’t do that. Well, he, uh just did.”

  11. Finally, Perfessa, where do you see the resignation of Benedict XVI fitting into this picture of chaos and turmoil in the Church? Was it a timid retreat before the advancing wolves which is largely responsible for this crisis or was it a strategic masterstroke from Benedict, designed to draw into the open all the malefactors and their fellow travelers at all levels of the Church, from the hierarchy on down?

    A question I would have asked de Mattei.

    • That’s actually probably the whole ball game, Kiwi. Once the truth of that coup d’etat gets out, whatever “shred of cred” to Progressives have left will be “gone with the wind”.


      • “Once the truth of that coup d’état gets out, whatever “shred of cred” to Progressives have left will be “gone with the wind”.” Are you so sure? I’d say that the majority of western Catholics wouldn’t care. They want what the Progressives are offering – calling the sins they want to commit virtues – and I don’t think they’ll balk even if they see the means by which that was accomplished. Look at the parallels in American politics – we are now learning of the unprecedented politicization of Federal law enforcement agencies and the intelligence services to the benefit of one political party, such that key members of it are in rebellion against their elected boss. Half the country not only don’t care about this gross violation of law and custom, they cheer it on.

  12. The effrontery of Francis is so in-your-face I can’t help wondering, at times, if his whole pontificate isn’t some kind of strategic satire. Now he wants to change the wording of the Our Father?

    Bergoglio: Lord of the Gadflies.

    • Your post reminds me of an interesting opinion which suggests that Pope Francis and his papacy have given the world
      pause with respect to it’s persecution of the Church gaining greater momentum.

      Persecution exists today with the agenda of the culture of death etc.. but has not as yet reached the heights it will do in the
      future. I doubt this is strategic on his (and others) part as compromise with the world is criminal.
      However this may be an accidental reality of his “stewardship” and since (up to now) there IS no “change” in the official teaching of the
      Church HER enemies have not been able to advance their hostility to the degree they might have under an orthodox Pope.

      • I am too; One minute he seems treacherously sneaky; the next, shamelessly frivolous: the provincial explainer.

        He’s been around the block and he going to let us all in on the true meaning of the “Pater Noster.” Good grief.

  13. No matter how far the Pope tries to take the Church away from God in his effort to please the world, it will not help the Church to be accepted by the liberal democratic left. The Protestant Churches moved to the left and the members left and the Churches are crumbling into nothing and they are still hated by the state. Satan cannot be appeased.

    • Your point is exactly why the many of us converts from those wretched organizations scratch our heads in wonder at the hell-for-leather pursuit of their doctrines and practices and…end…the modernist Catholics and their leaders are obviously engaged in.

      It is suicide.

  14. I disagree that men can’t rescue the Church! Look at what we do – complain, gnash our teeth, reinforce the despair that other Catholics feel (A sin in itself), but we don’t ACT. Orare et labor, remember? To Tsk tsk while the Church is on fire is cowardly. (I”ll say a Rosary – necessary but not sufficient.) The world doesn’t know that we exist! We feel that going to the Latin Mass, we have discharged our duty. Remember the stalwart young men that disrupted a heretical “Ecumenical” service, by saying the Rosary OUT LOUD, and shutting down the “service”. By their action, they truly fought for the Church. We are cowardly and slothful. Let’s organize public processions, pray the Rosary on the street, or in front of an abortuary…..Let us WITNESS for Christ and His mother. ACT!

    • Like this:

      Every state plus the territories are represented in praying to Our Lady of Guadalupe on December 12th.

      From Patricia (pm) in CA who’s the coordinator:

      All you need to do to participate in this rosary is
      A. Dedicate the Rosary to Our Lady of Guadalupe
      B. Ask her to protect the USA from Islamic jihad, from the denial of the Faith, and for an end to abortion.
      C. Be in a state of Grace.
      D. Go to the disqus site if possible and post your plans, so we get to see them. We love it!

      We are recommending people go to Confession and Communion, to fast that day if possible, and that we all say the Sorrowful Mysteries.

      Pass it on!

      • Maybe we would do well to ponder the parable of the talents. We are all ‘one talent’ people, but do we invest our one talent to any significant degree, or do ignorance and apathy rule?

    • Dear Helen, I agree whole heartedly with your comments about those that choose to do nothing. To be in a position of knowing something is incorrect and to do nothing is spiritual sloth and corwardice. You summed up your comment so well because if every solution to a problem arrived purely through prayer we would not have the book of ACTS.

      • Yes, this work has to start at the parish level. Make a Mess in your own parish, and parish by parish this will change. Or alternatively find a decent (as decent as you can) parish and gather like-minded folk there. We are told over and over that we are ‘the people of God’ and that the parishes ‘belong to us’ so what about taking it over, teaching the priest that you will no long put up with bull, and force the issue. It would NOT take very many to convert the entire parish.

        Easy? No, definitely not and it may take months and months. But is there not a line in the sand to be drawn? Church Militant what are YOU doing to change things?

        • Dear Barbara, I agree but the price is high at parish level esp. when as a Father my young children suffer because of those that think that have a higher power within the Church of Our Lord Jesus Christ may as well be JW’s with all the shunning that gets given back to us! On the positive side, at least our children see that their parents stand up to the truth come what may.

    • ” Let’s organize public processions…”. The English Catholics tried that against Fat ‘Arry 8th. It was called The Pilgrimage of Grace.

      It didn’t end well.

      But we must try it again, in the manner you suggest, and Margaret below. And we have to go about it not as Cassandras of woe and doom, but with joy — you know, like the Christians did in the Circus Maximus.


        • They were tested, and stood that test.

          the devil used the gallows to test the faith of men in the past.

          Today in the developed world he uses public opinion, loss of income, friendships, family relationships and “feelings”.

          I’m not sure which set of tests are more effective…

    • I see your discontent, but you missed a crucial point in that section of the interview. Please read this again, especially the end of it:

      MH: But how can this situation be resolved?

      RDM: It will not be men who save the Church. The situation will be resolved by an extraordinary intervention of Grace, which however must be accompanied by the militant commitment of faithful Catholics. In the face of this present crisis there are some who think that the only thing to do is to wait for a miracle in silence and prayer. But it is not like this. It is true that we need a divine intervention, but grace builds on nature. Each of us ought to do the maximum that we can according to our ability.

  15. Can anyone imagine what a catechist is going through during these times? Tonight, I had to answer a question about being able to trust the authority of the Church given to Peter and his successors. I gave the answer that I was given 15 years ago – that when the Pope speaks ex cathedra on faith and morals he is protected by the Holy Spirit from error. I experienced quite a cognitive dissonance. I guess since Pope Francis has not issued any ex cathedra statements, this protection has not been tested. Yet. Two weeks ago, when the subject was the four marks of the Church, I gave the class to my co-director. I didn’t think I could speak of One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic, when each of these elements have become so eroded by this pontificate and whatever curia members seem to be in control. This is a very difficult time to be presenting the Church to potential members.

    • I hope the prayer of my wife and myself, almost daily, doesn’t cross a line into to sin, but we do pray for Francis and our Church, often: “Please, dear Lord Jesus, please help the faithful cardinals, bishops and priests, along with us, defeat Pope Francis and his evil heresies by 1.) removing him from the papacy by means of a conclave; 2.) converting his soul; or 3.) taking him home to You (obviously, in a state of perfect contrition).” Irrespective, St. Athanasius, I’ve been told, was not a cardinal, archbishop, bishop or priest, but merely a deacon. Time to fight the obvious evil in our midst, isn’t it? I’ll answer. It is.

    • Beriggs, it may console you to understand more perfectly that if the Pope (any Pope) attempts to teach contrary to the deposit of faith, he can not therefore be teaching “ex Cathedra”. What we have as taught by Our Lord has both positive and negative components and is in effect his guarantee to us, since it is logically impossible to overcome it. The problem is that those who don’t understand this logic may be led into error and perhaps into sin if they follow erroneous teaching to mean that sinful behaviour is sanctioned and therefore either practice, tolerate or teach it. Millstones may await!

    • What you said right here, beriggs, is *the reason* I stepped down from teaching CCD last year (in the middle of the year).
      I just could not get past all of the… “stuff” coming from Rome. It seemed as though what I was teaching the kids was just the opposite of what was coming out of the Vatican. It just depressed me so. I am still in a funk.

    • You are dealing with an unprecedented crisis. It might be a “teachable moment”, but it is going to require a lot more now to convince people that the Catholic Church does have the truth, even if a lot of the ordained officials are hostile to what they have received as the deposit of the faith.

      I keep an icon of Christ Pantocrator in my bedroom, and I remind myself that in the end, He does not simply possess the truth, the way we possess our furniture, but He is the Truth.

    • If someone were to come to me wanting to convert to the Catholic Church, I’d be in a real bind as to where to send him for RCIA. I do not trust a lot of parishes to instruct converts in the faith, certainly not my previous parish where I worked in the RCIA program before leaving that parish for the Latin Mass parish locally.

      • The best possibility is to send him to the FSSP. Usually private and individual instruction with traditional baptism, Confirmation and Eucharist built on the Baltimore Catechism while the diocesan Ordinary will make sure everything is properly and canonically documented.

  16. QUOTE: ” . . .a new phase of the pontificate of Pope Francis: moving from a pastoral revolution to the open reformulation of doctrine.”

    The editor highlighted the crux, the point. Not only of the article but the reason why Catholic *conservatives” (as you corral them within their punctuation markings) will fail in sliding Francis’ Overton Window back to some acceptable time (with converts, usually the point at which they entered the Church).

    I offer no solution, except the forceful warming that we truly are at the stage where Pope Francis is bent on changing (slicing, dicing, burying) dogma. He and his proxies.

    I accept that as the line upon the sand – drawn bold, deep, and in concrete. We must equally be bold in declaiming we will not across over – if we wish not to be damned.

    And, yes, as the interviewee stated, the fruit of standing firm – the witness of it – is a work of God’s supernatural Grace. Yet Grace, as it often does, seeds, blooms, and is harvested by the hand of God’s agents. Which, against all expectations, may not include our starred cardinals – or, at the least, stand them as second string – but my neighbor down the street at 5th & Elizabeth.

  17. I simply cannot accept this:

    “the Pope does not lose his office until his heresy becomes apparent to the entire Church.”

    This defies logic.

      • The adjudication of heresy is a formal term based on competent higher authority that actually means something, not just the rhetoric of laymen. Catholic apologetics have denied the competence of any body, even an Ecumenical Council from the ability to judge a Pope.

        A council only becomes Ecumenical on the ratification of a Pope, after all, and it’s the only criteria that fits for even the first 8: The Catholic position has always been the Pope alone has the right to summon an Ecumenical Council, the Pope alone has the right to preside, and the Pope alone has the right to ratify or reject the decrees. The Pope can delegate that authority (as Pope St. Sylvester did for Constantine to summon Nicaea) or send legates in his place, and confirm (every other Ecumenical Council) or reject one, some, or all of their decrees (which St. Leo did on the elevation of Constantinople at Chalcedon).

        It’s certainly not attendance: At Nicaea, there were 318 bishops, at the second only 150, Ephesesus 198, the Sixth 194. Local council of Ariminium had 400 bishops in the year 359 and no one seriously argues it’s anything close to Ecumenical. It’s not equal representation: There were only 4 bishops from the West at Nicaea (which never really disputed the divinity of Christ at the time), none at the second Council, and only two at the third. At all of these with western representation, the Pope’s legates (even when they were just a priests) were seated and presided even over the Eastern patriarchs present.

        The Emperors had no commission from Our Lord to run the Church. Moreoever, heretic Emperors summoned sham Councils all too many times in the East to count them, most notably at the Iconoclast council of Constantine V. The 2nd and 5th Councils were originally local Eastern synods that only became Ecumenical because of the ratification of the Pope applied to the universal Church.

        • You don’t agree with the sentence: “A heretic is not a member of the Church.”? Why? But it was taught by all, everywhere and always in the Church. I don’t judge the pope. I never said that. I only repeat what the Church has always taught. And secondly I’m not a stupid monkey. I can make a distinction between a heresy and a sound doctrine.

          • Certainly at the outliers, it’s obvious but on fine points it’s not. There’s a risk when rhetorically calling any prelate a heretic that the judgement is implicit.

    • I hear what you are saying. It is clear that a formal heretic is not a member of the Mystical Body, but does that ipso facto remove him from office as well?

    • No, because if conforms to the Church’s political realithy. Just who gets to say a pope has abandoned his office? Me? You? That’s the issue. And it will take time for those who have the authority to finally make that claim, and there’ll be Hell to pay (almost literally) for them when they do. They’ll be accused of heresy themseloves and most evilly, the El Bergo Junta now running Holy Church will say they have caused the Schism.

      Therefore, the idea is for us laity, through prayers and pilgrimages and Rosaries, to give courage to those who have the power.


    • That’s just it.

      The “entire Church” will have no meaning until the vast number {majority?} of heretics within the fold convert or leave.

      And as Trent teaches us, there will always be the good mixed with the bad.

      The trouble comes when “entire Church” can mean to a rational thinking person an entity that stands for just exactly what it shouldn’t stand for. I submit that we are almost there.

  18. This is additional support for signing up with SSPX: “as faithful Catholics who want to separate themselves from heresy cannot be defined as schismatics.”.

    However, my belief is that we ought to stand, resist and fight rather than cut and run to SSPX. And let us pray for divine intervention to help restore the Catholic Church to what it was before Modernism set it.

  19. What troubles me most is this quote: “Today a large part of the college of cardinals, of the college of bishops, and of the clergy in general, are infected with modernism.”

    While most of us believed the Bergolian faction within the Church was a loud minority, it seems that is not the case. We are fighting against a much larger contingent of heretics than we believed.

    God is still in control. This is a monumental testing of our Faith.

    • No kidding, Granny. I was just about to quote that same sentence. The depth and breadth of modernism (and rationalism) in the Church is on an unimaginable scale.
      When I came to this realization some 10+ years ago it left me numb. [head shaking]
      Yes, God is still in control! Thank heaven.

    • Every criticism I ever directed at the Catholic Church before I converted I have subsequently, after my conversion found indeed to be true.

      Having said that, She holds the truth in her Tradition and teachings.

      It is a conundrum.

      • RodH,
        The conundrum can be, in many (most?) situations, folks tend *not* to separate the sins of the sons and daughters of Holy Mother Church from what She actually teaches.
        This is how one particular convert put it at a conference I attended some moons ago.

        • That’s true.

          The effect, among other things, is on evangelization.

          It is very difficult to reach people who observe the pro-communist stance of many prelates and the liberalism, religious indifferentism, void of discipline of doctrinal and practice offenders {both clerical and lay}, lack of use of and understanding of the Bible and indeed, apparent disdain for evangelization itself that permeates the Church.

          This is not a small concern. It is HUGE.

          Personally, as a theologically-trained ex-Protestant missionary, among other things, I am very certain that there are large numbers of Protestants that were they to actually know the teachings of the Catholic faith {ESPECIALLY on Bible} and see some semblance of following of those teachings they might very well give the Catholic Church a respectful look. See, Protestantism is in a shambles itself.

          But we continue to present to the world not just a mediocre picture, but worse than that, an ANTI-Catholic picture of our own faith, and I find it not one bit confusing that most Protestants think the Catholic Church is a really sordid joke and make fun of it as an institution. Why should they defend an institution whose leaders hardly defend it themselves?

          What person joins the Rotary and then goes out and tries their level best to change all the rules and goals of the organization? Yet we see in the Catholic faith a perverse and pervasive embarrassment of the teachings of the faith especially on moral issues and now brought into high relief with this guy Bergoglio and his “Gerald Ratnering” of the Church. And who is supposed to be drawn to that?

          God Save the Catholic Church.

  20. I think time has come to work and pray together even we have different opinions about Vatikan 2, about the popes before and so on! This all we can discuss when this terrible crisis is over. Now we have to be aware of this terrible danger, that the church has already opened and is opening the door for the Antichrist, at least for his spirit. For him it is equal if we think in this way or in another – if we try to serve God we are his special enemies. I also believe in an intervention from Gods side! But before we have to resist for the honor of our Holy Church and for the people who might be more and more irritated! Please Cardinal Burke and Cardinal Brandmüller! Do your part soon, that it will be not too late! It is high time!

  21. Amoris Laetitia (The Joy of Love) is causing great discord within the Church I believe the remedy to this discord can be found in an honest response to this question

    Is an act of humility too much to ask?

    I have read
    “At this moment in time the church has two sails that are blowing in the opposite direction causing great discord within the Church. On the Right: an extreme conservative wind wanting to blow our boat back to the becalming out-of-date swamp of pre-1962. On the Left: an extreme liberal wind wanting to blow our boat into rapids where faith and morals are thrown overboard”.

    But we can go forward in UNITY OF PURPOSE by hoisting a third sail one of Humility, the true (only) sail that the Holy Spirit blows upon, bringing arrogance to its knees and folly does not have to be appeased.

    Is the true Divine Mercy Image an Image of Broken man?

    Pope Francis says we need be a Church of mercy and so we do, but more importantly we need to be a humble Church, as Gods Mercy received in humility guarantees spiritual growth, which wells up into eternal life.

    I agree with the four cardinals in that this statement from Veritatis Splendor “conscience can never be authorized to legitimate exceptions to absolute moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts by virtue of their object” as God’s
    Word (Will) is inviolate. Individual we can only stand before His Divine Mercy in humility as we can never justify sin.

    I all so agree with this statement by Pope Francis “the Eucharist ‘is not a prize for the perfect, but a powerful medicine and
    nourishment for the weak”. It’s the sick and supplicant who need the doctor, not the well and the righteous”.

    How can the two statements be reconciled “With God all things are possible” as only God can square the circle.

    Throughout history God has made His Will know to mankind through his Saints, Spiritual leaders and Prophets. And at crucial times His Will has be revealed in a way that that cannot be misunderstood by His people.

    God’s Word (Will) given to Sister Faustina

    “Paint a picture according to the vision you see and with the inscription: “Jesus, I Trust in Thee.”

    The Divine Mercy Image that the Church displays today is an affront to God, instigated by nationalistic pride and those who would pacify the powerful it has nothing to do with Trust.

    As The true Divine Mercy Image is an Image of Broken Man

    “Paint a picture according to the vision you see and with the inscription: “Jesus, I Trust in Thee.” “I desire that this picture
    be venerated first in your chapel and then throughout the whole world”

    Sr. Faustina acted immediately in singular (pure) intent; no one else can paint this picture, as no one else can SEE what she saw. The picture she painted, sketched, (no matter how badly) must be venerated and no other, to do so knowing it is not the painting commanded by God (His Word is inviolate) is to commit blasphemy.

    The Church acknowledges that Sr Faustina received a direct visual and verbal request to “paint an Image according to the vision you see” God’s Word is Inviolate this is our most fundamental belief and sits at the base of all the Sacraments. His Word is not open for debate it cannot contradict itself and must not be touched by man, it is impossible for it to be God’s Word (Will) and not His Word (Will) at the same time.

    For clarity the church teaches that divine revelation ended with the apostles.

    The visual and verbal request given by God to Sr. Faustina may not be an additional
    revelation but it is a communiqué endorsed by the Church that incorporates the
    direct Word (Will) of God and for that reason it is binding on the Church in
    that the true image painted by Sr. Faustina (one of Broken Man) must be
    venerated and no other.

    Sister Faustina was very poorly educated and it is fair to assume that if her superiors had accepted her painting as they should have done (they would have known that Gods Word is inviolate) she would have also. Earthly hands violated
    Gods Word to fit their own earthly vision of goodness as they could not accept the reality that they were been asked by God to show human weakness.

    Any revelations after the first revelation now must be considered suspect, as from that time onwards earthly hands were distorting the Word (Will) of God.

    Sister Faustina was uneducated coming from a very poor family with only three year’s very basic education. Hers were the humblest tasks in the convent. She was very innocent and trusting we can deduce this because after her first
    vision she immediately attempted to paint Jesus herself and for this reason I believe her vision was genuine and received in total trust.

    Her diaries reflect a particular culture and type of devotion at a particular time in the Church but are more in keeping with those who would propagate such devotions. We need to look at her spiritual advisor Fr Michal Sopocko who appears to have overseen her diaries and commissioned the first fraudulent image of Divine Mercy, and in doing so
    violated her trust in God.

    The Church has acknowledged that the Word (Will) of God had been given to her, its actions confirm this, we have a picture in God’ House, with the words “Jesus I trust In thee” But the picture is not the one commanded by God, it is a worldly image of goodness, it pertains to the senses and is made in man’s own image, it has nothing to do with Trust.

    The present Divine Mercy Image is a self-serving IMAGE of Clericalism, definition of CLERICALISM: a policy of maintaining or increasing the power of a religious hierarchy. Their actions show that they did not trust in His mercy and were only concerned with a worldly image of goodness, the very same problem which has led to the cover up of the on-going child abuse scandal and refusal to acknowledge its historical culture within the Church emanating from Rome.

    The original picture by Sister Faustina in its brokenness relates to spiritual beauty (goodness) as it pertains to humility. The pure (humble) in heart shall see God The True Divine Mercy image calls for the leadership of the Church to give account for themselves, before God and mankind while at the same time healing so many past and on-going injustices.

    To do this the elite within the Church need to act out these instructions given by Jesus Christ to His Church

    “I desire that this picture be venerated first in your chapel and then throughout the world “

    Commencing in Rome by recapturing (Staging) the original ceremony by displaying the present self-serving blasphemous Divine Mercy Image an image of Clericalism, then remove (Destroy) it publicly and re-place it with the true image an Image of Broken Man and in humility venerate it in a symbolic way that cannot be misunderstood by mankind, then re-enact
    this action with the help of the bishops throughout the whole Church (World).

    If this were to happen a Transfiguration would occur within the Church at this moment in time that would resurrect the true face of Jesus Christ, a face that reflects Truth and humility before all those she is called to serve in love and

    From this base one of humility before God the Church can proceed to tackle many of her on-going problems/dilemmas as it would permit the Church to give access to the Sacrament of Holy Communion (Spiritual Food) to all baptised Catholics who for whatever reason apart from the sin against the Holy Spirit, who presently cannot receive the Sacrament of
    Reconciliation the means to do so.
    As an example; To those in second relationships, permit them to partake in Holy Communion in making a public acknowledgement of their need of God’s Divine Mercy just prior to receiving the Eucharist by venerating the true Image of Divine Mercy an image of Broken Man, saying these words from the heart publicly

    “Jesus I Trust in You”

    Then as the recipient approaches the priest for communion after his /her public confession the priest could say (or words to the effect of) “Welcome to the path/way of salvation/confession/reconciliation receive The body of Christ” in
    doing so acknowledging the on-going commencement to receiving the full sacrament of Reconciliation, by doing so His outward sign of inward grace His Divine Mercy is manifest at that moment in time as having been given by God
    Himself to the recipient before His Church (People/Faithful) full absolution has not given by the Church as they dwell in His Divine Mercy as he/she returns to his/her sinful situation (Entanglement with evil) but a journey of HOPE in
    that spiritual growth has commenced, this must be clearly understood by the laity in regards to the indissolubility of marriage.

    The need for the teaching on birth control in Humanae Vitae can also be strengthened by encouraging the laity who practices it, to acknowledge it openly before the Church in accepting their own human frailty, before partaking
    of the bread of life in Venerating The True Image of Divine Mercy an image of broken man, a reflection of themselves before God in the Eucharist. In acknowledging their dependence on His Mercy they give glory to our Father in
    heaven in bearing witness to the Truth, teaching others by their example to serve the Truth and walk in humility before our Creator and in doing so encourage all to confront that which enslaves mankind, our own sinfulness.

    “Paint a picture according to the vision you see and with the inscription. “Jesus I trust in thee”. I desire that this picture
    be venerated first in your chapel and then throughout the world “

    This is a missionary call instigated by our Lord to the whole Church to Evangelizing through the action of Humility, a disarming action in its honesty, that embrace all in its simplicity, as we encounter our brothers and sisters who stand and seek direction at the crossroads (Difficulties) of life.

    kevin your brother
    In Christ
    Further information on the true Divine Mercy Image see the link

    • From what I understand, the soul of one in a state of mortal sin is spiritually dead, not merely sick. Thus, receiving the Eucharist would no more help than eating food would bring someone back from physical death. I could be wrong, but I think this would be the case. Receiving the Eucharist in a state of mortal sin, compounds the mortal sin, adding sacrilege as well.

      • Thank you Colby for your response

        We all can say a perfect act of confession at any time, if the heart is moved to do so, and if it does at that moment it time all of our sins are nullified before God (Not Man) as we then dwell in His Divine
        Mercy. Many, many, people are entangled in ‘Sinful Situations’ as an example I will draw upon the parable of the tax collector in the temple

        But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner. “I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God” (Not man)

        The Publican is aware of his own sin, it is fair to say he now endeavours not to misuse his power as a tax collector but nevertheless goes back (Home) to his position of colluding with the enemy, he is still
        entangled in a sinful situation. Colluding in the sense of working (Taking income) from the oppressors of his people and remaining in an on-going situation of conflict with them, as his position would entail working with spies informers etc.

        But a journey of reconciliation (Spiritual growth) has commenced. As he owned himself a sinner by nature, by practice, guilty before God. He had no dependence but upon the mercy of God; upon that alone he relied.

        ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner

        The publican’s pray was full of humility, and of repentance for sin, and desire towards God.

        I have the same hope for all of God’s children no matter what their state, who have the desire for reconciliation with Him. And fortunately our Lord Himself has given the church the means to bring this about, as in when these words said from the heart publicly, just prior to the recipient (Who is entangled in a sinful situation) receiving Holy Communion (The Bread of Life)

        “Jesus I trust in thee”

        kevin your brother
        In Christ

        • I think that if someone is conscious of grave (mortal) sin, then he has the obligation to go to confession at the first opportunity. If he can do so prior to holy Mass, so much the better. A mortal sin can’t really be committed accidentally. For someone to choose sin, and choose to cut himself off from God takes a strong act of the will; selfish desires and hatred for God etc. I have heard though that holy communion forgives all venial sin (I assume it requires a proper disposition.) That is encouraging. I have a practice of begging mercy as I go forward to receive. I completely agree with you that it is key.

          • Thank you Colby from your sincere comment,
            for many cultural Catholics it does not take a strong act of will to commit a mortal sin, as a strong act of will against God, assumes hatred of Him; that is to want to extinguish the divine spark within ones heart (The Sin against the Holy Spirit) is a mortal sin as it cannot be forgiven. By definition all other sins can be forgiven and in this sense they are not ‘truly’ mortal.
            It could be said that many have been drawn into sinful situations due to human ‘weakness’ as their Faith has never truly/fully developed.

            Many cultural Catholics are aware that they have not been able to live up to the standard of the definition of a mortal sin, as an example, the use of Contraception. And so many fundamental good men and women have left the church in despair, as it created a situation of self-rejection before God within their own hearts. Others have remained by creating a self-serving conscious but in doing so have stifled spiritual growth. Possible some live outside the church in humility be fore God.

            It could be said that the Tax Collector dwells in a state of humility (St. Bernard- Humility a virtue by which a man knowing himself as he truly is, abases himself) and if he continues in this state it is
            fair to say that he has a constant relationship (proper disposition) with God, as he walks along His Path/Way of spiritual growth/enlightenment (Self-awareness before God) leading to the onward transformation of the human heart, that is a heart of compassion.

            I am sure you agree that only God knows the full reality of each human heart and that He cannot be deceived and for this reason we are not here to stone others or to put stumbling blocks before them, rather we would want for them that what we have been given, that is His continual mercy. And for this reason we are not to judge but encourage our brothers and sisters, no matter what their state of being, to also embrace His Divine Mercy in humility, as we encounter them at the cross roads (Difficulties of life).

            kevin your brother
            In Christ

  22. As Christmas rapidly approaches, have you considered some excellent reading material that takes our minds of the current situation? I have a copy of Saint Padre Pio’s Christmases, written by a dear friend of mine Jeanette Salerno, I thoroughly enjoyed this beautiful book and hope that it’s of interest to anyone out there in cyberspace!

  23. In my opinion the modernists have no chance of winning. The only way they could win temporarily if they will create a schism by which the faithful will be out of their way and they can fool their followers and the world. I commend the faithful leading cardinals for not falling into this trap. Yes, they want to create a schism.

    • “I commend the faithful leading cardinals for not falling into this trap. Yes, they want to create a schism.”

      But did Our Lord HIMSELF not “fall into a trap” which ultimately ensnared it’s author(s) thus freeing US from
      the bondage of Hell. Such a “trap” as you suggest, involves fidelity to HIS WORD, and at some point
      (perhaps sooner rather than later) all of us may have to embrace it. Regardless of the fears of a so-called schism.

      And regards the faithful “being out of the way” by “staying on THE way” does not the salt of the earth regain, nay,
      RETAIN it’s flavor?

  24. “What more can we ask for?”

    What more do we need? I basically agree with this gentleman. We must do our part, but the situation will be resolved by divine intervention, undoubtedly through Our Lady.

  25. Thank you for this article! It gives me courage to defend the Catholic tradition. If one is interested in learning more about Vatican I, read “A manual of Catholic Theology; Based on Scheeben’s “Dogmatik”.

    • Don’t ever give up!!

      There are many Protestants out there that will listen to you if you are willing to share your faith!!

      I was one of them.

      • Thanks for the encouragement! This very serious times we live in, but also very thrilling and thoughtprovoking; there is no real alternative to be passive in this crisis.

  26. Dear Maike my prayers continue for Dr Hickson. There is a distinction in Prof de Mattei’s correct belief that a Pontiff can err in context of the Authentic Magisterium. Nonetheless in accord with the Doctrinal Commentary to Ad Tuendam Fidem Proposition Two states any exercise of the Authentic Magisterium that refers to the Deposit of the Faith [Proposition One], here the indissolubility of marriage it must be either solemnly proclaimed, or stated as sententia definitive tenenda. The Pontiff would have to had definitively declared his intention in his letter. Dr de Mattei admits it is his opinion it does. I don’t perceive the letter providing that confirmation since it doesn’t pronounce, command, or teach anything in order to meet the standard set in the Doctrinal Commentary [which was written by then Prefect for the CDF Josef Ratzinger]. Although the Pope’s letter which affirms the Argentine letter requesting confirmation reveals the Pope’s intention it is not of itself a definitive declaration of intent. Furthermore I agree with de Mattei that Dignitatis Humanae is a theological disaster placing preeminence on conscience [for example Cardinal Kasper recently said conscience is a secret inviolable conclave between God and Man as if Christ’s words don’t exist]. Although there was effort that it be declared dogmatic it never was raised to that level and is not binding. Only Lumen Gentium and Dei Verbum were declared dogmatic. Otherwise I agree with Prof de Mattei that we need to oppose these errors. And that it will likely require divine intervention. Either by grace or by direct intervention by Christ. Certainly in either instance sufficient grace will be given us to withstand what is quickly becoming a true abandonment of Christ’s words and Apostasy.

    • It could be said that the true divine Mercy Image (Message) of Broken Man is a ‘direct divine intervention’ by Christ Himself.

      As our Lord Himself has placed before these men of power, the elite within the church, who in their own hubris ensnared themselves, by crystalizing their own hypocrisy before God and the whole church, in such a way that cannot be misunderstood by all.
      In endorsing a communiqué that incorporates the direct Word (Will) of God and then using that communiqué, they shamelessly made God in their image, a self-servingimage of clericalism.

      Because of this wilfully act, our most fundamental belief that God’s Word is inviolate, has been breached by those who profess to defend that belief, their accumulated silence on this matter compounds their guilt before God and

      “For clarity” the church teaches that divine revelation ended with the apostles.

      The visual and verbal request given by our Lord to Sr. Faustina may not be an additional revelation but it is a communiqué endorsed by the Church that incorporates the direct Word (Will) of God and for that reason it is binding on the Church, in that the true image painted by Sr. Faustina (one of Broken Man) must be venerated and no other.

      kevin your brother
      In Christ

  27. according to whom, while there is a basic incompatibility between
    [holding] heresy and [holding] papal authority, the Pope does not lose
    his office until his heresy becomes apparent to the entire Church.

    well, with the publication of “amoris laetitia” et al, the heresy is APPARENT TO THE ENTIRE CHURCH!

  28. Another weigh-in by Dr Peters.

    I am not of the mind that Peters is a raving Modernist who is hell-bent on wrecking the Church because he parses words and levels academic and carefully-worded lawyerese at those who aren’t skilled in the use of same.

    I learned a long time ago in the business world that lawyers serve their purpose, and that is not only relegated to holding down anchors at the bottom of the sea lest said anchors are swept away by the current.

    Accepting Dr Peters’ assessment at face value, tho, we still have the practical matter that the Pope is encouraging by word and action {and inaction in not disciplining them…} those who seek to change commonly accepted and understood Church teaching to be in line with condemned practices they have promoted for years. Not to mention practices that might be merely at this time twinkles in their eyes.

      • That is not his job {though as a “private citizen” he could say whatever he wants}.

        I am glad for Peters’ technical assessments on this issue and many others. I work in a law-heavy industry and it is, t be honest, refreshing to read his input on these issues.

        The cumulative effect is that nothing has happened that is irreversible even from a merely “legal” standpoint, whatever the Pope and/or his buddies think.

        As for practice, that doesn’t take a lawyer to describe. We all know how low is the common denominator.

  29. More and more brave Catholics are daring to speak out. Today, December 12, 2017, the Feast Day of Our Lady of Gualalupe, Patron of Unborn Children, a group of Catholic pro-life, pro-family leaders have declared their allegiance to Jesus Christ, His Church, and the Church’s eternal and unchangeable truths over and above any heretical members of the hierarchy including the Pope himself.

    The letter concludes:

    “If there is any conflict between the words and acts of any member of the hierarchy, even the pope, and the doctrine that the Church has always taught, we will remain faithful to the perennial teaching of the Church. If we were to depart from the Catholic faith, we would depart from Jesus Christ, to Whom we wish to be united for all eternity.

    “We, the undersigned, pledge that we will continue to teach and propagate the above moral principles, and every other authentic teaching of the Catholic Church, and will never, for any reason, depart from them.”

  30. Mattie is a typical cafeteria catholic. He picks and chooses what he likes. The libs did the same thing with JPII and BXVI. No, the libs didn’t like the Great Koran Kisser for some reason, nor did they like the anonymous Christian pusher, BXVI.


Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Popular on OnePeterFive

Share to...