It’s typically bad form to say “I told you so.” (But if you’re going to gloat, do it like Hilary. Then it’s hilarious.) Still, when you are perpetually maligned and attacked for your concerns and predictions, it’s sometimes appropriate to document the events as they unfolded to show that you really were on the scent. (Sorry #Bishopsgotthis hashtaggers – you got it wrong. Again.)
A new report is out today, and it’s credible, insofar as it confirms what we have been hearing all along (and because Rorate scoops are rarely duds.) A “wise, knowledgeable, and highly influential cleric, writing under the pen name of don Pio Pace” has written an Op-Ed about the yet-to-be-released Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation. It’s not long, but it’s difficult to excerpt without quoting most of it, so I’ll just encourage you to read the whole piece.
Though I don’t think I did it in public, I had taken to referring to the events of October as the “Potemkin Village Synod” among friends. And the gist of the revelation follows suit: Pope Francis, along with “Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, Secretary General of the Assembly, Abp. Bruno Forte, Special Secretary, Abp. Paglia President of the Council for the Family, and a few others” conspired to draft a pro-Kasper post-synodal document before the Synod even opened, and had a multi-stage plan about how to implement this, in part, through the manipulation of the Synod itself.
I said I wasn’t going to excerpt, but to sum up, here’s the pithy conclusion from New Catholic:
In sum, the October 2015 assembly was nothing but a theatrical play destined to prepare the final act which is already written: the post-Synodal Exhortation of mercy and forgiveness for all. Its message will count on the unanimous support of the secular media, and of the vast majority of the Catholic media which a long tolerance for liberalism naturally inclines towards solutions that please the world.
If this is true, it confirms the suspicions I’ve been relaying to you all along. Let’s revisit:
On September 11th, I warned:
So now, we see a rumored attempt to close down the proceedings entirely. To keep the small working groups even from communicating effectively with each other. To put the disjointed reports of disparate groups in the hands of the pope without ever publishing them, so we’ll never know what was actually said, and how much they opposed the final outcome.
Just like last time. Only last time, the good guys fought back and won the day.
This is a power grab.
It’s an autocratic move, and it signals confidence on the part of the Synod managers, who have proven themselves at the very least to be sympathetic to the Kasper agenda, that the pope will give them exactly what they want. Otherwise, they would be doing all that they can to keep the proceedings transparent. I can’t stress enough how important that is. We can see what they’re doing by what they’re trying to hide, and where they’re placing their bets.
Only God can stem the tide of what is coming now. Only His hand can steer us toward victory. Still, we are not excused from duty. Humanly speaking, those of us who remain in this battle for the soul of the Church and the protection of the family are the last line of defense. Nobody is coming to our rescue. The few bishops who have spoken out are very likely the only ones who will. We cannot place our hopes in a deus ex machina solution. We are on the eve of a great schism, and if we do not hold fast, if we do not ensure that we are doing Christ’s will and not our own, we will fail.
My sources in Rome say that there is a press conference scheduled for this Friday, where we will likely learn what we need to know about the proceedings. I expect that an attempt to lock down the information pipeline and keep the word from getting out to the media will be very difficult to enforce…
Now, more than ever, we need to remember what it means to be Catholic. The Kasper Koalition will not take that away from us.
I encourage you all to pray for God’s will in the Synod. I’ve stopped trying to petition Him for certain things. As a wise clergyman recently said to me, “I think that God permits that the evil inside the Church must grow and reveal itself in all its wickedness, and then God will intervene and make shine the truth and the beauty of the faith…”
God may in fact will that this Synod give forth some very wicked fruit indeed, if only that what has been hidden in darkness may at last be brought into the light.
On October 1st, I shared with you the revelation that a “Shadow Synod” was already meeting to work on the post-synodal document. (I followed this up by sharing a report on October 13th in which it was alleged that Pope Francis was meeting with such a group on an ongoing basis during the Synod.)
On October 3rd, I reiterated this point again, adding to the list of 7 reasons Voice of the Family believed the Synod would be manipulated:
There have been reports of a “Parallel Synod” already at work on the documents that may be presented at the conclusion of the Synod, despite the fact that the work of the Synod fathers won’t begin until tomorrow.
On October 7th, I substantiated the concerns I expressed on September 11th about a Synod information lockdown with this profile piece on Fr. Thomas Rosica, who as the English-language spokesman for the Synod was clearly obfuscating the reality of events as they were transpiring and supplanting them with his own agenda:
We have heard that even before the Synod began, a secret group of theologians began work on its final documents, which would make it somewhat difficult for them to accurately reflect the proceedings. We know that whatever happens in the Synod, Pope Francis has the final say on what we are to take from it. We have been told that Francis’s own intervention in the opening days of the Synod has kept the most controversial aspects of last year’s portion in central focus. And now, we have one of Francis’s biggest fans in the position of telling us what (and only what) he thinks we should know about the proceedings.
On October 14th, overwhelmed by the preponderance of evidence that the fix was in, I joined with other Catholic writers and theologians in launching an open letter/petition, asking the Synod fathers to walk out rather than be co-opted by a manipulated gathering oriented toward a pre-ordained outcome. In the letter, we cited the reasons for our concern, then wrote:
We fear, evidenced by all of the above, that the Ordinary Synod will attempt to recommend changes in teaching and pastoral practice that are contrary to the Gospel of Christ and the constant teaching of the Church on the sacred mystery of Catholic marriage and the nature of human sexuality. This would pose a clear and present danger to souls.
The Code of Canon Law 212 §3 states that the Catholic faithful “have the right, indeed at times the duty, in keeping with their knowledge, competence and position, to manifest to the sacred Pastors their views on matters which concern the good of the Church. They have the right also to make their views known to others of Christ’s faithful…”
Therefore, we faithfully request that each and every faithful Catholic bishop at the Synod, having made every effort to resist these attacks on Christ’s teaching, if its direction remains unaltered and those faithful voices remain unheard, do his sacred duty and publicly retire from any further participation in the Synod before its conclusion so as to prevent greater scandal and confusion.
Those bishops who remain as participants, accepting this process and its outcome, must certainly bear responsibility for whatever confusion and sin may result among the Catholic faithful from what would be the disastrous fruits of the Synod.
On October 16th, Cardinal Pell, considered by many to be the leader of the “resistance” to the Kasper proposal and one of the 13 Cardinals who expressed their concerns over the Synod proceedings to Pope Francis, was asked about our petition during a press event. He chose to rebuff our concerns:
Despite an online petition calling on prelates “faithful to Christ’s teaching” to abandon the 2015 Synod of Bishops on the family, due to perceptions of a “pre-determined outcome that is anything but orthodox,” one of the summit’s most outspoken conservatives says “there’s no ground for anyone to walk out on anything.”
Australian Cardinal George Pell, who heads the Vatican’s Secretariat for the Economy, told Crux on Friday that by the midway point of the Oct. 4-25 synod, concerns about stacking the deck circulating in some quarters have “substantially been addressed.”
On October 20th, undeterred in my concerns, I penned an Op-Ed in the Washington Post on my concerns that the Synod was all for show, and that the final outcome had already been decided:
[Pell’s] assurances provided little comfort. Bishops in attendance from Africa, Eastern Europe and Central Asia — regions where progressive ideology holds less influence — have continued to issue dire warnings about the Synod. Archbishop Peta of Kazakhstan said that he detects the “Smoke of Satan” in the meeting’s working documents and interventions, favoring compromises with Gospel truths that cannot be accepted. Archbishop Stankiewicz of Latvia said that “the admission [to Communion] of persons living in new unions would be an act of injustice against those couples who are struggling to save their marriage and with a great effort to remain faithful.”
Meanwhile, media coverage of the advances of radical proposals to change established practices, coupled with the implied approval of Pope Francis, has given the impression that many of the rules under discussion have already changed. Subsequently, individual Catholics are not waiting for a final document but are instead drawing the conclusion that the existing rules no longer apply to them.
Lacking a corrective word from the vicar of Christ, a gesture that might calm the storm, Catholics are left to wonder which side the pope is on. In his address last Sunday, Francis spoke of “the synodality of the Church” and his intention to impose greater “decentralization.” Were he to delegate to local bishops, as many suspect he will, the authority to determine such questions as whether the divorced and remarried could receive communion without a change of life, the effects would be catastrophically divisive, as the battle between opposing camps within the Synod has demonstrated.
Also on October 20th, I wrote:
It has long been my concern that Francis will make an end-run around the restrictions of papal infallibility by not making a decision that is binding, but rather by delegating the decision on matters as important as Holy Communion given to the unrepentant to Bishops, who must determine their own “pastoral process.” We know what this would lead to. We know that it could be done through ambiguities and vagueries, so that no one could easily pin the blame on the Holy Father. We even know the language to look out for – the idea that the Eucharist is “not a prize for the strong, but a source of strength for the weak, for sinners.”
Of course, we saw the handwriting on the wall in numerous gestures over the past 31 months, gestures we and others have documented through countless posts and articles while we have seen our concerns go dismissed and even scoffed at.
And finally, on October 27th, to the resounding cries of “conservatives won!”, I pushed back, hard:
Did anyone truly expect a deeply, openly heterodox [Synod relatio] text? Does anyone believe that this ends here? Does anyone think that Pope Francis — the same pope who imposed two apostolic letters to streamline annulments without the consultation of any relevant dicastery, without speaking to any of the canonists at the Apostolic Signatura who should have vetted the jurisprudence therein — has really been put in his place by “conservative” Synod fathers? Does anyone think that his concluding speech signaled defeat – a speech which lashed out at those “dead stones” who care about doctrine, promoted cultural and moral relativism, and said that “the true defenders of doctrine are not those who uphold its letter, but its spirit; not ideas but people; not formulae but the gratuitousness of God’s love and forgiveness”?
This is not over. We didn’t get the cure to this fatal disease, we got an obvious placebo. Stop celebrating, because the next wave is already coming, and no matter how exhausted we are, the fight goes on.
The heretics in the Church are not cowed. They are more empowered than ever. Those who advanced heterodoxy at the Synod were not disciplined – nor were they, as so many wishful-thinkers speciously tried to convince us, brought to Rome by Pope Francis to be “smoked out.” They are his friends. They helped get him elected.
Pope Francis is the guardian of the Church. He has allowed these rough men to attempt to violate Christ’s sweet spouse, and has raised his voice in protest not against those seeking to have their way with her, but against us – the very ones who would protect our mother from such an outrage.
People who listened to my podcast earlier this week about Francis Fatigue said they could hear how exhausted I am. That’s because I’ve been warning and warning and warning since October, 2013. (And back then, I was mostly alone. Now, not so much.) What did I write then? The same thing I am saying now:
Not all popes are chosen by the Holy Spirit, folks. Not everything a pope says is infallible, either. Heck, most of it isn’t. It’s OK to distance yourself from a dangerous pope. You don’t need to keep saying that things he said or did are being taken out of context, or that he didn’t contradict doctrine. The pope is not the faith. Eastern Catholics have been getting along fine without much input from him for millennia.
History shows us the truth of this. Pope Stephen VI wasn’t taken out of context when he held the cadaver synod. Pope John XII wasn’t misunderstood when he was committing adultery and murder. Pope Urban VI wasn’t being taken advantage of by the media when he tortured members of his curia who opposed him.
And none of these popes contradicted doctrine. They were all real popes. Valid popes. They were all protected by the Holy Spirit from promulgating doctrinal error in an official capacity, and that guarantee worked out just fine. But they were all a****le popes. Terrible, lecherous, murderous people. May God have mercy on their souls.
The thing they couldn’t do that Pope Francis can do? Give interviews that can be read by a global audience. Talk about doctrine in a non-doctrinal capacity in a way that gets everyone all confused. You can argue that they were worse while they were bedding women and killing enemies and digging up the corpses of their predecessors, but I honestly find that a lot easier to deal with. Nothing like, as Nancy Pelosi likes to say, a “Wolf in wolf’s clothing.” I like an enemy I can see.
No, what’s worse is when the enemy speaks in half-truths. When they veil themselves in cryptic language that can be taken to mean one thing by the orthodox and another by the progressive. When they speak in code that tells their brothers in the revolution that the fight is still on, that the 1960s aren’t dead yet and getting better. When they say nothing at all that can be definitively denounced as heterodox but everything that can be embraced by the heterodox if they so choose.
Stalin had a word for the people who sympathized with the Soviets in the West: useful idiots. This papacy is looking to be a continuation of the revolution that began before Bl. John XXIII invoked the council. This is a battle for the soul of the Church that is happening within the boundaries of papal infallibility, but make no mistake – a lot can go wrong without changing a single doctrine.
So am I saying I told you so? I guess so. I am frustrated with those who have fought me tooth and nail along the way, because the handwriting was on the wall. In huge capital letters. In neon.
But here we are. And my guess is that the revelation that the document was ready back in September means that its release is imminent. These things rarely surface too far in advance of the main event. So buckle up.
Steve Skojec is the Founding Publisher of OnePeterFive.com. He received his BA in Communications and Theology from Franciscan University of Steubenville in 2001. His commentary has appeared in The New York Times, USA Today, The Washington Post, The Washington Times, Crisis Magazine, EWTN, Huffington Post Live, The Fox News Channel, Foreign Policy, and the BBC. Steve and his wife Jamie have eight children. You can find more of his writing at his Substack, The Skojec File.
Heh. Jumping up and down like an outraged Mary Poppins is starting to be my new trademark.
I knew the timeline you give here; it’s why I found and started to read here once I noticed the mainline Catholic sites could neither see, hear, or speak of any evil on the part of this pope. And they made sure no one posted anything critical at their sites. (They’ve mostly changed their policy now that only a total moron could deny something is rotten in Vatican City.) On an optimistic note, this revelation is one more piece of the puzzle that, put together, shows us the REAL Pope Francis, not the PR and media creation.
Keep fightin’ the good fight, Mr. Skojec! Thank you for all you do. How about a group of you I-Told-You-Sos start a petition for Bergoglio’s retirement?
Repent or Retire, Your Holiness!
Like the one before the Synod it probably won’t have any direct effect, but it might inspire folks to pray for his removal with more urgency. It was my petition before Our Eucharistic Lord at Benediction and Adoration this week.
He wont abdicate. He needs to be deposed.
Neither outcomes are likely, but we can pray for his removal, if it be God’s will. Nevertheless, having a way to voice our love for Christ and the defense of His Church in the form of a petition is a positive thing, even though the petition itself will effect little or nothing. Just my thoughts.
Agree. He has spoken of it but, like a third world generalissimo he’s too drunk with power and spotlight to give it up. After all, how did he put it, “it is my church.” But, of course, he’s humble. I know because I’ve seen the black shoes as he steps from the Kia subcompact he uses to move about.
Strange kind of ‘humility’ not wearing the red, which signify that the head of Christ’s Church is willing to die for it. To me, the black signifies that he would not consider it.
Indeed, until his wrecking ball has done its job in its entirety, we will be plagued with Francis.
BY WHOM EXACTLY?
The cardinals or an imperfect ecumenical council can do this.
The writings of this Pope are going to be used by Protestants in coming decades and centuries to give supposed examples of how papal infallibility is false. Pope Francis will be infamous along with Pope Honorius and will be a cudgel that Protestants and others will use to beat up on Catholics for a long time. Two centuries from now, when global warming is shown to be a hoax, his encyclical will be used to “prove” the Church was wrong on doctrine. They will point to this Synod and coming document to “prove” the Church changed doctrine/dogma on marriage/divorce/annulments.
Sadly, they already are.
When Our Lady’s triumph comes, Protestantism will cease to exist.
two centuries from now we will be two centuries into the messianic kingdom, and bergoglio et al will be sitting on the burger grills at fenway park…
“It appears that you are mad as empty hell, and not going to take it any more.”
The one thing we are assured of is that no pope will ever formally teach error. I don’t suppose the present Holy Father intends to teach formal error, but if a pope persisted in wishing to do so, the Holy Spirit would prevent it.
The point is that he needn’t teach error, he need only give an impression that he permits it. Fallen nature will do the rest.
He’s done that already. But he won’t make a clear attempt to decree a positive change in Church doctrine, or the Holy Spirit will take him down. You watch, and see if it doesn’t turn out that way.
The Pope does not to have to formally teach error to cause extreme confusion and grave division.
This Pope is a tool of the serpent and just as crafty. He knows he doesn’t need to change doctrine to assert his foul master’s malevolent will. All he has to do is change the discipline and in time the doctrine will fall into obsolescence. He will go to his grave maintaining plausible deniability and his unfortunate successors will be left with the task of trying to get his genie back in the bottle.
that’s right. this pope is as heretical as you ever want to get. his mentor, he said it himself, was the prince of darkness, cardinal martini. in argentina, he is quoted in several respected journals as advocating the recognition of same sex unions:
http://bit.ly/1TvGXY7 | http://bit.ly/1TvGXY7 |
Steady on. The Rorate story still has to be sourced.
The Tosatti story about the symposium held under Fr. Spadaro’s auspices, involving around 7 Jesuits and many others, on the eve of the synod, has not been confirmed yet either.
Unfortunately, no journalist has yet determined the funding sources (supposedly four) for the symposium. One question is whether at least one source of funding was from within the Vatican itself. Why this information has not yet been determined remains a mystery. After all, a conference of its size costs something.
As they always say in journalism, follow the money.
My own view places the odds of an apostolic exhortation affirming the internal forum at 50-50. The Pope showed his hand at the end of the synod. Whether he has the temperament to act on it, and create yet more division in the Church, remains to be seen.
I would also place the odds of an apostolic exhortation, whatever it says, being issued this Tuesday, at 50-50.
The dictatorship of relativism is ruling from high within the Church. There is absolutely no denying the obvious.
There’s no doubt the Pope is a Kasperite.
Most Jesuits have waited for this moment, for decades. If it transpires.
Not to worry. SSPX has its own parallel marriage tribunal to supply for any internal forum’s “deficiencies.” Who knows? As with the Year of Mercy, the Pope may yet grant SSPX the faculty to resolve marriage cases and process annulments. That would be really interesting!
OK. You were right. You are brilliant. But more importantly you appear honorable. So why did you write this line?:
“Not all popes are chosen by the Holy Spirit, folks.”
In a sense the only Pope chosen by the Holy Ghost (excuse me I am an old man) was Peter the thrice denier of Our lord and Savior. All of the Popes subsequent to Peter were chosen by very, very fallible people some of whom may well have acting more under the inspiration of Satan instead of the Holy Ghost.
Holy Father Francis is still Holy Father Francis. He continues to be the successor to Peter. He remains the Vicar of Christ on earth.
And Christ will still be faithful to His promise that the gates of Hell shall not prevail against His Church.
Keep up the great work.
Richard W Comerford
I obviously missed it but where did Mr. Skojec declare that Pope Francis is not the successor to Peter, Vicar of Christ on earth?
Thank you for your reply wherein you posted in part: “where did Mr. Skojec declare that Pope Francis is not the successor to Peter,”
I must have missed it also. I did not see it.
Richard W Comerford
OK, so we’ve read your name umpteen times – will you ever stop singing it to yourself and your bedmate the antipope you’re whispering to? tanks!
Thank you for your reply wherein you posted in part: “so we’ve read your name umpteen times”
I am sorry if I upset you. May I suggest you simply ignore my posts?
“and your bedmate the antipope”
Neither you, nor I, nor any other individual possess the authority to pronounce Holy Father Francis an anti-Pope.
Richard W Comerford
Read the historic encyclicals that go centuries back. heresy deposes a pope de jure if not de facto. this pope is chock full of heresy, so he ain’t no successor to peter, but an antipope. And its the duty of cardinals to stand up to him and depose him. not only his heresies, but his conspiratorial election excommunicates him (UDG 81 – read it).
Thank you for your reply wherein you posted in part: “Read the historic encyclicals that go centuries back.”
Sorry. I am unaware of any Papal Encyclical historic or otherwise, on this matter. But then again I am just a knuckle dragger. Can you name one please?
and in part: “heresy deposes a pope de jure if not de facto.”
No. I think not. What is heresy? Who defines it? Who witnesses it? Is it formal? Is it repeated? Is it public? Have repeated formal warning been made against it? Has the alleged heretic been given an opportunity to recant?
In short who died and made you Pope?
and in part: “this pope is chock full of heresy, so he ain’t no successor to peter, but an antipope.”
You, as an individual, have neither authority nor right to speak discreetly of the Vicar of Christ or declare him a heretic. Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ chose the very weak, very foolish and oh so very human Peter; and not the almost perfect John, as His Chief Apostle. If He could put up with Peter perhaps you might find it in your heart to put up with Francis?
and in part: “And its the duty of cardinals to stand up to him and depose him”
No. You are quiet wrong. It is first the duty of the world’s Bishops to clarify and teach true doctrine. Then they have an obligation to enter into dialogue with the Holy Father if there is concern regarding his teaching of true doctrine. If it is clear that the Holy Father is not teaching true doctrine then he must in charity be first privately exhorted and corrected. After private correction comes public correction and exhortation. Then if that fails must come a trail based on true justice. If found guilty the Holy Father must be given an opportunity to repent and re-embrace the faith. If he fails to do so then and only then can a Pope be removed from the Chair of Peter.
Finally in part: “his conspiratorial election excommunicates him”
Again you are quite wrong. The alleged conspirators may be excommunicated; if said alleged conspiracy can be proved; but there is no provision under Church (Cannon) Law to depose a Pope elected by conspiracy and the reigning Pope is the master of Church law.
Richard W Comerford
Great post. I’m surprised there was ever any doubt that the events of the last couple of years have just been a manipulative campaign designed to add a veneer of legitimacy to an action that strikes a powerful blow to Catholic tradition and doctrine. Did faithful Catholics really believe that the Year of Mercy was anything but a way to condition our minds to accept this change? Did we really believe the Synod was some sort of fact-finding commission, rather than a process put in place to give an appearance of consensus (much like an public advisory board adds a gloss of legitimacy to the dictates of a federal agency, though the agenda, membership, and decisions of the board are determined in advance by the agency itself). In the end, I’m most surprised that the faithful leadership of the Church seems to have fallen for this.
Kudos fro your prescience, Steve. You are a good an and this is an invaluable Blog and it is certain that there are many many clerics who are, silently, cheering you on; and they SHOULD remain silent, btw.
Why pipe up only to be effectively decapitated by the revolution?
Isn;t it interesting how the revolutionaries repeat their actions?
No doubt they were meeting at Sancta Marthae (just like during V2) secretly planning this out in advance. There IS a reason why Bergoglio chose to live there.
Bergoglio is an AntiChrist who is both Our Pope and Our Cross and there ain’t a blessed thing we can do about it for we have no authority and those who do have authority are cowards and there is noting to be gained by pretending otherwise.
If Bishop has walked out of V2 and told the world why, imagine the damage we could have avoided and the same thing re the synod.
C’est la vie.
Ina ny event, great work, Steve
Mr. I am not Spartacus:
You posted in part:
“Bergoglio is an AntiChrist who is both Our Pope and Our Cross and there
ain’t a blessed thing we can do about it for we have no authority”
Brilliantly put. Simply brilliant. (Although AntiChrist might be too strong a word.)
Richard W Comerford
It appears that the faith of many has been shaken but I believe there are those whose faith in God and in his Church has actually been strengthened [one over the internet I know for sure and will post a link if and when I find it], because, despite the shenanigans of the Pope and the innovators, they were unable to achieve what they conspired, demonstrating the proptection of the Holy Spirit, the solicitude of the Good Shepherd and faithfulness to his promise, the maternal care of Our Lady, the prayers of the angels and the saints, and the faithfulness of God’s Holy People to the glory of God the Father.
I wanted to write the Pope and his innovators, but I believe it is the innovators who have the Pope.
“You can argue that they were worse while they were bedding women and killing enemies and digging up the corpses of their predecessors, but I honestly find that a lot easier to deal with.”
It is a feature of the age in which we live that we tend to think of sexual sins and murder as the most heinous transgressions of the Law. However, it would benefit us all to recall that the Decalogue was delivered on 2 tablets of stone – the first dealing with our duties toward and sins against God, and the second with our duties toward and sins against our neighbour.
The greatest sin of all is revealed on that first stone tablet, in the First Commandment, i.e. to not believe in Our Heavenly Father and His only begotten Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ. And of course the only unforgivable sin is that of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. Consequently those who lead others to lose their faith in God or falsely teach against His commandments – becoming a “skandalon” for others – commit a greater sin than either adultery or murder because they are guilty of leading souls to perdition.
A murderer can only kill the body – he has little or no influence on the destination of his victim’s immortal soul. However, a cleric, a bishop or a Pope who teaches people to disobey God’s commandments, and commit sacrilege against His Body and Blood, can lead souls to eternal damnation. That is a far worse crime than murder. This is why Our Lord said:
Matt 10,28 “And fear not them that kill the body, and cannot kill the soul: but rather fear him that can destroy both soul and body in hell.” (another proof BTW that hell is indeed a place because bodies are destroyed there as well as souls!!! Pace bishop Barron.)
This is why, despite the appalling sins of John XII, Urban VI and, not to forget, Alexander VI Borgia, I believe that Francis is a worse Pope than all of these put together. He hasn’t just tolerated one heresy and permitted its promulgation (like Honorious I and John XXII), but there are no end of dogmas and doctrines of the Church, not to mention the Word of God itself, about which Francis seems to have delighted in spreading as much doubt and confusion as he can. He is a destroyer of all that is true, good and beautiful. He is a destroyer of souls.
in short, “the deceiver.” amazing how he and obama are like two peas in a pod, isn’t it? both are going about undermining the very office they represent! frankenpope, obamanation, frankentrump, green gore & hellery!
Not to be rude, but there are plenty of Catholics out there who’ve been saying, “I told you so” for 50 years or more –at every ambiguity, every vague document, etc. The fight started long ago, even before Vatican Council II. The REAL QUESTION IS WHAT is Mr. Skojec and those who (finally) comprehend what has actually been going on in Rome all these years, going to do about it? Are they going to go along to get along? Or is it finally time for a clean break?
And P.S., if there are literally a handful of bishops on whom the remnant can rely, it will be a miracle.
Jesus Christ is the Head of His Church and He has always been the Head of His Church and he remains the Head of His Church until the Parousia but IANS is supposed to abandon His Church rather than stay in it and fight?
What sort of advice is that?
She is evil come out of her is what Protestants have been saying for half a millennium..
The buildings and the people who dwell in or frequent them do not make the Church. ‘Abandoning’ buildings and people who do not profess the Faith isn’t apostasy. It’s keeping the Faith.
So after you would have “abandoned buildings and people who do not profess the faith,” where do you go to “keep the Faith”?
You posted in part: “where do you go to “keep the Faith”?”
I read that the Irish under persecution met at night in fields with guards posted while the priest used a large flat rock as an altar to celebrate Holy Mass.
I also read Japanese Catholics under persecution by the Shogunate for 300-years used their homes to practice the Faith in secrecy.
My ancestors, the Abernaki, would often (according to family mythology at least) meet in swamps, on islands or hill tops until the Quebec Act of 1774 protected their religious freedom.
Richard W Comerford
Fair enough. Thanks, Richard. Another question [seriously]: When do we [start to] “leave the buildings and people who do not profess the faith”?
Thank you for your reply wherein you posted in part: “When do we [start to] “leave the buildings and people who do not profess the faith”
There are no perfect Popes, bishops or priests. That is the norm for the Church. Our Lord and Savior chose the all too human Peter to be His Chief Apostle. He did not chose the near perfect John.
Our Lord also did not establish multiple Churches so we could pick and choose. He established one, true, holy and apostolic Church. A Church which is His Mystical Body, with a visible hierarchy; and with Himself as its Head. As Christians we have no place else to go.
Our Lord did not promise us a rose garden. There is no true happiness in this vale of tears. We are pilgrims in this fallen world. Our home is heaven. Let us help one another on the road to home.
Richard W Comerford
“As Christians we have no place else to go.”
Thank you, Richard. God bless you. Happy Feast of the Immaculate Conception!”
You have a very weak faith if you lose it owing to particular buildings
Hey, IANS, you know NOTHING about me. And, as usual, you don’t comprehend what I’ve written. The Faith has absolutely nothing to do with buildings. So, don’t pontificate to me again. I’m tired of your smart comments and your assumptions about me and others who comment here and who don’t necessarily agree with everything you state. People who have to have 100% agreement within the so-called traditional movement are shooting themselves in the foot if they think they’re going to turn this ship around and get the church back again. This is a slow motion wreck which has taken hundreds of years to implement by those who hate the church and despise everything Jesus Christ said and did. You better start to look at reality; because the reality is that the church is under intense, unrelenting, furious attack from within and you haven’t a clue about what it’s going to take to restore it.
Are you a sede? If so, then what cardinals are left to elect a pope?
the potemkin synod, the sodomy synod, or the pavlovian synod? i like “woof, woof”
I have been warning since March 2013. There will ultimately be heresy promoted under the guise of infallibility. What else would you expect from the false prophet? The mass will likely be invalidated in May 2016.
Perhaps when Roman Catholicism is reduced to a rump church of a few million souls in the West, that is when the traditional Catholics will finally win out and regain the upper hand. Until then, the Spirit of Vatican II is stronger than ever. It is strident; it overwhelmingly dominates the Church.
You posted in part: “that is when the traditional Catholics will finally win out”
Christ has risen. The victory has already been won. He has promised that the gates of hell shall not prevail against His Church. Christ has also promised that He will be with His Church until the end of time.
Perhaps then it is not important which group will “win out”?
Richard W Comerford