Browse Our Articles & Podcasts

Progressive Catholics Launch Defense Initiative Against Filial Correction

Today, the website of the German bishops,, surprises its readers with the publication of a story detailing an initiative which has been launched in order to support Pope Francis himself against the critics who signed the 24 September Filial Correction. The new group is called “Pro Pope Francis” and now has its own website, It says that the group has already 100 signatories and more than 1,000 “supporters” of this declaration. The initiative thanks Pope Francis for his “courageous and theologically well-founded leadership.” The signatories also praise the pope for letting “mercy have the last word” in pastoral matters.

Screenshot of the “Pro Pope Francis” Website

Among the signatories are the two men who initiated the current declaration – the theologian, Father Paul Zulehner (Vienna, Austria), and the sociologist Father Tomas Halik (Prague, Czech Republic) – as well as retired Bishop Paul Iby (Eisenstadt, Austria) and retired Bishop Helmut Krätzl (Vienna), the Abbot of Pannonhalma (Hungary), Asztrik Varszegi, Auxiliary Bishop Vaclav Maly (Prague) and retired Bishop Fritz Lobinger of  North-Aliwal (South Africa). Among the signatories is also the editor-in-chief of the Jesuit journal Stimmen der Zeit, Father Andreas Batlogg, S.J. The Social Democratic former President of Parliament in Germany, Wolfgang Thierse, is likewise one of the signatories.

Important to note is that there are to be found several prominent dissenters from Catholic tradition among the signatories. For example, Bishop Lobinger proposes to ordain married men and women as priests; Father Martin Lintner proposes to liberalize the Church’s teaching on homosexuality and to re-write the 1992 Catechism in light of Amoris Laetitia. Moreover, one of the two men who launched the project, Father Paul Zulehner, a co-author of a book written by Bishop Lobinger, is also known to criticize priestly celibacy and to propose the ordination of married men as priests who would then assist part-time the main priest of a parish. Moreover, Martha Heizer — the President of the Austrian grass-root organization “We Are Church” (Wir sind Kirche) — was excommunicated by Pope Francis in May of 2014 for having, together with her husband, “celebrated” repeatedly Holy Mass in their private home and in the presence of guests.

In the following, we shall present to our readers the full text of the statement of this new initiative:

Dear highly esteemed Pope Francis,

Your pastoral initiatives and their theological justification are currently under vehement attack by a group in the church. With this open letter, we wish to express our gratitude for your courageous and theologically sound papal leadership.

In a short time, you have succeeded in reshaping the pastoral culture of the Roman Catholic Church in accordance with its origin in Jesus. Wounded people and wounded nature go straight to your heart. You see the church as a field hospital on the margins of life. Your concern is every single person loved by God. When encountering others, compassion and not the law shall have the last word. God and God’s mercy characterize the pastoral culture that you expect from the church. You dream of a “church as mother and shepherdess.” We share your dream.

We ask that you would not veer from the path you have taken, and we assure you of our full support and constant prayer.

The signatories

As Cardinal Gerhard Müller has just recently noted in an interview with the German Catholic newspaper Die Tagespost about the progressivist theologians who earlier had resisted orthodoxy: “In the meantime, the opponents of ‘then’ have now molted into enthusiastic followers of the pope.” [emphasis added]

The post has been updated, adding some information about Martha Heizer; a correction has also been made to the title of Wolfgang Thierse, who was not, as originally stated, former President of Germany, but Germany’s former President of Parliament. 

156 thoughts on “Progressive Catholics Launch Defense Initiative Against Filial Correction”

      • The Bergoglio Circus with the Devil as Ringmaster……

        and on the swinging Trapeze today folks we have Amoris Laetitia performing a novel
        and “somewhat” controversial act by attempting to balance Truth with Fiction…..

        Tune in and with patience await the arrival of Gravity (TRUTH) for surely the Magic has
        limited time to spend its spellbound attraction for the itchy ears among us….

  1. Typical liberal hogwash and misdirection.

    Note that they respond to the Correctio Filialis as though it were a direct attack on the person of the Pope. They make no attempt whatsoever to address any of the issues raised and simply repeat this false dichotomy they have invented between “pastoral concern” and Divine Law.

    It is never “pastoral” – it is never merciful – to mislead people about sin and the gravity of sin, and even encourage people to persevere in an objective state of manifest grave sin. They do not believe in the Christ who revealed Himself to us, but rather a banal fabrication of a false god which arose in their own gonads.

    • So far you have these two (or is it three?) from Notre Shame:

      Deane-Drummond, Celia Evangeline: Professor of Theology, Director Center for Theology, Science and Human Flourishing, Notre Dame (USA)

      Gregory, Brad S.: Director, Notre Dame Institute for Advanced Study, Professor of History and
      Dorothy G. Griffin Collegiate Chair, Notre Dame (USA)

      There will be more.

      The majority of signers, so far, appear to be from Austria.

    • Two more USA signatories:

      Gamberini, Paolo SJ: Associate Professor University of San Francisco (USA)

      Steindl-Rast, David OSB: spiritueller Lehrer, Eremit in der Nähe des Klosters Mount Saviour, Pine City (USA)

      • God Bless u for keeping me et al up to date. Hoping n praying that my archdiocese or at least my church will refuse to change the Mass to the mass that Francis presently has Lutherans n Anglicans working on!

        • Some more:

          Schafer, Sr. Jean SDS: Sister of the Divine Savior, Board Member Salvatorian Advocacy for Victims of Exploitation (S.A.V.E.), Inc. and of U.S. Catholic Sisters gainst Human Trafficking Gallant Circle Citrus Heights, (USA)

          Christensen, Sr. Elizabeth: Milwaukee (USA)

          Heitke, Sister Beverly SDS: Provincial Leader, Sisters of the Divine Savior, Milwaukee (USA)

          Portland, Paul J. SDS: Provincial Councelor, Pastor Milwaukee (USA)

          • I’m sure there will be more nuns. I had been an Associate w the Dominican Sisters but I left before making a five yr commitment cause they became SO LIBERAL!

  2. Let’s not lump together people who advocate ordaining married men as priests with people advocating for the ordination of women. The former is perfectly orthodox. A celibate clergy in the Latin church is a discipline — it’s not doctrine or dogma. It can be changed (and has been changed) and has been subject to many exceptions even in modern times. And of course, Eastern rite Catholics have married males priests. It’s perfectly proper for one to suggest (or advocate) that it would be wise policy to allow married male priests in the Latin Rite. In contrast, to promote female priests is to defy the infallible teaching of the Church.

    • Were we to have married priests in the West, we ought to do it exactly like the Orthodox do, but in reality, the Western parishes today simply wouldn’t pay the bills of such priests. Once you explain to the “Magisterium” Catholics what the costs would be of married priests, they run out the door with their hair on fire.

      And I’m married with four kids, praise be to the Lord, but wow, I’m run ragged as it is. Imagine a priest in such a condition. You’d be lucky if he could find the time to say Mass once in a while.


      • My father was a Methodist minister.

        He as a person was a wonderful man, a model in so many ways in spite of being outside the Church.

        But I am against the married priesthood. The Church has it right, but they simply need to make sure priests are using that state of life for the glory of God, and if they are not, they need to be laicized. I’m not kidding, the rot in the church is there for many reasons, but one of the most egregious and obvious is that there is no administration of public discipline. Not to us laymen and not to the priests.

        We need to restore that.

        And we need to get priests who bring the Gospel to men like my Dad, as my Dad gave priest after priest every opportunity to do so in ecumenical gatherings and I know of no effort EVER that was made to convert my father.

        I need to bite my lip hard so as not to say what I really think of such priests, but suffice to say they should have made the effort.

        • I don’t know what your father would think of our “ecumenical gatherings” here. The local Methodist minister and I have a habit of discussing “insensitive issues” in front of everybody else. He makes pointed comments about me not recognizing his “orders” and I go to great lengths to explain why I don’t and how he can get them validated if he’s seriously concerned about it! All done in the best possible taste of course.

          Sadly, the local Free Presbyterian church has now left the gatherings because nobody else takes Scripture seriously “apart from the Catholics” – and they really find that hard to deal with. Good job they haven’t met Catholics like these retards who are sucking up to Francis.

      • Very true. Few rectories can fit a family… that would mean off site housing. Then benefits for the wife and children. Imagine if/when it wouldn’t work out. What if the wife was caught was in adultery. The children would also be facing “preacher’s kid syndrome.” Many negatives and only relatively few positives since the only mechanism that would be acceptable is men already married being ordained like the Eastern Catholics and schismatic Orthodox, not those already ordained dating and marrying like the Anglican heretics do.

        • Oh, the logistics in the CC would be daunting, to be sure.

          And can ANYONE sincerely believe that in this day and age the ultimate goal isn’t the allowance of some sort of “marriage” “relationship” between two {or more?} sodomite priests?

          If we miss that we miss the whole game.

      • “the Western parishes today simply wouldn’t pay the bills of such priests.”

        This is a point I have often made to my parish council when they ask why I can’t become their next priest. Although my offspring have started leaving home now, there was no way they could ever have afforded me with a wife and five children to run.

        Additionally the demands of being a deacon are heavy enough to put pressure on a marriage and a family in terms of time commitment. The way in which a deacon and his wife become “public property” is something that seminary never really prepared us for, and a married priest and his wife would experience it to a much greater level of intensity.

        Seeing the life “from the inside”, I can think of a million reasons why a married priesthood would be a bad idea for the Latin Church. But more important than any of those practical reasons is the fact that the celibate pristhood is a great gift from Our Lord – a jewel in Our Lady’s crown. This great witness of self-sacrifice by those who truly live their vocation to the celibate priesthood would be put in danger of extinction the minute that they started ordaining married men to the priesthood.

        And then there is the issue of continence for married clergy which the modernists have totally screwed up – as much because of their ignorance of Canon Law and Sacred Tradition rather than bad will in this case.

        • Yes – continence for married clergy is the key. Is there a requirement for today’s permanent diaconate (i.e. married deacons) to be continent? Similarly, do you know whether Anglican/Episcopalian/whatever else priest converts to the Catholic faith, who have been married, are thereafter required to be continent?

          I might have a totally screwed understanding of the whole thing myself, but for some reason I thought that anyone that is married, and then gets ordained, is supposed to be continent the rest of his life. Am I totally wrong on that, or was that the practice at some past time in the Church at least? If not, then I guess I have no idea whatsoever where I got that idea.

          • This is a matter of ongoing disputation. Most permanent deacons have gone through their formation being told by their superiors that there is no requirement for continence. A few years ago a canon lawyer raised the issue that this was not in accordance with Canon Law and the long-standing tradition of the Church. Dubia were sent to Rome and the reply came back that married deacons were not required to be continent – but the reply dismally failed to deal with any of the canonical issues raised.

            So the honest answer at the moment is that the official position is murky. Of course that doesn’t prevent any deacon and his wife, who feel called to be obedient to tradition, from offering up this part of their lives to God voluntarily.

            What is very clear is that we promise at ordination that if our wives should pre-decease us then we must embrace celibacy and not marry again. However, even this promise has been degraded on numerous occasions by men receiving dispensations to marry again for “the sake of dependent relatives.”

            In the case of the Ordinariates I believe a specific dispensation from continence was written into the complementary norms to Anglicanorium coetibus when it was promulgated. A “hermeneutic of rupture” if ever there was one.

          • Thanks for the reply! After I replied to you, I read further some of the responses, some of which addressed this question of whether there was a requirement to be continent, and some were mentioning that the 1983 Code maintains the requirement to be continent, but I never looked it up, so I didn’t know for sure.

            So apparently, Rome has given an answer stating that married deacons are not required to be continent, but this answer was not based in canon law? Is that what you’re saying? Regardless, you made reference to being “obedient to tradition” and so I guess that at least you personally understand being continent for clerics to be in accord with long-standing Church tradition.

            I had a conversation about this whole issue with someone recently, who gave his rather frank, candid opinion about it, and it was something like this: it’s all about being worldly/living a worldly life – and within that, it’s often about sex. He thought that it was absolutely not debatable that throughout the history of the Church, clerics have always been required to be continent, and that where clerics are not continent, it is an outright refusal to give their lives wholly to God and to give up worldly pleasures, not to mention against canon law.

            He’s probably right, though obviously in general, “being worldly” is a problem with every single person who ever lived…haha…not just clerics. I guess the difference is that clerics have (been) chosen to bring the responsibility of a flock upon their shoulders and are therefore, in a certain sense, held to a higher standard and should be expected to live less worldly lives, including being continent if they are married.

            Anyway, thank you again for the reply – good to get the perspective from an actual deacon.

      • And since he wouldn’t use contraception, you would think, he may have many many children within his married life. What time for study, prayer, pastoral visits would he have to be a truly good priest?

        • I was not until I was married and had a child that I fully understood why the Latin Church requires celibacy of its priests…

    • Not quite. The ancient immemorial tradition of Major Orders in both east and west in the primitive Church was continence. This is seen in Canon 3 of Nicaea and matches St. Jerome’s description of the continence of the Greek clerics in the East, as well. Enforcement of the discipline laxed in both East and West but the law was never changed. This was eventually condoned in the East at the Quinisext Council in 692 while the west would reinforce its discipline… and let it lapse again until Gregory VII put a definitive end to it.

      Note also that St. Bede the Venerable called the Quinisext council a “reprobate synod” and the Pope, Sergius I, said he would rather die than accept its decrees.

        • It was Patriarch Maximos of the Melkites who had a large hand in persuading Paul VI to restore the diaconate in the west on the basis that it had been discussed at the Council of Trent. He had some ulterior motives for doing so, mind you.

    • It might be proper to consider a change in the discipline due to there being married priests in the eastern rites and in exceptions in the Latin as well. Even so, I suspect many would advocate for such a change more because the thought of someone willingly going without sex is simply too much to bear than because of any other more theological-sounding reason.

      • This is the problem with “exceptions”. Too many people don’t bother to learn what the specifics are, and think that one “exception” opens the door to many others. The RC priest knows, going in, what the expectations are. There are no surprises. Let them go to the Eastern Rite if marriage is what they want. I am tired of the expectations of the ill-informed and the selfish that the Church has to change. The Church has been the source of truth for thousands of years, and she will continue to be so, by the grace of her founder, Our Lord Jesus Christ.

    • OK, here we go again:

      1) Eastern Catholic *priests* cannot marry! What the Eastern Catholic Churches *do* allow is for MARRIED MEN TO BE ORDAINED PRIESTS. There is a BIG DIFFERENCE between the two!

      If a man is ordained celibate – both in the East and West – HE CANNOT MARRY. This is the constant and unchanging Tradition of the Church.

      So if anyone says that Eastern Catholic *priests* can marry, it’s patently false.

      2) If a married man wants to become a priest, he must first ask the permission of his wife. If she says yes, they both undergo formation – he in the seminary and she receives special formation. If she says NO, that’s the end of it. Plus, he cannot force her to consent. Her consent must be free.

      True story: When my pastor was in the seminary, a woman with 5 children knocked on the door and asked to see the bishop. The bishop came and asked her what she wanted. “Bishop, I want my husband back.” The bishop investigated the matter, and it was found that the man in question had not obtained his wife’s permission to enter the seminary. The reason why he left her? He heard in church the Gospel which says:

      And every one that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall possess life everlasting. (St. Matthew)

      He took the Gospel literally and left his wife and children.


      3) Married priests and their wives have to abstain from the conjugal act the night before the priest offers Liturgy. So if a priest has 4 funerals, 2 weddings and has to offer the Divine Liturgy on Sunday, that’s one week without marital relations.
      And if I remember right, celibacy is actually mandatory for a married priest and his wife. I GUARANTEE you that most RC women wouldn’t approve of that one! (And if she’s involved in the parish, they probably wouldn’t have time for it anyway imho.)

      3) If a priest’s wife dies, he is forbidden to remarry, since Christ has one Spouse and that is the Church (c.f. Ephesians 5: 22 et seq.). If there are children, that makes it more complicated.

      There are other rules and regulations which married priests must follow which do not apply to celibate priests and vice versa. If I find out more, I will edit my post accordingly.

      Honestly, if Roman Catholics knew what married Eastern Catholic priests have to go through, they’d get down on their knees and thank God that they have celibate priests.


      Full disclosure: My pastor is a Ukrainian Greek Catholic married priest. He has 2 parishes, is an on-call chaplain at local hospitals and loves gardening. Pani (pronounced Pah-nee; it’s the title for the wife of a priest) is very sweet and I love her very much.

      • Yes, we know. Gamgee didn’t even suggest otherwise.

        But you confuse celibacy and continence.

        I think the current discipline of the Latin Church is wise.

      • Rules shmules!!

        We all know that the ones clamoring for married priesthood are the same ones who will ignore and condemn whatever rules are set up for them, especially yhe ones about how it’s one man and one woman…

        Better to leave things as they are and weather this historical storm.

        The real reason behind the demand for married priests is the march toward homosexual marriage.

        and the real reason Bergy wants to allow the communion for serial adulterers is so his married priests and their second and third “wives” can offer and receive communion like Methodists.

      • According to Dr. Ed Peters, the 1983 Code leaves unchanged the Western Church’s requirement of perfect and perpetual continence for ALL clerics. I.e., all deacons are required, exactly as are priests, by tradition and canon law to practice perpetual, perfect continence. Including all married deacons.

  3. Lamenting Francis’s election in its immediate wake, a member of the Jesuit order whose name escapes me stated that everywhere Bergoglio went, he created pro-Bergoglio and anti-Bergoglio factions. We–still less the cardinal electors who clearly did not do their homework–have no right to be surprised.

    • I certainly do. One, I had no idea who were the “contenders” for the papacy following the surprising resignation of a living pope. Two, had I known who the contenders were by name, I certainly would not have known all about them. Three, had I known the contenders and all about them, I still wouldn’t have gotten a vote at the conclave.

      So, yes, I have every right to be surprised that we have a pope viciously attacking 2000 years of morals, tradition and teaching at every turn.

      • For too literal. “We,” as in the Church, heard a great many voices immediately following Bergoglio’s election. The post by Rorate Caeli entitled “The Horror,” which was sharply criticized at the time, is breathtaking in its accuracy:

        “Of all the unthinkable candidates, Jorge Mario Bergoglio is perhaps the worst. Not because he openly professes doctrines against the faith and morals, but because, judging from his work as Archbishop of Buenos Aires, faith and morals seem to have been irrelevant to him.

        ….Famous for his inconsistency (at times, for the unintelligibility of his addresses and homilies), accustomed to the use of coarse, demagogical, and ambiguous expressions, it cannot be said that his magisterium is heterodox, but rather non-existent for how confusing it is.”

        Is there a word of this that has not been repeatedly verified?

        • Truly, he does not seem to care one whit about faith or morals.

          I still remain immovably shocked at his tagging of the self-celebrated serial murderer of 10,000 dead babies as “One of Italy’s Greats”. Ditto his standing shoulder-to-shoulder with the Lesbo-Lutherans of Lund, his flagrant and manifest misquoting of Jesus in EG 161, and oh, so many more things…

          He seems totally oblivious to simple human integrity as if nothing at all on earth matters except being “rigorous” in one’s faith or committing the grave made up “sin against ecumenism” of seeking to convert the lost. It’s as if one should, in the event one finds oneself conquering personal moral failures, go get drunk and see a whore just so’s not to be too perfect. And I really am not sure that is an exaggeration!

          I do not trust the man and I warn others against listening to him lest they follow his teaching and give up the Catholic faith or just as bad, steer clear of it.

          I would not allow the man near my grandson. And I do not think I am alone in that sentiment.

          And this man is a POPE?

          It is truly agonizing to say it, but sincerely, no wonder the Protestants level the harshest of accusations against us!

  4. It is pathetic that this formal response eschews any actual discussion of the theological points at issue. And the notion that “compassion and not the law shall have the last word” is truly frightening. God’s “law” is not some thing separating people from “compassion.” God’s law is the path to salvation. God’s mercy is delivered through the Sacraments, and those Sacraments are established and governed by God’s law. One cannot take refuge from God’s law. God’s law is the refuge. Sanctifying grace is restored to repentant sinners in the Sacrament of Reconciliation, according to the law. To suggest that compassion requires putting God’s law aside is to entirely misunderstand both God and the Church.

  5. Wow…

    The obsequient, sycophantic tone of the open letter is nauseating…to say nothing of the errors being promoted and supported

  6. Praise God!!!

    It’s about time!.

    Since converting to the Catholic Church I have been, almost on a daily basis, shocked at what I can only describe as a pervasive culture of deceit and dis-ingenuousness that I find everywhere.

    It’s like this.

    Before Francis, “Everybody” among the priests and prelates was ostensibly “orthodox”. Dissidents were sneaky. They didn’t often puke out straightup heresy, they just dodged and weaved and marginalized teaching, downplayed it or ignored it.

    Enter Bergoglio.

    Now, the traitors to Christ are bold and unafraid to spew their venom and it is growing. The Catholic Church in the developed world is now the spittin’ image of where the Episcopalians were just a few years ago. Really, we are now a MIRROR IMAGE of Liberal Mainlinism. You might say the Bergoglian “Church” Paradigm is that of one big twisted mess of grunting and squealing Persons squirming around in the same theological sleeping bag with the United Methodists, the Lutherans and the Episcopalians.

    Cathometholutheranglicism is what we have become in our public image.

    In a way, that’s good.

    I have been waiting for a fight to brew. Now it is true that we among the orthodox are led by pansies and sissies and our “leaders” show utterly no inclination to bring the fight to defeat heresy and defend the faith to the heretics, but I’ll take luck over skill any day so I am glad this Rogue’s Gallery of doctrinal scum is eagerly bringing the fight to us.

    Let them.

    It will force sides to be taken and in the end, those who affirm the truth will be forced to stand up. Over time the sifting of the Church will occur and the confusion of a “Pretend Church” that used to reign when “everybody” was “orthodox” will be a thing of the past.

    One good Pope who is courageous enough to sign a very long list of excommunications and laicizations and interdicts and we just night get back in the business of bringing the Gospel of Jesus Christ to a world that is dying to hear it.

    We need prelates to name names. We need bishops who will cal for the laicization of priests and excommunications to-boot.

    The Affirm but don’t condemn” model cooked up by Pope john XXIII as expounded upon in his opening address to Vatican 2 is a wholly manifest failure.

    I look forward to the fight and I sincerely hope this attack will get one going.

    • “I HATE the fakeness that exists everywhere in the Catholic Church.”

      The other day, meeting with a group of friends, I was talking to an old friend who is a priest, and I could tell he defintely felt on the defensive among us. He got to talking about the “psychology of conversion” because I had brought up Hell. I had asked the assembled friends to use one word for Our Lord. What would they use? None used “Savior”. “Lord” yes, “Son of God” and so on. (Three words but we counted that as one.) I made the not-often-made point that Absolute Being, Being Itself with a capital “B” went to the infinitely amazing feat of becoming a human being, suffering, dying, establishing the Holy Eucharist by which we are saved, and then rising again – and He did all that to save us from Hell. It’s the point to the whole religion! Yet the Vat2 Church never mentions Hell.

      So my friend started talking how that sort of palaver turns people off; that one shouldn’t mention Hell, though he did insist he preaches on it annually in a specific liturgical season each year: on the Four Last Things, he said (in Lent, I suppose). His psychology of conversion comment brought two things to my mind: First, Chesterton’s famous, “You can’t study men; you can only get to know them,” and second, the catty comment (which I didn’t say) “Your psychology of conversion hasn’t worked out too well these past 60 years, has it?”

      But I could see the system had gotten to him. The very idea of trying to witness Christ with Psych 101 nostrums rattling around in one’s head is so ugh.

      Ugh. Just ugh.

      And anyway, whatever happened to St. Matthew 10:19?


      • “the catty comment (which I didn’t say) ‘Your psychology of conversion hasn’t worked out too well these past 60 years, has it?’ ”

        It’s been a complete and utter failure and we need to directly confront every priest or bishop who is a convert to this rubbish with that very fact.

        Right now I see red.

        So many Catholics have suffered this garbage for so long. converts like me come to the faith only to find it doesn’t really exist except in pockets.

        Many cradlers and converts have paid substantial prices for holding to the true faith while our leaders have chased after every damnable pseudo-gospel out there.

        I hope a fight is coming. I PRAY for it.

        This “let’s pretend” is exhausting.

        • “Lets get ready to rumble”…
          But as a general warning, we must be aware of the sanctimonious spirit we creatures are vulnerable to
          and remind ourselves that we fight for Love, with Love, and by Love.
          Spiritual pride is a very sneaky invader…..( just a thought )

        • “Converts like me come to the faith only to find it doesn’t really exist except in pockets.”

          That’s always been true, RodH. Nuthin’ new.

          There’s an old saying that the traditional list of Irish saints is merely a list of the only Christians in Ireland at that time! St Jerome made a similar comment that once the Faith was the official religion of the Empire, then one couldn’t push one’s way through a room without bumping into all sorts of clerics who only took their jobs to position themselves for Imperial promotion.

          I’m sure all these bishops/priests or whoever kissing Ol’ El Bergo’s feet are the same.

          What IS new, radically so, is their open contempt for the Teachings of the Faith. You see it all over the place. What we have to do is live like the saints (Irish or otherwise) and St Philip Neri is a good example, so is St. Francis de Sales, who said “Cook the truth in charity until it tastes sweet.” We definitely have to fight, but we need to fight smart.

          I’m sure I could find a Sun Tzu quote to the effect that you know your enemy, his terrain, and use his weaknesses to your advantage. The Progs are a humorless bunch of Narcissistic moralizers: pompous nitwits, actually, sorely lacking in actual learning (Bergi is a great example of that!) who do nothing but maneuver for “moral superiority” over us “backward, rigid Trads”. So, educate yourself to what the Faith is, turn the tables on these Pharisees (they’re bad Pharisees, as opposed to Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus). And…laugh (as opposed to yell) at them. Laugh – I suppose I mean chuckle – smile politely, chuckle bemusedly at ’em and their posing. They’re ridiculous. Let ’em know you know.

          Dangerous, too, they are oh yes, But you can be dangerous to them, too. You do that in many ways, each suited to you. Find your strengths, and don’t forget that God fights for us. We’re not the ones who need a degree in psychology: the Spirit witnesses for us. And He is as near as our breath: “No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it.” Deut 30:14

          Knowledge. Patience, and Humor, these three, on a plate. And Faith is the plate. All those and “speaking the Truth in love” (Ephesians 4;15): that’s how God wins through us.

          And know that many are praying for you and this great task we’ve all be given.


      • “the catty comment (which I didn’t say) “Your psychology of conversion hasn’t worked out too well these past 60 years, has it?””

        Heaven is a place where one will never need to bite one’s tongue again…for all eternity… 😉

        • I’ve often wondered what the Church in this country would look
          like if policies and ‘pastoral approaches’ were linked to results.
          As it is today, our prelates and theologians can gas on and on
          about the latest pastoral or liturgical fad, and impose the stupidest
          things on their flocks, all without having to account for any of
          the resulting fallout.

          What would parish life look like if it were mandatory that every
          parish produce a certain number of vocations per capita, or face
          closure? What if a parish priest might be moved to a smaller, less
          prestigious or more remote parish if he didn’t meet his quota of
          baptisms, marriages and conversions? Or even better, what if
          our bishops had their voting privileges in the USCCB suspended
          if their diocese didn’t produce a certain number of vocations per
          capita? (After all, if such bishops can’t get it together in their own
          diocese, why should they be able to legislate policy for the
          Church in the rest of the country?) I daresay, linking pastoral
          practices to actual results and not ideology would probably put
          a quick end to a lot of the absurd liturgical and pastoral fads
          that keep cropping up, and focus our leadership on figuring out
          what actually works.

          I suspect that bogus “psychology of conversion” nonsense
          wouldn’t last long, were my dream to come to pass…

  7. Just remember, folks; these guys represent probably what is a BY FAR majority of “Catholics” today.

    What they support and promote IS the only thing most folks can see in the “Catholic Church” today.

    so don’t laugh it off.

    Get angry, and get ready, and may God bring this clear delineation to every parish and may the spiritual war begin!

    • This is, in part, due to the fact that wr are now in the third generation of Catholics raised under the proliferatrf errors of Vatican II and those which have since risen from the same.

  8. I mean, I could sit down and write a reasoned rebuttal of this lame screed but I just read the full list of signatories. Have y’all taken a look at it? Bar three or four exceptions, all of the signatories are Austrian or German! Do I need to say more? What a devastating condemnation of this dreck and far more powerful than anything which I could muster. Francis gets a big thumbs up from two places where the Catholic Church is on life support. I didn’t know there were that many Catholics remaining in those two countries. The losers who are currently presiding over empty pews and empty seminaries give their whole-hearted support to a man who wants to extend this carnage to the universal church. What a joke! These folks appear totally oblivious to the monumental irony of their endorsement of Francis. Austria and Germany are “ground zero” for post-Vatican II destruction of the faith and (thank goodness) will soon be Islamized and subject to sharia. Good riddance.

    Seriously, this is the beginning of the schism. We’ve had two opposing camps in the Church for many years but this is the first time it’s gone public and the polarizing figure of Francis is the cause. Not long now before the rupture is complete.

    • “I didn’t know there were that many Catholics remaining in those two countries”.

      Do you actually count these people as Catholics?

    • I am not sure that you are right to lump Austria and Germany together. Yes they speak the same language and yes, sadly they provide the majority of signatories to this letter. I think that the language is a part of the reason for that.

      However there is a difference.

      In Austria the VAST majority of those professing to be Christians are nominally at least Catholic. In the 2016 census, almost 60% of the WHOLE population were listed as Catholic. The last census in England showed about 7%.

      In most other Western Countries many of those would have long ago left the Catholic Church. What is the percentage in the USA? In New Zealand? (I assume from your name) these are the two places you know best.

      With a chosen at random Austrian more than 8 times more likely than an Englishman chosen at random to state that he is Catholic, it would seem a statistical certainty that there would be more “rebels” in the Austrian Church than in the English one.

      Indeed 7/8 members of the Austrian church could be rebels and there would still be as many (proportionately) “faithful Catholic” Austrians as there would be faithful Catholic Englishmen, and that is assuming that ALL English Catholics would be regarded as faithful. And I can assure you that there are probably no more than 2 English Bishops who would clearly and publicly meet that description. And there are plenty of Englishman who I would expect to sign that letter now that it’s translated!!! I assume that no one is pretending that all Catholic Americans are good and faithful too, despite there being a FAR lower than 60% of the population claiming to be Catholic. .

      Don’t forget too that whilst Austria does not (yet at least) have “gay marriage”, that it was legalised in oh-so-Catholic Ireland by a referendum of the whole population with the support of a number of Bishops and Priests and who now have a gay Prime Minister.

      Sure. Austrian Catholicism has its issues, but it may be that the biggest issue is that so many of its people claim to be Catholic.

      • How sad, you know?

        Some good young men out there who want to serve Christ in His priesthood, who joyously would cherish and wear the robes of the priesthood, as a symbol of fidelity to Christ and His Church and souls………….but they wait………now.

  9. “Inchworm, inchworn, measuring the theologeee-aaahns…”.

    C’mon, the Schism is forming up, and fast. RodH is right. Don’t laugh it off. But don’t get angry, either. Laugh at their harlequin masque. If we can’t laugh at their grotesque antics, we couldn’t laugh at the Three Stooges come again. Trads have a right to be angry, don’t get me wrong. But these Progs are so pathetic, it’s actually funny. However, aside from all such callowness on my part (mea culpa) had Trads practiced the good humor of so many saints, for instance St. Philip Neri, we would have buried the Vatican II Church 30 years ago.

    Now, it is utterly, blindingly obvious that it is doing us the favor of burying itself. We shouldn’t work up a sweat.

    Raghn Corvinus

    • You might have a care for those who do not have access to traditional communities and are bound to NO, which means VII churches. When it’s your only option it’s not nearly so funny.

      • I am one who is bound to NO. I travel 50 min. once a month to a Byzantine Church. My frustration is growing. I feel like an outcast at my local parish. Most Catholics (what I call Sunday Catholics) are oblivious to what’s going on or don’t seem to care. They think if the Pope says it, it must be true. I was once like them. Soon I may bite the bullet and join the Byzantine parish and make the drive every Sunday.

        • I would like to move my family but I have a job that provides enough that my wife gets to stay at home with our kids. It’s not easy. For me, it would be four-and-a-half to five hours on good reads, six hours in the winter, to get to an FSSP mass. Not a good situation.

        • Exact. Same. Boat.

          Baptised and Chrismated Byzantine Catholic – nearest church hours away. Two churches in town – one liberal, gay-marrying, nightmare liturgies (tamborines and all), the other middle-of-the-road-Archbshp. Chaput-type middle of the road novus ordo. Not really sure I see the point of any of it. Wonder if it would be best just to get mass once every month or so, or just put up with the heresy and indifference. Sad part is Pope Francis isn’t that novel, the church in the 70’s and 80’s (when I was a young man) was the same, not at the Pope level, but at the parish level. It’s just that Pope Francis appears to be trying to “own” the destruction and equivocation that was already present.

          • Fr Hesse (look for him on youtube) states you are exempted from the Sunday obligation if the Church does not provide the Mass of All Times in a reasonable distance.

      • Oh, I agree, Brian W. I spent what was it? Thirty years in Purgatory, otherwise known at the modern N.O. Mass. That no doubt sounds wicked to many but it was a purgatory. A misery. Suffering. (Only in Purgatory your suffering is part of your cleansing. So perhaps to some extent I’ve been a bit cleansed myself.)

        And I remember, my friend, when the priest at that parish I grew up in stopped using the beautiful marble altar rail. Like it was yesterday. He must have told people to line up instead of using the rail, and receive standing. But this one family kept going to the rail. Others did at first but they fell away and this one family stayed. I could tell you their names (wasn’t me; I kept losing myself in the beautiful windows of that church, which I wandered in since I first noticed them in childhood; but after what happened, I was ashamed that I didn’t protest).

        So this family, they kept going to the rail and the priest – I assume the moderators wouldn’t like me using his name, but this occurred in the Columbus, Ohio, diocese – kept this family till last: he wouldn’t give them Holy Communion till everyone else had theirs. And finally, I remember the day the priest just stopped giving them Holy Communion. He left them at the altar rail. Yes, he did.

        He ended up rewarded for his services by getting a plum assignment in Columbus itself, (in a ritzy suburb) and the next priest, who acted the gay blade (whether he was or not) tore out the altar rail.

        I grew up with that altar rail. It was a beautiful, subtle mottled grey-greenish (the Irish word is “glas” as in Dubhglas, the name) marble with sweet, humble, really, highlights of various colors. The new priest remodeled the entire sanctuary area, in fact, Tore out the side altars (same marble as the rail) and either used pieces of the rail or the old altars to make a new Vat2 altar. When people complained, he’d say, “Talk to the bishop! Talk to bishop!” We should have revolted. Pitchforks. Tar. Feathers. For the bishop and his “queen”. Actually, this guy was accused after all this was done with having an affair with a woman! He got shunted off into oblivion and the bishop retired back to Cleveland or from wherever he came.

        I left that church. I took my mother to the old school gym to Mass until the church was open again, and that was it. My brothers thereafter had to take her. (Mother and one brother now have died, and the remaining brothers no longer go to Mass at all.) It was a church in a county seat about a half an hour from Columbus, and my drive to Columbus was only 45-some minutes (too long for my mother). There in “the big city” I hung out at a conservative parish (which I formally joined) but spent my time with the Melkites in their heavenly liturgy. (I wish, I wish, I wish I were rich, for I’d have built them a proper church.) Then a TLM started up at an old downtown parish, started by a truly orthodox priest who saved that parish from extinction. The TLM was full every Sunday. I would have transferred to it but ended up leaving for Europe, where I’ve been living since. (The priest was not allowed to stay at the parish he saved, but the TLM continues there, at 8:30 a.m., though, an awkward time for a number of people, the older ones and families.)

        So, you are right, my good sir. Nothing to laugh about.

        Then again, what would have happened it we all had laughed out loud at the priest insisting on everyone lining up like lemmings? We should have stopped that then and there. Just sat there and laughed, and then all of us go to the rail! But we didn’t. It might seem cruel to laugh but it would have been cruel, far more so, to show what we really felt.

        I don’t normally (as in never) watch Michael Voris but a good friend insisted I observe this one episode he liked. i did, and Voris was talking about the coming collapse of the Church in the U.S., population-wise, and how not only parishes but entire dioceses will be closing, with archdiocese becoming mere dioceses, and so on.

        From my own experiences in the Vat2 Church, I know why that is happening. Exactly why.

        You know your own situation, of course, and I’m sure you’ve tried to organize a TLM in your area. Keep at it. The Vat2 Church is doing us the favor of burying itself. “Far-stretching, endless time reveals all hidden things and buries that which once did shine,” as Sophocles wrote long ago. (The Greeks knew everything.)


      • Hallo Brian, try We have been thus attending almost daily Mass on weekdays while on Sundays we go to a TLM some 30km away. For my fellow Catholics without this opportunity they can have at least the comfort of weekday Mass. If you acquire a copy of the Roman Missale, you can follow every prayer and handling to the last detail. Pray the Mass! in the fullest sense.

      • I wrote up a reply to you, Brian W, but the system deleted it, and I assume because it was too large. I’ll put it up on my blogspot at:
        later today. But believe me, I know very well how we’ve been treated and ARE treated now, and it ain’t funny.

        But they do what they do in large part to “get your goat” so when you laugh at them, it’s 180 degrees opposite of what they expect. A bit of psychological warfare tossed back at ’em.


  10. Fast forward a few year’s and the ” dream ” they have of the Church being “a Mother and Shepherdess”
    is developed ” naturally ” to give rise via the “God of surprises” to the celebration of lesbian priestesses
    administering the Sacraments.

    I would like to remind these “heroes of the revolution” that the Church already has its female distinction as

  11. Such substance-free, sycophantic droolings.

    To paraphrase Antonin Scalia: If I ever wrote anything like that, I would hide my head in a bag.

  12. “Progressive Catholics Launch Defense Initiative Against Filial Correction” Should be changed to “Apostate Catholics Launch Defense Initiative Against Filial Correction”

    • Oh, but ‘dreaming’ is correct usage of terms of his worshipers. He said in his speech at audience on 30.08. this:
      “God wants from us — while we are on the road and are attentive to the reality of life — to be able to dream, like Him and with Him. To dream about a different world. If the dream cease — dream it again — returning with hope to the original memories…”
      And again, in his catechesis during Wednesday audience on 18. May, pope Francis called God in the grammatical present “a dreamer who dreams about the transformation of the world”. At the same time he claimed that God “has realised the transformation of the world in the mystery of the resurrection.”
      Sooo…, he believes that our almighty Triune God is a dreamer!?

      • God the Dreamer.

        I’m pretty sure there is no more heretical concept than that.

        And yet, Bergoglio isn’t a heretic because Popes can’t be heretics, etc, etc, etc….

        • Exactly. And indeed, they could be right with that,- pope can not be heretic, as the we can say other way the heretic cannot be(come) a pope. In fact a heretic can’t be even a Catholic, not even catholic peasant, so to say. But there are many who still think and speak about some kind of legitimate election in 2013… Many among us too, still, instead they do some (better) job in searching the truth…
          PS. This is what I saw just a half hour ago. And I wonder,- why this came out to the public so late!?
          “Father Bergoglio Was Not Allowed To Say Mass in Public”

          And,- what’s next? Can’t wait!
          We must keep pressure and share the Gospel and every other common truth. Until we drop dead. Living the Faith that way, I am sure the last hour of our earthly life will be the sweetest one we’ve had in this life.

          • One way or another, I do not see how this entire pontificate can escape absolute and total condemnation.

            If it does, I will be completely confused.

          • I believe there will be a repudiation of the heresies being spread by this pontificate. Pray for Cardinal Burke, pray he shall have solid support. This is not really personal about Francis; it is about the Church, the faith, the papacy, the Magisterial teachings, the Sacraments. If it was only about Francis: it would be easy.

        • And, by many writings of the Saints and past Doctors and popes, known heretics cannot be validly elected the Roman pontiff. To say otherwise is to engage in what I call intellectual hipocrisy.

      • He is putting his eggs in the wrong basket, isn’t he?

        Let us stay awake, dear Lord! I fear, if I fall asleep in my anxieties, I shall succumb as well.

        • Waste of time – he’s been putting broken eggs in a very holey basket. ~Now he’s scrambling the mess over a good hot fire………no prizes for source of the fire :-))

  13. Our Lady’s prophetic words at Akita on Oct 13, 1973, are coming true —
    “The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, bishops against bishops. The priests who venerate me will be scorned and opposed by their confreres…churches and altars sacked; the Church will be full of those who accept compromises and the demon will press many priests and consecrated souls to leave the service of the Lord.

    “The demon will be especially implacable against souls consecrated to God. The thought of the loss of so many souls is the cause of my sadness. If sins increase in number and gravity, there will be no longer pardon for them”

  14. It’s all rah rah rah …. no specific and articulate defense of AL, just “we won so get in line with it” as if this is plain politics and not
    about the Truth. Their response is banal and vain …. but here we are.

  15. It would mean a lot more if they could dis-prove any of the points on Correctio Filialis. It doesn’t matter who or how many sign it. As far as I know, the Dubia and Correcto Filialis stand unopposed. The current situation will not stand the test of time. Lord help us.

  16. Quite a crew here.
    Particularly edified by the Jesuit’s abandonment of clerical attire – it is good to see some effort at veracity.
    What drives such individuals to promote protestant “theology” in a Catholic setting? Would it not be far more efficient to officially jump ship and become some sort of protestant? Or join the local
    ethical cultural society? Or get a job that requires some virile application.
    Fraudulence meted out as gospel.
    Ah, the salaries. The perks. The notoriety of being a bad-boy cutting-edge progressive in an
    institution that has its head stuck in the Middle Ages. That’s a way to stand out in a crowd. The contrarian pose is ever so attractive on the scholarly academic, on the ecclesiastic who
    has some regrets about “life choices.”
    It would be easy to say this entire clique – and it is indeed a huge clique – requires therapy – but since they left the habitation of theology long ago for the consolation of the soft sciences, it would appear to be a counterproductive suggestion.
    The expeditious solution is to withdraw the salaries, the tenure, the perks and the jacked up
    ecclesiastical abode of the Teutonic lads – and their global sympathizers.
    Utterly tragic.

  17. We will see, won’t we, if Pope Francis will respond (directly, by intimation, or proxy) to this “reaching out” – or not.

    If he does, with paternal affection – even with a quibble or two, while ignoring all others – will speak (how is it put) volumes. In short, when he goes it will have closed the door. Done, there’ll be no more conversations, with any petitioner, ever. Unless it is had (maybe) in the middle of Fr Martin’s gay-timbered bridge!

    Frankly, Francis should respond, be frank with us,; that way we will know where we stand – where he does.

    The signatories of this statement must have convinced themselves that their statement washes out the effect of ours. Maybe Pope Francis is swimming the same wishing waters.

    Has Francis ever gone fishing? Had he, he’d know the telling signs of trash fish: their dull stumpy fins, lack of sparkle on their scales, and, mostly, their boney taste. Why waste a first-light morning or long-shadowed evening casting one’s bread with the likes of these. Give me a Sierra golden trout sheltering among the upstream boulders – cousin to those netted on the Sea of Galilee.

    A beach breakfast. Maybe Francis has never tasted iits brisk, fortifying deliciousness!

    So be it. Still, Pope Francis must respond, give his truest heart voice. There’s comfort in that, of a sort; a clarifying honesty. Hearing it we’ll know our next move.

    Which is . . .later. Gone fishin’.

  18. Has anyone seen the fiasco in Lyon Francis. If not having communion makes you “feel bad” just “take it!” So says the archbishop. And I thought Amoris Laetitiae only was for Latino ladies raising five kids alone after being abandoned by an abusive coke lord gang member? That’s what we were told…. Now it’s burgeious French people who just shacked up like Laurent in this article.

    • This coming out of the mouth of a Cardinal:

      “If someone can no longer stand not taking communion and because of this internal suffering, finally decides to stop attending Mass, it would be absurd and inhumane to continue to withhold it from them.”

      The Cardinal reiterated that “for some people, the path of faith necessarily includes taking communion, while for others, it is enough to participate in Mass without communion, like Charles Péguy”.

  19. “Dear Highly esteemed Pope Francis”……… that is pharisaical! These dissidents and brood of vipers would use ANYONE who they think will further their modernist agenda. I can hear the hissing and the slithering. They were dissidents BEFORE Francis and they will be heretical dissidents after Francis.

  20. This letter is so funny. You know it’s gotten bad when the ageing hippie crowd has to reassure the Pope, “It’s okay— keep going! Your papacy is theologically sound! It really, really is! We assure you!” ????????????

    • Yes funny, and truly pathetic that they could only muster 100 signatories.
      Actually back in 2003 about 250 German apostate theologians signed a “manifesto” called “Kirchenaufbruch jetzt!” (“Church breakout now!”), in which they clamored for an end to priestly celibacy, women priests, recognition of sodomitic unions and liturgical free.for all.
      This idiotic manifesto is still on the rounds. To date they have the support of 68,000 lay Catholics, many of whom are now probably either dead or have long since left the Church.
      So gathering signatures is something the Gerrie apostate Catholics like to do. But it seems they had better hurry up before they are all dead.

  21. The theological depth of their letter is simply earth shattering. But it’s yet another clear indicator, as if we needed another one, of the (interim) success of Satan’s onslaught on the Bride of Christ. The Rhine has flooded the Tiber. But it won’t be forever as we know.

  22. Heretic theologians giving support to a material heretic Pope. Why am I not surprised!

    Perhaps these heretics would be more fruitful in their work if they prayed and worked for the restoration of the Church in Germany, rather than allowing it to continue its relentless path towards self-destruction.

  23. By many writings, papal bulls, and other esteemed documents of the Catholic Church, Saints, past Doctors and popes, known heretics cannot be validly elected as a Roman Pontiff. To say otherwise is to engage in what I call “Intellectual Hipocrisy”. I find it personally astonishing that those who advocate the position that Francis is a validly elected pope hold on their positions. I am not advocating in any way for the Sede’s. However, so many people continue to uphold and support all the great Doctors and popes of the past regarding whether or not a known heretic can remain Catholic AND get elected pope by the College of Cardinals. It is well known that Bergoglio espoused heretical views and teachings his entire priesthood and as cardinal archbishop of Buenes Aries. How can one support one position while supporting the other when they both contradict one another!? Food for thought. Perhaps Fr. RP can chime in with a few thoughts.

  24. When I read articles like this, I think of Cardinal Ottaviani’s remark at Vatican II: “I pray God to allow me to die before the end of this Council. Thus, at least I shall die a Catholic.” (

    In my case, at the age of 73, I paraphrase that comment: “I pray God to allow me to die before this pope creates any more wreckage in the Church. Thus at least I shall die a Catholic.”

    • C’mon folks, it doesn’t work like that.

      Once these Progs, these Modernists, go far enough, and they went that limit back in 1968, actually, when so many “Catholics” rejected Humanae Vitae, they’re no longer Catholics. And I DON’T say that to somehow judge their eternal salvation. God does that. He will judge them according to His Word, which is a sword. (Rev 19:15) Their eternal salvation is not my business. Don’t tell me I’m being spiritual proud, arrogant, or a “triumphant Catholic” either, (according to the Vat2 elites, that tatter one is the worse thing you can be). It’s like math. 2 + 2 does not equal 5, no matter how high the cleric who insists it does. A club has rules, and if you break the rules then you forfeit club membership. You can renounce citizenship in effect by selling secrets to the enemy or whatever. You lose driving privileges when you “drink and drive” and so on and on.

      No, I’m simply stating a fact: Catholics can believe a wide range of things, but there’s a point when they go far enough that they cease being Catholics and become whatever: Prots, pantheists, pagans, Buddhists, JWs, Mormons, or nothing much at all. It’s a lot like Irish history: the English invade, set up a rule, and then have the gall to tell the rebellious Irish that they’re traitors!

      We’ve been invaded, out maneuvered in a classic “war of position” that’s now a “war of maneuver”. Their “long march” through the Church’s institutions is over. They’re out in the open.

      And the time is fast approaching when formal Schism is declared. That’s as plain as those gay paintings on the walls of that goofy perv bishop back in Italy. Plain for all to see.


      • I agree.

        But you know, many believe “Once a Catholic Always a Catholic” is the Free Get Out Of Jail Card that gives them standing on earth to affirm whatever doctrine they care to and still remain a “Catholic”.

        The only way that whole culture can be cleaned up is with rigorous discipline. Excommunications, laicizations, interdicts. I really see no other way.

        It is hard to fathom a Pope being elected who will assert such a plan of salvation.

        • “that horse has bolted” am afraid, if they failed to do the consecration of Russia pre-V2 what hope
          a campaign of substantial discipline in the future..
          too many rotten apples on the tree now, serious pruning ahead.

        • I agree too, RodH. Very hard to imagine a pope being elected who would do the necessary. Scylla and Charybdis. We’re on the horns of a dilemma. But then again, I think the forces at work are raging, actually, and pressure is building as in a runaway steam engine. Something has got to blow.

          And soon.

  25. Signs of the schism. Of course they don’t deal with the heretical issues, just practice papolatry. What is good about the list is that we get names of heresy supporting “catholics.”

  26. Hmmmmm, this is Papal worshipping instead of worshipping The Word of God Jesus Christ:

    “Every one that putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and he that marrieth her that is put away from her husband, committeth adultery.”
    [Luke 16:18]

    The Papacy of Francis the Great is really about worshipping the Sex Organ.

  27. These people are on the back foot. The have no positive agenda, but are merely reacting to the definite statements of Correctio Filialis. It is a copy-cat gesture, the irony being that imitation is a type of compliment. In the end they will fail. The Correctio rests on the rock of Catholic Faith, that has endured from age to age. They only have ‘dreams’. Their house is built on sand. It will fall.


Leave a Comment

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

Popular on OnePeterFive

Share to...