“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be “cured” against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.”
― C.S. Lewis, God in the Dock: Essays on Theology
As I sat down to write this, I immediately found myself thinking of the above quote by C.S. Lewis. Of course, I don’t find it entirely applicable. I think today’s moral busybodies — particularly those aligned with the hard left or with theological and moral progressivism — are actually not more likely to go to Heaven, though they certainly make a hell of earth.
As the Four Cardinals Letter and the associated commentary by Cardinal Burke about a possible need for “formal correction” of the pope now ring out like a shot heard ’round the world, I have been revisiting the developments of the past seven months since the promulgation of Amoris Laetitia (AL). While Pope Benedict XVI will always be remembered for his opposition to the Dictatorship of Relativism, Pope Francis will instead be known for his imposition of a Dictatorship of Mercy. The new, anti-Catholic realities imagined by his magnum opus exhortation — ushered in under the false auspices of a pseudo “mercy” that is permissive, flaccid, and empty — will be forced upon you whether you want them or not. And you will like it.
Like many nascent tyrannies, the process of oppressively undermining the sacraments of Holy Matrimony, Confession, and the Holy Eucharist began under a pretense of openness and honesty. Recall the opening remarks of Pope Francis at the 2014 Synod:
One general and basic condition is this: speaking honestly. Let no one say: “I cannot say this, they will think this or this of me…”. It is necessary to say with parrhesia all that one feels. After the last Consistory (February 2014), in which the family was discussed, a Cardinal wrote to me, saying: what a shame that several Cardinals did not have the courage to say certain things out of respect for the Pope, perhaps believing that the Pope might think something else. This is not good, this is not synodality, because it is necessary to say all that, in the Lord, one feels the need to say: without polite deference, without hesitation. And, at the same time, one must listen with humility and welcome, with an open heart, what your brothers say. Synodality is exercised with these two approaches.
This is a theme that he again repeated in the post-synodal apostolic exhortation itself (pp. 3-4):
I would make it clear that not all discussions of doctrinal, moral or pastoral issues need to be settled by interventions of the magisterium. Unity of teaching and practice is certainly necessary in the Church, but this does not preclude various ways of interpreting some aspects of that teaching or drawing certain consequences from it. This will always be the case as the Spirit guides us towards the entire truth (cf. Jn 16:13), until he leads us fully into the mystery of Christ and enables us to see all things as he does. Each country or region, moreover, can seek solutions better suited to its culture and sensitive to its traditions and local needs. For “cultures are in fact quite diverse and every general principle… needs to be inculturated, if it is to be respected and applied”.
[…]
The various interventions of the Synod Fathers, to which I paid close heed, made up, as it were, a multifaceted gem reflecting many legitimate concerns and honest questions. For this reason, I thought it appropriate to prepare a post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation to gather the contributions of the two recent Synods on the family, while adding other considerations as an aid to reflection, dialogue and pastoral practice, and as a help and encouragement to families in their daily commitments and challenges.
Throughout the process, we were assured again and again of an open, informal process of dialogue and discussion that encouraged honesty and openness without fear of retribution. We were assured that these were merely pastoral guidelines, and that even certain varying cultural contexts would change the way they would be interpreted and applied in different situations around the world.
Except none of that was true.
It wasn’t long after AL went to the presses that the batons and riot gear arrived on the scene. Within days of its release, Cardinal Walter Kasper, the chief advocate of this new “mercy”, said that AL had changed everything. And certainly, we saw immediate effects. There was the instant implementation of pastoral provisions for the remarried to receive communion by the Philippines Bishops Conference (the first of several such moves around the world). Supportive and enthusiastic statements from then-Archbishop Cupich and Cardinal Lehmann added energy to the adoption of the new paradigm. Advocacy for Communion for the remarried in a public statement issued by Italian priests showed that pastors were ready for a change.
Shortly thereafter, a group of European theologians — some of whom had ties to secret meetings in Rome during the Synod — proposed that it was time to “re-contextualize moral theology and canon law” in light of the exhortation.
Then, Cardinal Schönborn — to whom the pope entrusted the official interpretation of AL, said that the exhortation was magisterial — which, if Lumen Gentium 25 is to be believed, would therefore demand the “religious submission of mind and will” of the faithful.
Next, Archbishop Paglia — a Kasperite — was appointed to head the new Pontifical Academy for Life and the John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family. At the time, he said that the pope “clearly wants to continue the new course which emanates from the Synod of Bishops [on Marriage and the Family] and his encyclical [sic] Amoris Laetitia.” Two months later, in a series of simultaneous actions that sent a strong signal to those charged with educating the faithful about Church teaching on marriage, it was announced that the Melbourne campus of the JPII Institute was to be shut down, and Cardinal Robert Sarah was suddenly replaced by Pope Francis as the keynote speaker at the opening of the JPII campus in Rome — itself newly under the leadership of the Kasperite Monsignor Pierangelo Sequeri — where the Holy Father preached his new synodal doctrine of marriage.
Cardinal Sarah, who has stood firmly against innovations in both marriage doctrine and liturgy, then suffered a near-total purge of the membership of the Congregation for Divine Worship and Sacraments, of which he remains the titular head.
Still, criticism of AL mounted. Scholars and philosophers and theologians and experts from across the world spoke out. Men of such esteem as German Catholic philosophers Robert Spaemann and Josef Siefert, and American Catholic philosopher Jude P. Dougherty. Moral and dogmatic theologians like Dr. E. Christian Brugger and Dr. Jessica Murdoch. Catholic prelates like Cardinal Walter Brandmüller, Cardinal Carlo Caffara, and Bishop Athanasius Schneider. An international group of 45 Catholic theologians, pastors, historians, and scholars sent an in depth 13-page document to every one of the 218 Cardinals and Patriarch of the Church, enumerating 19 theological censures — some involving heresy — against plain interpretations of certain statements in the exhortation.
But The Dictatorship of Mercy was just getting started.
After a number of bishops in the Buenos Aires region released a document pertaining to the implementation of AL that included an option for communion for those living in adulterous relationships, Pope Francis personally affirmed their work in a letter, writing, “The document is very good and completely explains the meaning of chapter VIII of Amoris Laetitia. There are no other interpretations.” Pressed on the authenticity of the letter, the Vatican confirmed that it was, indeed, from the Holy Father.
Just ten days after reports of the papal letter emerged, the Cardinal-Vicar of the Diocese of Rome — the Pope’s own diocese — solemnly proclaimed guidelines for the implementation of AL that allowed communion for the remarried. He did so in the cathedral of St. John Lateran — the literal “seat” of St. Peter.
The following month, Cardinal-elect Kevin J. Farrell, the appointed head of a new Vatican division for Laity and Family, said that Amoris Laetitia “is the Holy Spirit Speaking”. “I honestly don’t see what and why some bishops seem to think that they have to interpret this document,” said Farrell. Meanwhile, Vatican insiders Andrea Tornielli and Giacomo Galeazzi launched a diatribe against papal critics, accusing them of being “dissidents” who “are anti-Francis but love [Russian President Vladimir] Putin.” Yesterday, Italian sociologist Massimo Introvigne — one of the primary quoted sources for the Tornielli/Galeazzi screed — posted on Facebook (with Andre Tornielli tagged) that he believes Cardinal Burke is now guilty of a Catholic “fundamentalism” that is “potentially schismatic”.
Which brings us, of course, to the present week. Bishop Marcello Semeraro — “secretary of the Council of 9 Cardinals chosen by Pope Francis to be his personal advisers” and bishop of Albano in Italy — has just given a speech on AL at the Jesuit Univeristy of Comillas in Madrid in which he said:
Amoris Laetitia surpasses the logic of “it is not possible – it is possible,” and introduces instead a “clear distinction between general rule and particular case.” Discernment and accompaniment are the key ingredients here, he added.
Regarding the regulation for Catholics who have entered a second civil union after a prior sacramental marriage (and civil divorce) to live as brother and sister in order to receive the sacraments, Bishop Semeraro qualified: “What would it mean that people who have children live as brother and sister? The step forward of Amoris Laetitia, with respect to Familiaris Consortio, is that they [the civilly remarried] can express their affection in their situation, and this is where the accompaniment and guidance of the spiritual director would enter into play.” He added with more clarity: “It is not a brother and sister relationship but a conjugal relationship. They are people who have children and have responsibilities in their relationship.” He claimed to support his interpretation with earlier Church magisterial teaching: “Gaudium et spes says that spouses who abstain from marital relations endanger their relationship and may commit infidelities.”
“Moral discernment by which one tries to know the will of God on a general level, valid for all, and what is good and what is bad” stands in opposition to the personal pastoral discernment that “helps me to know where I am, what is my situation,” the bishop explained.
Papal “mouthpiece” and close collaborator Fr. Antonio Spadaro, SJ, spewed his own venom at critics of AL this week, saying that, “The Pope has ‘clarified’. Those who don’t like what they hear pretend not to hear it!” In another tweet, since deleted but screen captured by Catholic journalist and deacon Nick Donnelly, Spadaro made a reference to the film version of J.R.R. Tokien’s Lord of the Rings, apparently referring to opponents as “witless worm(s)”.
Meanwhile, Cardinal-designate Kevin Farrell has also re-asserted his previous position in new comments, this time harshly criticizing one prominent U.S. bishop’s guidelines for the implementation of AL as causing “division”:
Philadelphia Archbishop Charles Chaput’s guidelines issued in July unequivocally state that divorced and civilly remarried Catholics may not receive Holy Communion unless they “refrain from sexual intimacy.” Chaput, who currently heads the U.S. bishops’ ad hoc committee for implementing the pope’s controversial Apostolic Exhortation, has stated that the document must be interpreted “within the tradition of the Church’s teaching and life.”
But Farrell, who was recently appointed by the pope to head the new Vatican Dicastery for Laity, the Family and Life, stated that he disagreed with Chaput’s position.
“I don’t share the view of what Archbishop Chaput did, no,” the cardinal-designate told Catholic News Service on Tuesday. “I think there are all kinds of different circumstances and situations that we have to look at — each case as it is presented to us,” he said.
“I think that is what our Holy Father is speaking about, is when we talk about accompanying, it is not a decision that is made irrespective of the couple,” he said, adding that while there is an “objective moral law” you will never find two couples who have the same reason for being divorced and remarried.
The Cardinal-designate said implementing the pope’s exhortation should be done “in communion” with all U.S. bishops, not by individual bishops.
Today, in a new report from Italy indicates that the Italian Bishops Conference — which met last weekend to discuss AL — has decided to allow communion for the divorced and remarried, and to take what many have long speculated is the next step for the organizers of the synods: the promotion of homosexuality within the Church.
Finally, as I already told you earlier this week, top Vaticanista Sandro Magister revealed just two days ago that there is an organization called Osservatorio per l’Attuazione della Riforma della Chiesa di Papa Francesco (Observatory for the Implementation of the Church Reform of Pope Francis) that is “Monitoring studies and teaching” of Catholic professors to see if it is in accord with AL. From Rorate Caeli’s translation of Magister’s post, we see the chilling email that the group has sent to some members of the Catholic academic community:
Dear Mr/Ms Professor
Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family
Pontifical Lateran University
Vatican CityAs has already happened and is happening for other pastoral, academic, and cultural Catholic institutions, our Observatory for the Implementation of the Church Reform of Pope Francis (OARCPF) – an initiative of a group of Catholuc lay people in support of the pontificate of Pope Francis – has begun in the current academic year the monitoring of the contents of publications of faculty and the teachings imparted [in class] in the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family in order to make clear the adaptations or eventual disagreements regarding the address made by Pope Francis on the occasion of the opening of the new academic year of your Institute (Sala Clementina, October 28, 2016), in which you were called “to support the necessary opening of the intelligence of the faith in the service of the pastoral solicitude of the Successor of Peter.”
In particular, the contents of published works and the imparted classes will be taken into consideration in reference to what is expressed in the apostolic Exhortation “Amoris laetitia”, according to the image “of the Church that is, not of a Church thought in one’s own image and likeness,” orienting research and teaching not anymore towards “a too abstract theological ideal of matrimony, almost artificially built, far from the concrete situation and from the effective possibilities of families as they are” (Pope Francis, mentioned address, October 28, 2016).
To this end, we will make use of the analytical and critical reading of the studies published by the faculty, of the theses of graduation and doctorate approved by the Institute, of the syllabus of classes of of their bibliographies, as well as interviews of students made after classes, in the square in front of the Lateran University.
Certain that we are doing a useful task to improve the service that you perform with dedication to the Church and to the Holy Father, we keep you up to date on the results of our observational study.
This is war.
I have heard reports that the Vatican is like an occupied state. Certain sources I’ve spoken with have a fear that communications with Vatican officials are being monitored; some have even reported suspicious anomalies in their telephone conversations in which, after a dropped call, the audio of the last moments of their conversation has played over and over again on a loop, as though they are hearing a recording. Some individuals who work within the Vatican are advising their contacts on the outside not to share sensitive information via email or their Vatican-issued cell phones.
If it sounds surreal, bizarre, and conspiratorial, I agree. But what could be more bizarre than a pope needing to be confronted for his forceful promulgation of what could reasonably be construed as heresy?
I do not expect that things will slow down anytime soon. Reports have now surfaced that Pope Francis will, for the first time, avoid spending time with the curia before this weekend’s consistory in which the newly created cardinals will be officially elevated. Marco Tosatti speculates that this may very well be a tactic for the pope to avoid having the dubia about AL presented to him in person. He does not want to answer. He does not feel that he needs to.
You see, The Dictatorship of Mercy demands your complete obsequience. Resistance is futile.
UPDATE: In a postscript at his blog, Sandro Magister indicates that it was discovered that the letter from the “Observatory for the Implementation of the Church Reform of Pope Francis” was an initiative created by a group of students, and not something with an origin within the official machinery of the Vatican. Says Magister, “It remains a sign of what today is a pervasive, inquisitorial animosity against those who are not considered in line with the current pontificate.”
“The pope’s exhortation should be done in communion with all other U.S. bishops, not as an individual”. Well, why don’t we start with Humanae Vitae, in communion with all the bishops of the world?
You have a point. You can’t like a unilateral decision for one, but complain about one you don’t like, even if the latter could be heresy–not regarding whether a pope should be able to make or reestablish binding declarations on his own. That being said, contraception ban would have stood regardless that Pope Paul 6 agreed with it.
Great tie together of some of the major developments in this on going crisis afflicting our Holy Mother the Church. Here is a good link to an english report of Tossati’s reporting about the Pope running scared from the Cardinals and actually canceling his meeting with all of them prior to the consistory (unheard of violation of protocol and a neglect/insult to the entire College of Cardinals): http://www.ewtn.co.uk/news/holy-see/in-wake-of-rejection-of-dubia-pope-francis-cancels-meeting-with-cardinals
Is the Pope running away to avoid scary Cardinals, perhaps he knows something: like they plan on rebuking him to his face tomorrow? I am speculating that they may meet anyway without him and issue a rebuke…
We need to pray this evening for the entire (or at least majority of the) College of Cardinals to defend the Faith tomorrow and issue the Rebuke.
Let them rebuke him in abstentia, then. If this pontiff is not man enough to face the consequences of his own actions, then that speaks volumes about his character, or lack thereof.
“When Kephas came to Antioch, he was clearly in the wrong and I would have rebuked him to his face but he ran away and hid in the house of James with the other Judaizers, so I never could.”
#ThingsPaulNeverSaid
I needed that good belly laugh, thank you.
Too funny LOL
If Pope Francis refuses to personally render yes/no answers, I imagine the 4 Cardinals will press forward. If they grow to 8 or 16 then the Pope is cornered. I imagine whatever their size, the Pope will dismiss them. Then we shall see how many Catholics remain believers in Doctrine and Holy Tradition set forth by Christ. As I wrote before, Pope Francis’ problem isn’t the “Doctors” of the Church, Jesus Christ
I rather believe that the masses will follow (sheeps led astray) and only a “remnant” will remain in the real Catholic – founded by Jesus- Church. The church has to suffer its own passion like Jesus did. Even BXVI said it before stepping down
Fr RP, he cancels because he can. PERIOD. He doesn’t have to face the Cardinals. So what if it’s an unheard of violation of protocol, he does not give a monkey’s. But I will pray like you said we should.
It is not unheard of. Recent popes have done the same thing. There is enough horror without seeing it in every movement at the Vatican. That said, I agree that it is very suspicious but it is not unprecedented.
Is there some provision in Canon law that, were the Pope to remain silent on a serious doctrinal issue and leave souls in a state of grave spiritual danger, the Cardinals could take further action? I think Cardinal Burke said something to this effect in his recent interview, didn’t he? http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/cardinal-burke-on-amoris-laetitia-dubia-tremendous-division-warrants-action
I just tried the link you included here in your post.
Would you believe the website says, ” It is under heavy load.” Cannot be accessed at present.
Something is really going on, isn’t it?
Thank you, Steve, for compiling this excellent timeline of the past seven months. It is necessary, I think, in order for those of us trying to make sense of the insanity to be able to remind ourselves of just how we arrived at where we are today; it can be so easy to miss the forest for the trees when one is engaged in the thick of spiritual warfare. I also think you have done an excellent service for future generations—please, Lord, let there be future, faithful generations to read this!—so that they can learn from the mistakes of our era.
Isn’t it bitterly ironic, like gall forcefully pressed against the lips, to see the dictates and mandates of a progressivist pope forced upon his subjects in the name of a false sense of mercy, while the whole world lauds him for his actions, while his saintly predecessors (such as St. Pius X) who forced their sense of orthodoxy and conservativism upon the Church were reviled for doing so? Because, as we should all know by now, when a progressive mandates something, it is acceptable, especially if in doing so he is helping people too stupid to understand; when a conservative/traditionalist mandates something, the response is the polar opposite.
>>[W]hen a progressive mandates something, it is acceptable, especially if in doing so he is helping people too stupid to understand<<
I disagree. It's not "stupidity" that prompts the acceptance of "progressivism." Whether the discourse is civil or ecclesiastical, "progressivism" is a mere euphemism — a fig leaf, if you will — for licentiousness.
I should have used air quotes around “stupid”. My point was that a progressive sees himself as smarter than everyone else and genuinely believes he has to impose his vision upon those who would go along with them if they were, in his mind, smart enough to understand what was best for them. But when people resist him, in his mind, he sees them as idiots who need saving from their own stupidity via his own superior (so he thinks) intellect.
It’s the narrow path versus the wide path – always.
Oh, I misspoke when I said I “disagreed.” All you said, LB236, makes total sense. I guess I was adding another perspective. Yes, we orthodox Catholics are just backward “bitter clingers.”
I’m still going to get my Plenary Indulgence on Saturday at my diocese’s cathedral though…
Got two! At Our Lady of Victory Basilica, Buffalo, NY, in June, and at the Basilica Shrine of Ste-Anne-de-Beaupre, Province of Quebec, in October. Both, singularly beautiful pilgrimages!
Coming soon, the USCCB will be given its marching orders to comply fully with AL. By the end of 2018, every single parish in the US will be monitored for full compliance.
Maybe sooner? Who knows. Be prepared to stand with our faithful priests whether in our churches, our basements, our crawl spaces or wherever they may be.
Steve, this is a great help to be able to look back on the last 7 months or so and to appreciate all the major developments and turning points since the publication of Amoris Laetitia. I think your expression, The Dictatorship of Mercy, is really apt. And, as I think you’ve said already, it doesn’t stop with errors regarding the divorced-and-remarried, but extends to a dangerous error in the understanding of grave, mortal sin. As Cardinal Burke pointed out in his recent interview:
“But then there are the further questions in the dubia apart from that particular question of the divorced and remarried, which deal with the term “instrinsic evil,” with the state of sin and with the correct notion of conscience.”
It is tragic that a “false mercy” threatens to eclipse the true understanding of the Divine Mercy of which we are so much in need, as our Lord Jesus said to Saint Faustina: “Mankind will not have peace until it turns with trust to My mercy” (Diary of St Faustina, 300).
It is ironic that you mention St Faustina. Her diary entry is very interesting for the birthday of the current occupant of the Chair of St Peter.
Yes, I had read that passage somewhere along the line. It’s quite sobering. I suppose our Lord allows these things for a purpose, but it is truly painful to watch the Vicar of Christ carry on in this fashion. Does he really intend to change the Deposit of Faith or is he just mislead by modernist-liberal ideas? I don’t know which is worse. Truly we must pray for his conversion and for the entire Church.
I am reminded of some words of prophecy given by our Lady of Good Success to Mother Mariana about 400 years ago in Quito, Ecuador: “At the end of the nineteenth century and throughout a great part of the twentieth [and beyond], many heresies will be propagated in these lands…In those times the atmosphere will be saturated with the spirit of impurity which, like a filthy sea, will engulf the streets and public places with incredible license…. Innocence will scarcely be found in children, or modesty in women…..He who should speak seasonably will remain silent.”
Who is the “he” who will remain silent? Does this refer to Pope Francis? And to the questions-dubia which the four Cardinals have recently presented to him?
Our Lady of Good Success also said to Mother Mariana: “Pray constantly, implore tirelessly, and weep bitter tears in the seclusion of your heart, beseeching the Eucharistic Heart of my most holy Son to take pity on His ministers and to end as soon as possible these unhappy times by sending to His Church the Prelate who shall restore the spirit of her priests.”
I always took it that the “he” referred to Pope Emeritus Benedict who knows everything but says nothing.
Yes, it could well be, Ana.
That passage in the diary is striking for another reason. It is said Out Lord was in agony and sorrow for many reasons, but particularly because he could see so many souls in the future who would not make use of His sacrifice and be lost in hell forever. I also think the reference to the garden is important since this was the scene of the public betrayal of Judas – his heart was already with the devil but this was the awful face to face reality of the treason.
That’s very interesting…
Is the Church now going through her Passion as our Lord Jesus in His Sacred Passion? There seems little doubt…
Indeed we are now in the last stages of the Passion of the Church and it will appear to die and be buried, but like Our Lord will rise again to the amazement of the enemies of Christ. Read Yves Dupont “Catholic Prophecy” and you will see it is all foretold.
Thank you, MB. These are very sobering prophecies !
Dubious is, as dubious does.
Just like my mother used to say, “A conclave is like a box of chocolates. You never know when they’ll elect a nut.”
Just a small side note that makes me laugh. Until the Francis pontificate, that I continue to call The Great Clarification, Massimo Introvigne was a regular columnist in one of Italy’s tiny number of traditionalist Catholic papers. One of the great services Bergoglio is providing the CHurch is outing who is for and who is agin.
I had the great blessing of being born during the final years of the pontificate Pope Pius XII and receiving all the sacraments up through confirmation prior to the resulting changes. It was beautiful time to come into the church. In a fifty year retrospective, the net result of Vatican II seems to me be akin to a French revolution by the progressive bishops and clergy within the church against their Holy King and Queen. The King’s throne (His tabernacle) moved to the side so as not be be a center of focus, and our Holy Queen’s and St. Joseph’s statues moved from the front of the church to much less visible locations. This net result has somehow been lost to me until the Pontificate of the Argentine Jesuit Bishop Jorge Bergogiio appeared as “Pope Francis”.
I had a similar experience, having been born in 1953. I made my First Holy Communion and Confirmation in 1960 and 1965, before the close of the Council. Our parish was still under the pastoral guidance of the holy priest — Father, then Monsignor, Thomas J. O’Hern — who founded her in the 1913. My maternal great grandparents and great aunts and uncles were founding members. My father made his First Holy Communion there in 1937. Vatican II “spirituality” was, mercifully, slow to seep into the Mass and the Sacraments there.
“The Dictatorship of Mercy demands your complete obsequience”. Excellent!
Francis is a master of the half-truth method, that is lying while sounding true, just like how satan masquerades as an angel of light. The true part is that Mercy is available. The lie is that you need not amend your life, nor even have a purpose of amendment, to receive it. In other words, a diabolical manipulation of inferences. Great sounding, but eternally deadly. You can’t do any better than this as a teacher offering itching ears what they want to hear, that is leading souls to hell on the wide road. Francis is truly a son of satan. Pray that he converts.
These juvenile tweets (and especially “memes”) by the highest Vatican officials are unbefitting the proper dignity and decorum of their office.
Where did this mediocrity come from, how did the Church of Christ get this low that a stupid fool is the head of the Church? We need an Ambrose right about now to push these simpering homo pandering, adultery enabling, morality wrecking, sacrilegious Communion desecraters out on their stupid liberal brain damaged crosseyed faces. .
My parents and I walk a thin sheet of ice regarding defending the Faith in the liberal progressive diocese of Salina, already banned in one parish for defending the Sacred Liturgy, hate to say we are surrounded by liberal dioceses in Kansas, except in the Wichita Kansas diocese, five hours away, so what I am saying, we have to stand up for the Faith but must know we might not be able to go to Mass or receive the Sacraments if the liberals get tired of us. I’m disabled and can’t travel too well and my mom is getting there, just so complicated, defend the Faith, no longer allowed to attend Mass and receive the Sacraments, go with the status quo and say nothing, go down south for not defending Our Lord.
Thank you for an excellent recap of the synodal shenanigans and the chaos that has ensued thereafter. The tsunami of confusion, deception and now, threat, is out in the open, and we the faithful thank courageous Catholic media for reporting the facts as they have occurred since the last Synod – the appointment by P. Francis of dissident clergy as synod fathers to implement his liberal theology under the guise of “mercy”.
We are also forever indebted to the courageous cardinals and bishops who have stepped forward and offered resistance to heresy. We are praying for them and for holy mother the Church, that the Holy Spirit guide and strengthen them in these difficult times ahead. The prophecy of Our Lady of Akita is being played out, and the moral chaos is evident. Lord help us!
What did St Francis prophesy about the end times…”…in those days he will send us a destroyer rather than a pastor”?
Surely there have to be more than 4 cardinals who know what is going on is evil. Will nobody else stand up and face down this antichrist of a so-called pope?
Fake prophecy though…
Do you mean fake as in its attribution to St Francis or fake as in its prophecy of a “destroyer pope”?
Both. I tackled it here:
https://onepeterfive.wpengine.com/if-francis-is-an-antipope-we-cant-know-it-yet/
Thanks – I won’t cite that one again! Although, on the basis that a broken clock is right twice a day, some fraudster may yet prove to have hit on something which comes about by chance. Stockbrokers make their reputations on it! 😉
The thing that makes that one dangerous is that it SOUNDS perfect. So people share it like crazy. Our Lord didn’t warn us about false prophets because he thought they’d sound kooky. He warned us because they’d be believable.
I do wonder if the reason it sounds perfect for our day is because it was composed in an era which had many parallels with our own? In the 14th century the Fraticelli or Spiritual Franciscans were suppressed by Boniface VIII in a similar way to how Francis has treated the FFI in our day. Obviously there was much more bloodshed and animosity involved back then, but the use of exile could be a direct parallel. They had been treated very favourably by the previous pope – Celestine V – prior to his abdication.
I can almost imagine one of the Spirituals composing something like this and ascribing it to St Francis in order to undermine and discredit Boniface VIII. William of Ockham took up with them for a while and by many accounts they could be a pretty nasty bunch who would not be above forging prophecies in the name of their founder.
Good summary of the wonder filled pontificate of Francis the Apostate. His “Mercy” program is quite simply a license for him to do and say whatever he wishes, in any manner he wishes, to whoever he wishes. In reality his program is not mercy but Cultural Marxism and his implementation is not merciful but totalitarian.
To save their own souls the Cardinals need to replace him as soon as possible as he is is destroying the Catholic Church and causing people to sin.
The errors of Russia. They will not be spread – they have spread.
Yes, especially within the Catholic Church.
The one thing I fear is that he will become truly nasty and excommunicate the Cardinals.
I don’t know much about the processes but can he do that?
He can very well come up with trumped up charges and excommunicate them to stymie their efforts? But then that would probably alert all the others.
You mean the way St Athanasius was excommunicated by Pope Liberius who was the 1st Pope to not be canonized? Oh the irony. Only this time there is no emperor pressuring anyone.
That is not a fact. There is much controversy over the matter and many protestants and opponents of infaillability use this case to say “see, the pope can be a heretic.” The historical record does not prove this at all. In fact, Liberius suffered greatly defending the faith from a heretical emperor.
I’m not saying that Pope Liberius was heretical at all. I’m simply saying that history has demonstrated that defenders of the Faith can be put in papal crosshairs. Simple as that.
But he eventually gave into the pressure of the Emperor and condemned St .Athanasius. Bishops at various times in history have shown themselves to be lacking in fortitude. Yes, in the fourth century and again 18 of the 19 the English knuckled under to Henry VII, all except St. John Fisher. Who remebers them these days, but the witness of Sts. John Fisher and Thomas More is still a great light for the Church and will continue to be so.
Most of the accusations against Liberius come from sources that have a vested interest in finding a historical precedent to justify a certain archbishop who recently defied a certain Pope and was excommunicated for it. I know what you are trying to imply but this historical event doesnt fit the mold of a faithful cleric resisting a despotic pope.
Yes. you are correct. It is not easy to imagine the stress Pope Liberius was and we don’t know all the circumstances.
Yet another straw man argument. The excommunication is a historical fact. This in no way impinges upon the charism of infallibility. Liberius’s act was a judicial one and was outside the necessary conditions to be called infallible. Drawing attention to this is a red herring. Go back to Vatican I and you will see that the definition of infallibility is very strick and narrow.
Great summary and synthesis.
What a different tone we see now from his earlier tone of gentle encouragement to speak out. Yeah, speak out so we know who is against us. Cardinal Burke must have taken that bait and dared to share some “collegiality”.
I’m a layperson with no connections nor advanced theological understanding. But even I can see from here there was a very dangerous, even diabolical, undercurrent rippling through our church to the very top. It is no longer an undercurrent, it is a raging whitewater, not quite willing to be unmasked, but daring enough to go for broke in terms of destroying Sacraments and distorting the teaching of Jesus Christ as to render it not what it once was, or how Catholics for millennia would recognize it.
These men are dangerous. They mean business. They are this close to what is obviously their goal, they have their guy in place, he’s willing, and by God, they’re going to get it done, don’t get in their way.
Into this wade four Cardinals…dubia in hand.
This is indeed, war, and it will be played out in supernatural terms and temporal. We shall be witnesses to one, and hopefully assist in the other with prayer and faithfulness despite our particular circumstances.
The most frustrating and galling part of this it is that Sparado and his ilk think of themselves as Gandalf when in reality is they who, if they are anyone, are Grima Wormtonque. Sadly, as nice as it would be imagine Pope Francis as sickly Theoden, the victim of evil counsellors, in reality he is more akin to Saruman, dressed in white who has “abandoned reason for madness” and thinks placating the Enemy is the only way to survive his onslaught and the evil counselors are his minions
Very good article. Keep pushing the phrase “Dictatorship of Mercy.” It is clear that the Year of Mercy was a Trojan Horse to promote Confession as a means to forgive illicit relationships and allow communion not matter what Jesus said about marriage…
You talking about moral busybodies demonstrates a total and complete lack of self awareness.
Wow. This article is very disappointing. So sad to see so many out there who act like they know better than the Pope. A post that opposes mercy seems to sound like a post that opposes Christ, if you ask me.
If this is war–and it is–then it is a manifestation of THE war between The Woman and The Dragon. Once again, I beg of all those whose hearts are beating now, and will beat in the future, to make their TOTAL CONSECRATION to Mary Immaculate according to the Kolbean formula, or–if made–to renew and deepen that Consecration without any limit whatsoever. The Immaculata alone has from God the promise of victory over Satan. Only as Her instruments, Her slaves, Her absolute property and possession can we make any difference at all, let alone hope for Final Victory. Conversely, if we do not make and live out our Total Consecration (which is the realization in full of the Baptismal commitment), then it will be as if the devastation of Bergoglianism had been wrought by our own hands. It is one way or the other: God (the true and living God whose Mother is Mary; who joins us to Himself as His family when we accept Her as our Mother as well) or nothing. They are liars and seducers who enjoin us to stand on the sidelines as mere spectators “minding our own business,” not “criticizing the Pope” when it is our witness to the integrity of the Holy Gospel itself which is at stake! “Stop obsessing” about the commandments of Almighty God, is it? Words which the Serpent himself first hissed into humanity’s collective ear! I am begging you, my brothers and sisters in Christ–even I, who by my manifold sins and failings have forfeited all right to be heard in and of myself–to listen to the voice of the one who, paying for our sins upon the Cross itself, addressed to the Faithful Disciple and to all who would be faithful disciples, the ineluctable declaration: Behold Your Mother. Not: consider in Mary an example of holiness, which you may or may not elect to imitate in your own journey to Heaven. Not: see how virtuous and faithful Mary is? It would be good if you were to become sort of like her. Not: some people might not get who she is, so could you quietly usher her away, so as not to offend anyone? But rather the imperative, the command: Behold., meaning: Realize. Acknowledge. Own. We have no more right to consider Total Consecration to Mary Immaculate optional than we have to permit unannulled and intentionally incontinent “remarried” people to receive Holy Communion.