I’ve told you before that I think schism is coming, and fast. But it occurs to me now that it’s difficult to tell where run-of-the-mill heterodoxy ends and schism begins. It’s not the sort of thing that becomes clear until you’re well and truly past the line in the sand.
I’m telling you right now, I just saw that line in the rear-view mirror.
I was reading an article this
evening at the National Catholic Register about the secret meeting (the one I told you about last Friday) in Rome yesterday in advance of the second half of the Synod. The article was so good, the reporting was so thorough, I said to myself, “This must be the work of Edward Pentin.” I scrolled back to the byline, and so it was.
You see, Edward Pentin is the same man who caught Cardinal Kasper’s racist remarks, then proved that they had actually happened when Kasper denied them by producing the audio file. He’s also the man who did the lion’s share of the the investigative journalism on the Great Catholic Book Heist of 2014 – the disappearance of some 200 copies of Remaining in the Truth of Christ that disappeared from the mailboxes of Synod fathers last October, allegedly at the hands of Cardinal Baldisseri, the pope’s hand-picked Secretary General of the Synod.
In other words: he’s doing the Lord’s work as he uncovers much of the conniving going on in the episcopacy with the aim of undermining the Sixth Commandment.
But I digress. The line in the sand I was talking about? Well, here it is:
A one-day study meeting — open only to a select group of individuals — took place at the Pontifical Gregorian University on Monday with the aim of urging “pastoral innovations” at the upcoming Synod of Bishops on the Family in October.
Around 50 participants, including bishops, theologians and media representatives, took part in the gathering, at the invitation of the presidents of the bishops’ conferences of Germany, Switzerland and France — Cardinal Reinhard Marx, Bishop Markus Büchel and Archbishop Georges Pontier.
One of the key topics discussed at the closed-door meeting was how the Church could better welcome those in stable same-sex unions, and reportedly “no one” opposed such unions being recognized as valid by the Church.
Participants also spoke of the need to “develop” the Church’s teaching on human sexuality and called not for a theology of the body, as famously taught by St. John Paul II, but the development of a “theology of love.”
One Swiss priest discussed the “importance of the human sex drive,” while another participant, talking about holy Communion for remarried divorcees, asked: “How can we deny it, as though it were a punishment for the people who have failed and found a new partner with whom to start a new life?”
Marco Ansaldo, a reporter for the Italian daily newspaper La Repubblica, who was present at the meeting, said the words seemed “revolutionary, uttered by clergymen.”
French Biblicist and Ratzinger Prize-winner Anne-Marie Pelletier praised the dialogue that took place between theologians and bishops as a “real sign of the times.” According to La Stampa, another Italian daily newspaper, Pelletier said the Church needs to enter into “a dynamic of mutual listening,” in which the magisterium continues to guide consciences, but she believes it can only effectively do so if it “echoes the words of the baptized.”
The meeting took the “risk of the new, in fidelity with Christ,” she claimed. The article also quoted a participant as saying the synod would be a “failure” if it simply continued to affirm what the Church has always taught.
The closed-door meeting, masterminded by the German bishops’ conference under the leadership of Cardinal Marx, was first proposed at the annual meeting of the heads of the three bishops’ conferences, held in January in Marseille, France.
The study day took place just days after the people of Ireland voted in a referendum in support of same-sex “marriage” and on the same day as the Ordinary Council of the Synod of Bishops met in Rome. Some observers did not see the timing as a coincidence.
I wish I could excerpt the whole thing. You’ll just have to read the rest of it for yourself. It may not be obvious yet, but I’d wager that this carefully-structured bit of reporting by Pentin is going to be one of the most important things written about the upcoming Synod. It shows the pre-planning, the forming of cabals, the willingness to undermine Church teaching, the revolutionary language, the subversion by secrecy, and the blatant disregard for the natural law as a manifestation of God’s own Divine Will.
In other words: this is what a schism looks like.
What is happening right now may not be formally called “schism” by the Church for many years to come. But make no mistake – it will be. History will not look kindly on those involved in such things. Always, the enemies of Christ think they can prevail. Always, they find that God has other plans.
Things are happening fast. I can’t recommend strongly enough that we be spiritually prepared. Only a little over four months to go until the Synod.
Pray.
Re: your other Facebook post. Any ships leaving for Mars in the next four months?
The destination is beyond that for those who remain faithful: heaven.
I don’t know. i just want to live long enough to light up a Cohiba on Mars (in a dome or whatever) and set up a homestead for me, my wife and my ten Catholic kids. I think a Latin Low Mass would be beautiful there.
Vatican II. August 26-29, 1963. Fulda, Germany. The Rhine Flows Into The Tiber.
The question then becomes, where does the laity stand?
Is there an ability to fight for Christ’s Church or do we simply prep our souls and let Him take care of the rest?
Both!
Why do I get the feeling that Cd. Marx will be “pope” someday?
Gah!
He may convert. (Come back). “Spiritus spirat ubi vult.”
Only in his imagination
Only in my nightmare.
Heaven forbid!
Go to a new faith then
The day will come when the Antichrist reigns-for a time.
Anti-pope.
Gird your loins and put on the armor of God, this is spiritual warfare! We are alive in this present moment as a result of God’s will for us in order to fight. The only question left to ask one’s self is behind who’s standard will you rally?
We have been called by God to hold the line my brothers and sisters in Christ. Deus Vult!!!
Where does Pope Francis stand? Is he with them, or is he against them? If he is against them, why does he let this go on?
Which side will end up in schism? Them or us? That depends on Francis. I suppose he could opt for some sort of slow-moving incrementalism. Sort of a drip, drip, drip that moves inexorably torward their side but slowly enough that no individual outrage is enough to force believers in the timeless stance of the Church out all at once.
Because I can tell you, the day the Church blesses sodomy (one of the sins that cries out to heaven) is the day I will know it’s claim of authority is illegitimate.
The Church stands – irregardless ! A Pope may need to be deposed if he proves to be a heretic, as determined by competent authority
Just remember, you and I both need the valid Mass and the Sacraments ! The gates of heaven – and all that. Christ told us that probably because we would have a time like this when we have serious and well founded questions about Church authority.
“The gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” (Matt.16:18) Parce, Domine; parce, populo Tuo. Lord, you see that the gates of hell and all of hell seeks entrance to the gates of Your Church. Lord, permit us to witness Your mighty Arm now.
The Japanese Church survived without priests because two Sacraments don’t require a priest: Baptism and Holy Matrimony. Teach, teach, teach your children the faith, pray Rosary together, make spiritual Communion according to St. Alphonsus Liguori and a silent at least 30-minutes long Adoration. The gates of Hell won’t prevail.
We’ve seen the drip, drip, drip that moved in the aftermath of Vatican II that turned into a spigot and a waterfall in certain places.
Stop blaming V II, and start blaming Sin.
Vatican II was the beginning of all of this. They’re wouldn’t even be “synods” and bishops conferences if it weren’t for that uninspired disaster.
The total loss of faith canot directly be laid at the feet of Vatican II
You can not prove that.
I am really tired of heretics on the far right and far left blaming everything except sin – especially sins related to pride, sloth, envy, anger, and sexual sins.
Lack of catechesis is the problem, along with the trash in the media.
The catechism changed, as did the religion as a result of Vatican II. If you cannot see the change, you areally either a result or part of the problem.
By your logic, every single pope prior to this new religion is “far right”
What dogma has changed from CCofT to CCC.
Give page numbers, paragraph numbers, etc.
Start providing proof, rather than ranting and raving.
No Dogmas or Doctrines have been changed! They can’t be!
When people make public statements they must be prepared to back them up themselves.
Please do not answer for Salvelinus, or he will never learn.
MIKE, I can’t say I appreciate your tone. Since I don’t remember asking you to come in here and begin lecturing our readers, I’m pretty sure you’re operating on an imaginary mandate.
When it comes to evangelization or catechetical instruction, a little humility goes a long way. Might want to give that some thought.
Plz read Salvelinus post – this “new religion”.
Please answer his post.
I will stay out of it.
thanks.
Sorry Mike, not my intention!
Yes, vatican introduced new doctrines that absolutely were different as noted by Cardinal Larrona during the Council.
Paul Vi was made aware of this but let the schema on the church go ahead anyways.
See page 350 of Prof Mattei’s work, “The Second Vatican Council, an unwritten story.”
A modernist ( new theology) conspiracy formed prior to the opening of vatican two and although it was a minority party (the other minority party was the conservative party of Lefebvre and others) and it seized control of the council on the very first day and, owing to its pre-council preparation and structures, it was able to convince a majority of the other Fathers to support it with those fathers thinking some benefit would accrue to them.
As Prof Mattei observed, all revolutions work this way – via a conspiracy of revolutionaries who are successful enough to convince the middle-of-the-roaders that they are the vanguard one must support and he cites the revolutionaries cultivating support with the Kerensky cadre in the Russian Revolution and the Girondists in the French Revolution.
Vatican Two was a successful revolution within the form of Roman Catholicism but,thankfully, it was pastoral and not binding for it promulgated no Canons or Decrees to which one had to plight their spiritual troth or else face an anathema.
Currently the Roman Catholic Church is at the abyss and one more step will make it appear to disappear from the world and that is because Holy Mother Church is recapitulating within herself the passion of Jesus Christ.
Before too long she will appear to the world to have died and been buried but, and this is ineluctable, at some future point she will be miraculously resurrected in all of her glory and the world will then recognise that Jesus is, and has always been, the Head of His Catholic Church.
I will not be alive to witness that resurrection and neither will those reading what prolly reads like the ravings of a madman.
Our task as traditionalists is to keep alive and pass on within the domestic church (Family) the Faith once delivered.
Here are a few.
In Dignitatis Humane, man has a God-given right to religious liberty. (DH No. 2.)
In Dignitatis Humane, Christ’s revelation was completed at the Cruxification. (DH No. 11).
In Unitatis Redintegratio, the Spirit of Christ uses heretical sects as a means of salvation. (UR No. 3)
In Unitatis Redintegratio, common worship with heretics is desirable and effective in petitioning for grace of unity. (UR No. 8).
In Nostra Aetate, the Church has a high regard for non-Catholic doctrines. (NA No. 2).
In Unitatis Redintegratio, Catholics and heretics long for the one, truly visible Church. (UR no. 1).
In Unitatis Redintegratio, heretics are in communion with the Catholic Church. (UR No. 3). Also in Lumen Gentium (LG No. 15).
In Unitatis Redintegrati, heretical divisions prevent the Church from realizing its unity. (UR No. 4).
In Unitatis Redintegrati, the life of grace exists outside the Catholic Church. (UR No. 3).
In Orientalium Ecclesarum), the Sacraments can be given to the Eastern schismatics. (OE No. 27)
In Lumen Gentium, Muslims worship the same God as Catholics. (LG No. 16).
In Lumen Gentium, The order of bishops is also subject to the supreme power over the universal Church. (LG No. 22).
In Gaudium et spes, Christ by His incarnation has united Himself with every man. (No. 22).
You have done a lot of work. And thank you for the references.
None of these have to do with Dogma.
With the exception of Dogma, one Pope can not bind another Pope since these are written for the times in which they are written – as teaching.
Otherwise there would have been nothing new going all the way back to St. Peter.
It is very important not to take sentences out of context of the paragraph.
Code of Canon Law is man made law (must be approved by Pope) and can be officially changed by any Pope.
There was no Code of Canon Law as such prior to the middle ages.
” The Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups …..”
Yes, God gave us a free will. Jesus never coerced anyone to follow Him.
Can not find the sentence “In Dignitatis Humane, Christ’s revelation was completed at the Cruxification. (DH No. 11).”.
But read it hurriedly.
Got to go for family obligation, but will get back with this tomorrow.
Mike, please don’t spend any more time on this. I’m sorry I got involved because I do not agree with you and you are obviously a fervent defender of the teachings of Vatican II while I find some of them as opposing what the Church has always taught.
I’ve never known successive popes contradict completely what prior popes have taught, particularly those who saw grave dangers to the corruption of The Deposit of Faith.
I can only continue to believe and trust in the Lord.
I hope I am a defender of Christ’s Church.
There are 5 or 6 sentences in VII docs that need to be clarified, so you are not completely wrong, but without checking I don’t think they are those you pointed out.
When in doubt and for further info – plz check out Abp Athanasius Schneider – because he is 100% accurate on what needs clarification due to misinterpretations – confusion.
The Most Reverend Bishop Athanasius Schneider –
“Vatican II Must be Clarified” (June 27, 2013)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8iBeaGeuxw
He does not state any Pope is heretical, or a Pope is in error.
He does not state that a Pope can not change Code of Canon Law which he can, etc.
But he certainly wants some clarification, which most of us do.
Read the entries on scandal. They do not differentiate about active and passive scandal and so we have the absolutely evil and execrable entries that teach that Jesus gave scandal – a sin according to the new catechism.
That fact alone is just cause to burn every single existing catechism.
Think of it Mike. The universal catechism identified Jesus as giving scandal – it does this twice – and it is the first time in the history of the Catholic Church that any person was singled out as one who gave scandal and the one singled out is the Divine Person, Jesus.
Jesus taught what was “NEW” to the Jews and others, and therefore some at that time in history were scandalized from their Jewish or other beliefs – regarding the laws/rules of men, not of God.
Are you stating that the Bible is wrong ?
Mt 9:13; Hos 6:6; Lk 15:1-2 and 22-32; Mk 2:7; etc.
CCC: ” 589 Jesus gave scandal above all when he identified his merciful conduct toward sinners with God’s own attitude toward them. He went so far as to hint that by sharing the table of sinners he was admitting them to the messianic banquet. But it was most especially by forgiving sins that Jesus placed the religious authorities of Israel on the horns of a dilemma. Were they not entitled to demand in consternation, “Who can forgive sins but God alone?” By forgiving sins Jesus either is blaspheming as a man who made himself God’s equal, or is speaking the truth and his person really does make present and reveal God’s name.”
CCC: ” 2326 Scandal is a grave offense when by deed or omission it deliberately leads others to sin gravely.”
JESUS never lead anyone to sin.
Are you suggesting that He did ?
Please pay attention and read CCC 587 – 590.
“This catechism is conceived as an organic presentation of the Catholic faith in its entirety. It should be seen therefore as a unified whole.” (CCC pg 11)
Just what do you believe regarding the Catholic Faith?
The Messias-Deniers took scandal. Jesus did not give scandal. . You think the church began with Vatican Two and, thus, you were just the ultramontanist low fruit that was easy pickings for the modernists
Why are you dishonest about me? A sign that when people do not have facts they merely attack the other person.
Sorry if you believe Abp Athanasius Schneider is a ‘modernist’ – by your own definition. I consider him a Faithful Catholic. I believe as he does.
Sounds to me like you are making up your own religion.
All scandal is not bad. Scandal is bad when it causes another to sin.
Using the Douay-Rheims Bible –
Mt 15:12 ” Then came his disciples, and said to him: Dost thou know that the Pharisees, when they heard this word, were scandalized” ?
Mt 13:57 “And they were scandalized in his regard. But Jesus said to them: A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house.”
If you do not believe in the Bible, there is nothing I can do to help you.
Your haughtiness is entirely our of place here. You can not even read and comprehend what is right before your eyes.
The catechism teaches that to give scandal is always wrong, a sin, and it teaches that depending upon the authority of the offender, that sin may be grave.
And the catechism teaches that Jesus gave scandal – two times
That is, objectively, the catechism teaches that Jesus engaged in grave sin
What does this say ?
CCC: ” 2326 Scandal is a grave offense when by deed or omission it deliberately leads others to sin gravely.”
This defines when scandal is a sin.
I don’t know what you are reading.
Mike, I don’t think the Catholics, as you say, on the far right is a good way to say this, that is political terminology and shouldn’t be used when speaking of Catholicism. There are only Catholics. One is either Catholic and faithful to Christ and His Church or one is not. They are defending the Church and what it has taught for 2000 years and should not be called heretics. I also agree with you and think VATII is blamed when in fact it was sin and deviant people who used it to further their agenda to bring us to where we find ourselves today. Satan is trying to destroy the Church from within and without and as Catholics we should not be dividing ourselves and calling each other names!
Remember Fatima!
I fully agree that the best terminology for Catholics is to use – Heretical Catholics, Schismatic Catholics or Faithful Catholics. This is most accurate.
But there are people who say they are “Catholic” who are on the far right of Church teaching as well as the far left of Church teaching who think everyone is a heretic except themselves and people who heretically think the way they do.
Mike, isn’t it more like what Jesus said that either one is for Him, or one is against Him?
Either one believes all of the Truth, which makes one Catholic, or they only believe some of it or none of it, which makes them non-Catholic (or in reality, enemies of Christ.)
Yes, that is why we should know what the Bible states, as well as the Doctrine of the Faith (CCC) so that we can adhere to them to the best of our ability.
Jesus said – if you love me you will keep my commandments.
Baptised Catholics can be heretics or schismatics, or become agnostics or apostates. It does not make them non-Catholic in that sense.
We never become unbaptized.
What is your explanation for the absolute “lack of catechesis” and “Bishops not publically correcting the scandalous behavior of Catholics”? Simply because they are sinners as we all are? If so, as teachers and preachers of God’s truths, why haven’t they used the very helps available to them through the Church called Confession and Penance so they could right themselves before God and stop their own scandalous behavior, including the heresies that serve to destroy the faith of those who they shepherd?
I don’t know the motives of some Bishops including but not limited to Kasper, etc .
Some of the formation in US seminaries has probably been poor, but that does not answer motives.
I don’t know if V11 is to blame for some of whats happening because I don’t know enough about V11. What I do know is that after V11 we were told that we no longer had to fast from meat on a Friday. I was very young and in no position to question my elders. The altar rails were removed so it was no longer possible for some people to knell to receive Jesus, I’m now in that position myself and of course receiving in the hand became the new thing. I have learned since that these changes did not come out of V11 so now I think that this was also a manipulation of some, as those who tried to manipulate the last Synod. If anyone has anymore information on this subject please enlighten me.
Abstaining from meat on Friday has always been a Country by Country thing. Never a Church wide proclamation as far as I know.
The Church wide requirement was/is to do some form of penance on Fridays.
Exactly what this form of penance was/is determined by the various Bishop’s Conferences. For example the practice was different in Canada from the US.
We can thank Cardinal Joseph Bernardin (and friends for what has happened in the USA.)
In the US we are still required to give up meat on Fridays OR do some other form of penance on Fridays.
For the USA – http://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/liturgical-year/lent/us-bishops-pastoral-statement-on-penance-and-abstinence.cfm
The entire Church is required on Friday’s during Lent, etc.
The precepts of the Church still exist and are in the CCC 2043.
VII never said for anyone to remove Altar Rails – again Bernardin and Company in the USA. 🙁
The Ordinary Form of the Mass GIRM specifically states that the individual can receive Holy Communion on the Tongue and/or while kneeling. Due to arthritis in the knees, I receive on the tongue and while standing at OF Masses.
The Extraordinary Form (TLM) of the Mass since they use the 1962 Missal, all are required to kneel and receive on the tongue.
Friday discipline was universal
Yes to Friday discipline being universal, but not eating meat on Fridays was not.
You say that the entire Church is required to fast from meat on Friday’s during Lent. This is news to me. I try to remember to fast from meat every Friday. I know that most people in Ireland are not aware of this requirement. Then again we followed what we hear from the church and there’s not much teaching coming from them. We never had any reason to question it. As far as we were concerned there were only 2 fast days in the year. Ash wed. and Good Friday. I assume that you may be thinking (why didn’t they look it up in the CCC. In those days no one had the finance to purchase a bible or a CCC.
Bible’s (abt $50 each), and CCC’s abt $27, are not cheap when times are difficult.
But for those who go out to eat, purchase alcoholic drinks etc, purchase cell phones & internet time, etc., they can sacrifice these to purchase a Catholic Bible and the CCC.
Here are two links for the CCC.
1) This is from the Vatican web site.
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm
2) This is a good search engine (licensed by the Vatican) for specific topics.
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
I couldn’t find any reference to the CCC on the Irish Bishops Conference web site, so I just completed sending them an email asking them why.
Let you know IF I get an answer.
I think you misunderstood me. When I said “in those days” I meant at the time of V11. There was very little available finance to purchase bibles etc.
If you hear from the Irish Bishops I would very much like to hear what they have to say, but I can almost guarantee you that they won’t respond. Look at all the renegade priests that we have in Ireland and they haven’t done anything about it. I complained to our local bishop 2 -3 years ago about a priest in his diocese who was preaching that hell didn’t exist and he never bothered to do anything about it. The priest was preaching this almost every Sunday at 12 noon Mass. They have a camera in the church and the Bishop could have heard it for himself, The bishops secretary went to the same Mass every Sunday and she could have confirmed it, but still he did nothing.
I have always gotten the best results when I take a copy of the Bible and or CCC with me – when talking to high ranking clergy or even a Priest.
I mark the appropriate paragraphs prior to meeting (or emailing), so I can “quote” them easily.
In addition know what our Popes have stated about the CCC.
” What Catholics REALLY Believe SOURCE”
There is some pride that they know the Faith better than the laity due to their education. (Our personal opinions sometimes seem to have little value.)
I always provide the paragraphs or verse #s, and leave them with the Bishop, which are in my “talking points”, so they can review it after I have left.
This is the best that I know how to do. If really serious I send an email to the Apostolic Nuncio for the appropriate Country, and the appropriate Curia Congregation at the Vatican.
Wrong Mike. See the 1917 Code of Canon Law. Friday abstinence was universal and mandatory.
However, to be fair to you, you do not seem to know much of anything about Tradition so it is no surprise you are wrong abut this also
Please provide the reference number within the Code of 1917.
No.
You look it up.
You are here posing as an authority and so look it up your own self and educate your own self.
You seem to think you are some sort of expert but it is easy peasy to deflate your pretensions as I just did for the 1917 code of canon law was universal and it included friday abstinence from meat.
I coud post even earlier universal legislation from a Pope, but I;ll let you look up that also 🙂
Now, any even only adequately informed Traditionalist knows these facts but you not the first clue and yet you are here posing as some authority while demanding others produce proof for you.
The combination of haughtiness and laziness is irksome.
The misinterpretation of VII preying on the mass ignorance of the folks in the pew is the problem. The same distortion is happening with the U.S. Constitution.
Just read your catechism; if you have questions, call Catholic Answers or go to http://www.catholic.com. God bless!
Your last sentence is directly attributable to Vatican Two , just read the opening speech written by Montini.
Please provide the verse number(s) in the Bible that states the sins of high ranking Clergy make the authority of the Church illegitimate.
Well, Peter was the first Pope and he never… oh, wait.
Seriously, that’s one of the things that I take great inspiration and comfort from, that Jesus was willing and able to appoint a lowly sinner to be the bedrock of His Church, and with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, that is exactly what Peter was.
Jesus had mercy for all who repented.
And by the Holy Spirit inspiring the writers of Sacred Scripture to tell us of the bad (sins) as well as the good, I believe He was teaching us more than one lesson.
According to what I have read, Pope Francis has stated that the teachings of the Church concerning SSM will not be touched, can’t be…and that Doctrine can not be changed. I believe it is a rogue group of German Bishops behind all of this.
It is a sad commentary that I would state I “hope” that this is exactly what His Holiness will do, but there it is. There should be no question about it, but at this point in time, I half-expect anything to happen. I will keep praying for Pope Francis and the Church.
Hello, Mr. BXVI.
I stumbled upon this comment, and your last sentence made me curious. Do you recognize now that the Roman Church’s claim of authority is illegitimate?
Hello, Mr. BXVI.
I stumbled upon this comment, and your last sentence made me curious. Do you recognize now that the Roman Church’s claim of authority is illegitimate?
Shame on Francis for surrounding himself with such apostates and schismatics Radcliffe included. Germany and Munich might as well be led by Karl or Groucho Marx as apostate ,Bernard. Sad to say a schism is here already. I bet Benedict 16th regrets retiring now. As AB Burke has stated under Francis we have no rudder or Pilot in charge of the Catholic faith.
There is, otherwise known as the Holy Ghost.
I don’t believe the Holy Ghost was involved in electing Bergolio.
my opinion is that Benedict XVI is the Catholic pope, and Bergolio is “pope” of the Vatican II religion
At least you speak for yourself
Only God and his Church can make that judgment.
I bet B16 saw this coming from a mile away and judged that he no longer had the ability to fight it effectively.
Pope Benedict. .. with Jorge Mario Bergolio pretending to be pope
“Participants also spoke of the need to “develop” the Church’s teaching on human sexuality and called not for a theology of the body, as famously taught by St. John Paul II, but the development of a “theology of love.””
Ok, just an observation but some theology of the body commentators such as chris west claim that anything is acceptable between married couples as long as the act culminates in the normal way. He says explicitly that anal and oral intercourse is acceptable. In other words, he justifies sin.
I see two evils, one is just the lesser evil. We need to get back to what the fathers and doctors have always and everywhere taught.
Truly, is it the “risk of the new, in fidelity with Christ,” or is it the “risk of the new, infidelity with Christ”!
You have to hand it to them.
*
First Step: Disarm the Faithful:
Next: Implement the very things the faithful were told not to insist upon.
– Call a sham Synod on “the family” when is was “The Homo Agenda All Along” [sarmaticusblog].
– Manipulate the Synod and release an interim report pre-approved by the pope but not from and not seen by Synod Fathers that has been called one of the worst official documents drafted in Church history [John Smeaton, co-founder of Voice of the Family].
– Leading up to Synod 2015 hammer away at the rigid legalists, or the hypocritical doctors of the law – by the way, who are these in the Church?
– Shepherds up to and including the Pastor of the Universal Church remain silent as the land of saints and scholars becomes pagan in a day.
*
You have to hand it to them.
One might call this a nest of vipers, but from the looks of them I’d suggest Burmese pythons. You have to wonder what purpose there is in allowing this coven to become public, while withholding the contents of the discussions and presentations. Is it to frighten those who hold to the Magisterium — thinking them “low-info, pious naïfs” easily intimidated by the big scary sophisticated counter-intuitive scholarship of the heterodox? Instead of Pope Bergoglio informing us of his television habits (i.e.: living in the dark) and his regard for La Repubblica (living on the left), maybe he would want to exercise his disciplinary authority and get these lads back to their respective cages. That done, they might want to resume a practice of weekly confession. Is
that too much for a lowly layman to ask of his pastors?
This has all the same earmarks of the “theologians” who pre-empted Vatican II with their progressive agenda, and then succeeded in corrupting so many of our priests. We need a courageous shepherd to take the wheel of this ship now! Pray for Francis!
These people feel emboldened by the climate in Rome. They are mistaken that the Holy Father will be with them and will teach error. They have a Rude 2000 year shock coming.
Some disagree.
I assure you that Bergolio is one of these men. Not catholic
I hope not. The Holy spirit will roast him.
That seems to be the impression …
Yes, things are moving very fast indeed. We all need to remain in a state of grace.
No one has remarked on who elevated these people to Cardinals. Isn’t that of some importance?
If you can blame Jesus for picking 12 Apostles: one who betrayed him, another, the first pope who denied him, and the rest who fled.
So, using the example of Peter’s denial of Christ, and of Judas, the Church believes one who denies Christ or who betrays him can still be a pope?
I prefer to approach it this way: any Pope can be a denier [Peter] or a traitor [Judas]. There is nothing about the office that says that can’t be. People are free and they can betray their calling.
*
Israel is a type of the Church and the Son of man was delivered to the chief priests and the scribes, and they condemned him to death, and delivered him to the Gentiles [cf. Mk 10:33 (RSVCE)]. It does not have to happen but we should not be surprised if a Pope and some with him were to deliver up the Church, the Mystical Body of the Son of man.
Well I suppose the Vicar of Christ could be the Antichrist but how would that protect the Church from the gates of Hell? If there is a single faithful person left when Christ returns?
For biblical characters, to me false prophet would be more apt.
*
Cf. Gn 3:15: while serpent strike the heel, the woman’s offspring crushes the serpent head. Eventually the victory over the powers of evil will be definitive. This victory will, of course, be gained through the work of the Messiah who is par excellence the seed of the woman.
The Church is you and me along with all other baptized Catholics.
It is up to us to read the Bible and the CCC and abide by the teachings of Christ and His Magisterium.
We are all given a free will to choose heaven or hell.
Of the 267 Popes, there have been 12 corrupt Popes in the history of the Church.
These include: Alexander VI (1492-1503) who was a Borgia and fathered Lucrezia and fathered others, and
Benedict IX (1032-1045) who was openly a playboy and was so bad that there were riots against him Rome due to his scandalous behavior.
Just because someone was evil, or bad does not mean that he is not a duly elected Pope.
There is nothing in the Bible that ALL Popes will be holy, or that all Popes will go to Heaven. – Jesus never promised this.
Homosexual modernist men, leftover from the New Springtime keep electing these evil men.
There have been good Popes and bad Popes, good Cardinals and bad Cardinals, good Bishops and bad Bishop, etc from the beginning of the Church.
Since no one is without sin except Jesus and His Blessed Mother.
I have no clue why everyone expects all of them to be Holy or without sin. This does not make any sense to me.
Of course. But in their ordination, they were given teaching and governing authority that the laity does not possess. They are supposed to be the shepherds of the flock, teaching all that Christ taught. When they propose something never done in the Church before, it serves to confuse and divide.
Yes, and those sinful high ranking clergy will be held accountable by Jesus.
This does not mean that the Pope is not valid.
It does not mean that V II was not a valid Ecumenical Council.
It does not mean that both forms of the Mass are not Holy when the required rubrics are adhered to.
The lies about these is when those on the far right or far left become heretical and drive people away from Christ’s church.
Follow the example of Abp Athanasius Schneider 199% in these matters to be a faithful Catholic.
Division and confusion is bad – and if I scandalizes anyone it is gravely sinful.
CCC: “2285 Scandal takes on a particular gravity by reason of the authority of those who cause it or the weakness of those who are scandalized.
It prompted our Lord to utter this curse: “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.”
Scandal is grave when given by those who by nature or office are obliged to teach and educate others.
Jesus reproaches the scribes and Pharisees on this account: he likens them to wolves in sheep’s clothing.”
Modernists destroyed the real Mass and substituted the Lil’ Licit Liturgy in its place and it is obvious the Real Mass is far superior to the Lil’ Licit Liturgy.
One point will suffice. The modernists killed the Offertory and substituted a jewish meal prayer in its place.
Both the Ordinary and Extraordinary Forms of the Mass are Holy when the required rubrics are followed by both the Priest and Laity.
Any Pope has the authority to change any parts of the Mass that are man made.
Some prayers, rubrics and vestments, etc., are man made laws and did not exist at the time of Christ and His Apostles.
Parts of the Mass have been changed many times since the time of Christ and His Apostles.
Once again,you are wrong, and wildly so this time.
The PARTs of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass have not one whit to do with the personal preferences or prejudices of the laity.
The PARTs of the Mass – Petition, Adoration, Reparation, Thanksgiving – have to do with the Holy Sacrifice of Jesus on Calvary sacramentally re-presented as an act of propitiation to our Triune God in Heaven with the action of the Mass consisting of Jesus as both Priest and Victim and the Mass doesn’t have one damn thing to do with jewish meal prayers but you, mike, treat the Mass as the mere preference of men.
Yes, you have swallowed the anthropocentric ideology of the modernists and you defend it vaingloriously.
OK, lots of luck with all of that 🙂
Adios.
Far from being a putative authority, you really don’t have a clue. Now, you could take some time and become an autodidact and delve into and learn Tradition, but, I don’t see that happening.
Unless Tradition is presented to you by those who have severed their connection with it – hierarchy – then you have no connection with it
C’est la vie
Only you have brought up that the laity can choose parts of the Mass. I certainly never said that.
All the important parts of the Mass are the same in both the Ordinary and Extraordinary Form of the Mass.
You are the one who makes wild accusations without any links or documentation to prove your statements.
Btw – Jesus was Jewish. The Old Testament was/is Jewish.
” Unless Tradition is presented to you by those who have severed their connection with it – hierarchy – then you have no connection with it “.
If you have severed your connection with the hierarchy of the Church, then you have no connection with the Catholic Church.
Where is the line from heresy to apostasy?
CCC: ” 2089
INCREDULITY is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it.
HERESY is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same;
APOSTACY is the total repudiation of the Christian faith;
SCHISM is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.”
There are heretics within the Clergy, and on the left and on the right.
The catechism gives scandal
Pope John Paul II who promulgated the catechism gave scandal
If you were baptized Catholic, you give scandal.
And man who was baptised correctly is a Catholic – even protestant children are catholics when they are baptised.
So, will the Pope be listening to the Holy Spirit during the Synod, or will he allow this unholy alliance to take control?
When I see a picture of Cardinal Marx, I get the same feeling as when I see a picture of Martin Luther. The only thing keeping these “clergy” in the Catholic Church is that they don’t want to give up the pedigree or the real estate.
Thus I make it known to you that from the end of the 19th century and shortly after the middle of the 20th century…the passions will erupt and there will be a total corruption of morals… As for the Sacrament of Matrimony, which symbolizes the union of Christ with His Church, it will be attacked and deeply profaned. Freemasonry, which will then be in power, will enact iniquitous laws with the aim of doing away with this Sacrament, making it easy for everyone to live in sin and encouraging procreation of illegitimate children born without the blessing of the Church… In this supreme moment of need for the Church, the one who should speak will fall silent.”
– Our Lady of Good Success, Quito, Ecuador, 1610 A.D
CCC 675…
This is truly a new religion. Tell you the truth all of these novelties anger me and now confuse me greatly.
Regarding another pet-project of this modernism is the equally Protestant and secular civil divorce and remarriage. . I’m a man who’s wife divorced him, without me having any say.
Since I’m trying to be catholic and pick up my cross by remaining married to the one I still love and took a vow with *even though she chose not to” I still wear my wedding band and consider myself married. Some may call this pathetic, but I call this trying to follow the words of Christ and his church.
Yet now, and even some priests tell me I can remarry and receive the sacraments and it wouldn’t be adultery? ?!!
Long story short, it almost appears that us that follow the church the way it always had been are now being schismatic?? That is not “in union” with the Holy Father?
I need guidance on my approach now snice it appears more pathetic to fellow “catholics” than trying to follow the magesterial truths.
I’m really sorry to hear that, Salvelinus. There are too many stories like yours, and it’s almost as if the sacrifices you’ve made and the faithfulness you’ve held onto in the face of insurmountable difficulty is seen as worthless by these bishops.
God sees it though. Keep the faith.
Why no divorce?
Because that is what the LORD himself did. He did not divorce man even when man played the whore and went after other gods (= demons), who are not God therefore not man’s husband. God stuck with us when he could easily have gone and created other beings who could be faithful to him (cf. Mary, the pride and honor of our race).
*
If you ask me, you have followed our LORD did and may he reward you for it.
You are not alone, Salvelinus. And God does see and take your sacrifice of living the Faith, even the marginalization by those who should be your most stalwart supporters (fellow Catholics) into account.
The imitation of Christ is what your living – thank you for your service and your sacrifice!
Will it result in schism or will the German Bishops be chastised and removed? I doubt they will repent of this, their deceit, as they have been taught the Truth and are now defying it and following Satan and the world.
From Kierkegaard: “Christ changed water into wine. Modern theologians (and I would add bishops) do a lot better. They change wine into water.”
The cardinal Electors were warned, to me, they have no excuse. The whole this is worth reading, very prophetic.
For those who have just woken up, the so-called pope francis was the one who called the silly synod to begin with. He is calling all of the shots. he remains in the background, for now, allowing these show trials to continue. Don’t expect his report that he will have to sign off, on next year, regarding the final synod report, to have any clarity. On the contrary, his M.O. has always been to be ambiguous, confusing, and taking both sides of an argument. he has done that for decades in argentina. we were told that Benedict was stepping down for health reasons, old age, and that he couldn’t deal with the homo-mafia, running rampant in the Vatican. Lies, all! What has bergoglio done to dismantle the homo-mafia? He just appointed a homo-friendly cleric to the peace & justice department, timmy Wycliffe, who now gets to go to the synod. Bergoglio lives with a homo deviant by the name of Mons. Ricca, who should be in prison. Just the two of them live in the papal apartment. when the schism takes place, they will force us to accept a new religion, the one world religion, which will be completely opposed to Christ and his teachings. Anyone who ‘resists” will be thrown out.
Anyone who has read Iota Unum by professor Romano Amero will know that if a formal schism emerges, it will merely confirm what has been a reality for fifty years or more.
The abomination of desolation is standing where it ought not. Hold on to the Rock, Christ.
Change is coming.
Lot of people saying that right now. Care to elaborate?