Saturday, August 9, 2014


Just as there is a false "spirit" of Vatican II which was promoted in the 1960's and 70's by clergy and laity who did so in rupture to the actual truth of Vatican II, so now there is a promotion by the same personality-type ideologues of a false "spirit" of Pope Francis. The video below these comments is my point of reference. Its inverted ethos is stunning.

Recently I read the following:

For reasons that are open to interpretation, the secular media has been selectively "positive" in its representations of Pope Francis, in the same way it was often selectively negative about Pope Benedict, his other predecessors, and about Catholic teaching in general. This is evidenced by the relative media silence toward Pope Francis' statement regarding women priests, made at the same press conference, in which he firmly states that the Church's position on the issue was unchangeable. Meanwhile, when Pope Francis calls for those with same-sex attraction to be "integrated into society" rather than judged and marginalized, he is seen as a herald of change to Catholic doctrine, when in fact he is merely pointing out what his predecessors, and the Church, have been saying all along.

I know that some who comment on my blog blame Pope Francis for the fact that the secular media and Catholic media that has an agenda independent of the Church and her Magisterium, MANIPULATE Pope Francis' words. They believe that what the Pope says opens himself to this distortion.

But they do not or did not blame Pope Benedict for the negative press he received from the same sources who did the very same things with Pope Benedict's words but in a negative way.

Of course we know that what these same sources are doing is nefarious, disingenuous and manipulative. They now speak half truths to show that Pope Francis supports their ideologies when in fact we know the complete truth of what Pope Francis says and teaches is very traditional. His Holiness would of course blame the devil for this sort of inverted propaganda.

The Pope has upheld God's design for marriage by upholding God's design for Holy Orders. It is a masculine/feminine hermeneutic.  Children need both a father and mother in the natural family and the supernatural family that is the Church. Thus only a man can marry a woman and be open to the propagation of new life in a biological, natural way, the true meaning of sexuality anchored in natural law.

Priests are a liturgical sacramental sign of Jesus Christ the Bridegroom and the Church (all the baptized, clergy and laity together) are the sacramental sign of the Bride of Christ. Only men can be fathers, husbands when united to a wife and a sacramental icon of Jesus the Bridegroom in the Liturgy. Nothing new here and Pope Francis has emphasized this in a way no recent pope has done, even Pope Benedict!

When you watch the three stories below, the one I had most sympathy with is the one who was abused by two priests as a child and who was able to meet with Pope Francis. His report is marvelous!

The homosexual theologian at Boston College is the least sympathetic and certainly ideological. He can't be fired because of tenure, which means he can get away with murder. When you watch him, keep in mind that TENURE=CLERICALISM but in the academic, not religious world.

The final guest is simply vapid. You think she is orthodox until she presents her silly agenda about women priests and why women are entitled to all seven sacraments. Her hyperbole is, oh my, embarrassing!


Anonymous said...

Your point is that sodomites, lesbians, pro abortion people and all those who hate the doctrines of the Catholic Church love that man because they believe Francis agrees with them. I think we already know that.

I for one don't want the Holy Roman Church to be transformed into the Episcopal church. I don't think we have to change and modify everything just to please a bunch of protestants.

What is the big problem....if you don't believe in the teachings of the Catholic Faith then don't become or identify as a Catholic.

I don't believe anything protestants or Jews or Muslims believe and guess what I'm not asking them to change. I could care less what they do. But they seem hell bent on changing a Church they will never believe in.

If Francis wants to be a protestant so bad he should become the archbishop of Canterbury. And in what universe has Francis upheld Catholic doctrine just like his predecessors? He purposefully causes confusion time after time. Thats not from God.

rcg said...

The point that Francis is causing dialogue is correct. I do believe that is his goal. Points I disagree with all of the people are the problems with the Church being related to changes in doctrine or theology, rather it was weak leadership. The poor fellow who was abused did not seem to have an axe to grind. The more I hear about it the less the homosexual agenda makes sense to me, not more, and the final lady sounded more like a Protestant the more she talked. In her the case and the case of the theologian we have to wonder how they can stay in the Church.

Anonymous, your last two paragraphs were nonsense.

Православный физик said...

As I've said consistently, sometimes it's the media, sometimes it is the words of Pope Francis himself.

The reason Pope Benedict had the benefit of the doubt when it came to misquotes (and as an extension Pope Francis does not)...

a. The mind of Pope Benedict was known through his work as head of the CDF. If something didn't match his written record, we could know with a certainty something was wrong.

b. The misquotes were so obvious from the context of what was said, it was clear he was being manipulated. This is not the case with the quotes of Pope Francis. Even with the full context of the quotes of Pope Francis, one can see how the quotes were manipulated to the ends to which they were. (Because he ALWAYS answers questions in the subjective)

c. Pope Francis is still an unknown. He doesn't have much of a written record that we can fall back to. (The language of record is not the issue). That is to say, when he says things like he's a "Son of the Church"...there's a minimal written record fully showing the "Son of the Church" card to be true. (Take aside the point that we've seen people pay lip service to Church teaching and completely being polar opposites throughout history, recent history of Vatican II being a good example, where all of the modernists came out from hiding))....

d. Pope Francis repeats the same mistakes (giving multiple interviews to the same people who allegedly misquoted him before), constant speaking without preparation with media present. Pope Benedict learned from his mistake (condom fiasco, Ragensburg was not a mistake) and did not repeat it. That is to say Pope Francis is being rather stubborn when it comes to things. (I probably shouldn't talk I'm pretty stubborn myself) and this combined with the seemingly ostentatious humility make for a person that some can't give the benefit of the doubt to.

Pope Francis has indeed said some things on the ordination of women, usury and a few other topics which are quite good and people definitely need to hear these words. But he (Pope Francis) needs to do a better job in framing his answers so that these things will minimally be done....answering the question might help

Gene said...

Yes, Anonymous, it is like the moron trolls on this blog. Why are they here? I don't go over to Pray for Tail and stir crap. I simply don't give a damn about why they think or believe. They ain't Catholic…to Hell with them.

Anonymous said...

Didn't Francis say to go home and cause a mess?

And we have to obey a pope don't we? Even a pope who says white is black and black is white.

Now I was brought up to believe that no pope would be foolish enough to say white is black etc., but times have certainly changed. So if Francis can cause a mess why can't anyone else. And who is to judge anyway right.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

The ones who are causing the mess are those like the comment above this who manipulate what the pope says to serve their ideologies, either on the heterodox right or heterodox left. All of a sudden, though, the heterodox right acts toward Pope Francis as the heterodox left did toward Pope Benedict. There are those pesky little mortal sins called hatred, derision and calumny. But don't let that stop the heterodox right from speaking or writing!

Of course the heterodox left committed the same mortal sins against Pope Benedict and now they manipulate Pope Francis by partially quoting him in order to make the world think he's their darling, when of course, if they quoted His Holiness properly His Holiness would not be! This is called manipulation.

Anonymous said...


I don't wish to criticize, but your contention that there was a false spirit of Vatican II in the 1960's and 70's is just not accurate.


Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

You are correct; but it began early in the 1960's although I much prefer today compared to the 1970's which I lived through. While not everyone would agree, it is not as bad today as then.

Bill said...

I remember still my one exposure to a folk Mass, Father, and must agree that things now are not as bad (mostly) as in the 1970s.

On the other hand, I do wish Pope Francis would not so often provide the perfect sound bites for the secular media. I know full well that he has not changed doctrine, and nothing he has said is at odds with doctrine. Yet I could wish he spoke in ways less easily manipulated.

The media will manipulate, anyway, but why make it easier?

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Bill I agree, my biggest fear is that the papacy is becoming too much Pope Francis and the cult of the personality or celebrity. And yes based on this ethos he needs to be more circumspect. I preferred Pope Benedict approach to the papacy, not populist or celebrity/personality driven but pointing to the institution of the papacy, not the particular pope.