In my most humble opinion, Pope Benedict’s hermeneutic of continuity which he enunciated in a very cogent way at his Christmas talk many years ago to the cardinals of the Roman Curia, was the centerpiece of is papacy and a way forward to heal the schism between the Church prior to Vatican II and the Church after Vatican II.
I embraced and embrace Pope Benedict’s theology and also that he wasn’t a dictator about it, which in hindsight may have been a mistake, but proposed rather than imposed his papal leadership.
A direct consequence of the theology of the hermeneutics of continuity was Summorum Pontificum and the letter to the world’s bishops that accompanied it.
The letter, in particular, was/is a good teaching devise for the theology it contains.
But now, and with the signature of the reigning pope, Pope Francis has completely destroyed the theological magisterium that Pope Benedict brought to his papacy and to the Church Universal.
What I was able to teach about the two practiced forms of the one Roman Rite, was possible to teach with papal support on July 15, 2021 but I was not able to teach the very same thing the next day, July 16th. A whole corpus of papal teachings by one pope, now retired or emeritus, was completely repudiated by the current reigning pope, Pope Francis.
And apart from anyone’s affection for the older form of the Mass or even the theology of Vatican II with the hermeneutics of continuity that preceded the Council, the authority of the papacy and the entire Magisterium of the Church is weakened by the current pope because the next pope can undo any and everything that the previous pope said and promulgated or any other pope or Council of the Church.
That’s the scandal of the Motu Proprio of the current reigning pope—he just pulled the rug out from underneath the entire papacy and its magisterium.
48 comments:
Father McDonald,
A must read at Rorate - an auxiliary bishop in the Netherlands of all places lambastes the Pope of “Mercy” and says the Liturgy is not the pope’s play thing. He also points out the blatant hypocrisy at its base
This is the Papal version of "Rule by Executive Order". Here in the US this is now commonplace at both the the federal and state level. It is a dictatorial practice in almost all cases. It's use as a way to rule by fiat is intoxicating to those who impose their will this way.
St. Francis of Assisi, a great saint, highly mischaracterized and the purported hero of a certain high-ranking prelate, made this final prophecy shortly before his death. Although all of this certainly seems to describe our times, numbers 2, 4 & 6 seem especially apt:
1. The time is fast approaching in which there will be great trials and afflictions; perplexities and dissensions, both spiritual and temporal, will abound; the charity of many will grow cold, and the malice of the wicked will increase.
2. The devils will have unusual power, the immaculate purity of our Order, and of others, will be so much obscured that there will be very few Christians who will obey the true Sovereign Pontiff and the Roman Church with loyal hearts and perfect charity. At the time of this tribulation a man, not canonically elected, will be raised to the Pontificate, who, by his cunning, will endeavor to draw many into error and death.
3. Then scandals will be multiplied, our Order will be divided, and many others will be entirely destroyed, because they will consent to error instead of opposing it.
4. There will be such diversity of opinions and schisms among the people, the religious and the clergy, that, except those days were shortened, according to the words of the Gospel, even the elect would be led into error, were they not specially guided, amid such great confusion, by the immense mercy of God.
5. Then our Rule and manner of life will be violently opposed by some, and terrible trials will come upon us. Those who are found faithful will receive the crown of life; but woe to those who, trusting solely in their Order, shall fall into tepidity, for they will not be able to support the temptations permitted for the proving of the elect.
6. Those who preserve in their fervor and adhere to virtue with love and zeal for the truth, will suffer injuries and, persecutions as rebels and schismatics; for their persecutors, urged on by the evil spirits, will say they are rendering a great service to God by destroying such pestilent men from the face of the earth. but the Lord will be the refuge of the afflicted, and will save all who trust in Him. And in order to be like their Head, [Christ] these, the elect, will act with confidence, and by their death will purchase for themselves eternal life; choosing to obey God rather than man, they will fear nothing, and they will prefer to perish rather than consent to falsehood and perfidy.
7. Some preachers will keep silence about the truth, and others will trample it under foot and deny it. Sanctity of life will be held in derision even by those who outwardly profess it, for in those days JESUS CHRIST WILL SEND THEM NOT A TRUE PASTOR, BUT A DESTROYER."
Don't you think that this requires serious consideration to invalidate the Francis papacy? I think when a pope refuses to address the legitimacy of his teachings, because he knows that he's backed into a corner and he cannot answer, it becomes just cause. If he does respond he will sink himself further into the morass he’s created or he must admit his fault. Neither a good option for him because they become the thread that unravels everything.
Seems to me that in order to stop the politicization of the papacy there will have to be a close examination of the reign of Francis starting with the illegitimate lobbying on his behalf before his election and ending with whatever his last petulant act might be.
I don't believe Pope Francis is concerned about Tradition-minded Catholics rejecting Vatican II or the New Mass. I think he is far more concerned about the growing number of people who are calling him an antipope.
This is the only reason I became Catholic and STAY Catholic.
Continuity.
When the Church rejects its own past practices and doctrines, sugar-coat it however they will, and sugar-coat it they do, what they are REALLY saying is, "They got it all wrong!"
And if they got it wrong for the first 2000yrs, there no particular reason to believe, and every reason to disbelieve, they now have it right in only the last 50yrs.
Truth is immutable. If it subject to constant revision, it is only The Great And Terrible Oz.
Which clearly seems to be in what progressives believe, which is nothing but it all smoke and mirrors. They only preach busy-work to keep their minds off the fact it really has no meaning and ends with a hole in the ground and worm food.
Sign me up!
Or don't, which is what more and more say every day.
Fr. McD:
It not only weakens the magisterium but does tremendous damage to the Church militant. By that I mean that radically changing what was once important to ordinary Catholics and then to suddenly become not important gives the impression that the Church is a purely human organisation like all the others. This was the case with the radical changes to the liturgy after the Council, and even simple things like eating meat on Fridays which did tremendous harm to the trust of the faithful in the Church as a bride of Christ: ordinary Catholics were then as today not theologians who would understand and agree to these arbitrary yet significant changes, but like all ordinary people, work with impressions from the array of information they were getting. On one day one is welcomed to attend a TLM, on the next one is an outcast if one tries. Worse still is the motivation for the changes: to become friends to the world.
The Superior General of the SSPX recently made a statement on Traditionis Custodes. I do not want to judge its truth, but for certain, this is the impression that many had following the Council:
"On one side is the Mass of All Times. It is the standard of a Church that defies the world and is certain of victory, for its battle is nothing less that the continuation of the battle that Our Blessed Lord waged to destroy sin and to destroy the kingdom of Satan. It is by the Mass and through the Mass that Our Lord enlists Catholic souls into His ranks, by sharing with them both His Cross and His victory. From all this follows a fundamentally militant conception of Christian life that is characterised by two elements: a spirit of sacrifice and an unwavering supernatural hope.
On the other side stands the Mass of Paul VI. It is an authentic expression of a Church that wants to live in harmony with the world and that lends an ear to the world’s demands. It represents a Church that, in the final analysis, no longer needs to fight against the world because it no longer has anything to reproach the world. Here is a Church that no longer has anything to teach the world because it listens to the powers of the world. It is a Church that no longer needs the Sacrifice of Our Blessed Lord because, having lost the notion of sin, it no longer has anything for which to atone. Here is a Church that no longer has the mission of restoring the universal kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ, because it wants to make its contribution to the creation on this earth of a better world that is freer, more egalitarian and more eco-responsible – and all this with purely human means. This humanist mission that the men of the Church have given themselves must necessarily be matched by a liturgy that is equally humanist and emptied of any notion of sacredness."
People left the Church millions upon millions after the Council when they were fed the impression that if the Church cannot beat the world after all, then She must join it. A rethink of the role of the Council in the disaster that followed is needed, not a going back to upholding the rigidly ideological understanding of the Council that immediately followed it.
All of this speculation about a pope who is obviously mediocre and why he did this is pointless. WHY he did this, only HE knows for sure, but his excuses given with the Motu Proprio don't stand up to scrutiny anyway, so why bother arguing about it?
The Motu Proprio and its accompanying letter is a "tell". It gives the game away for the modernist agenda and reveals their status. So I'm going to say the quiet part out loud:
We won. Jesus won. The people of God won. God is unbeatable. The Mass of all ages isn't going to fall because of one man's pettiness or the frustration of a bunch of geriatric hippies and homosexual men serving a Church whose dogmas they don't even believe.
We won.
WE WON.
The "Church of the New Springtime/accompaniment/dialogue/tolerating sin/standing for nothing, etc." is over. IT'S OVER. The Emperor has no clothes.
The pachapapa lost.
We won.
Start acting like it and quit acting like losers. Francis and his fake church are done. It's just a matter of watching their house of cards tumble.
It's over.
Anon1018....do you not think it curious that someone who worries over being called an anti-Pope would be the first to abrogate the ancient Latin Mass, and the first to ever do so? This is his way of showing to everyone he is no anti-Pope?
That strikes me as someone who says, "No! I am NOT a murderer! And if you say that again, I shall kill you!"
One of the most outrageous and offensive things that I have read is what the Costa Rican bishops had to say about the Church "reChristianizing" the liturgy after Vatican II. Check out the story with their words on catholicarena.com.
My, oh my. There hasn't been this much gall-danged consternation since Verda Tompkins popped a strap in mixed company at the last Coweta Country Club bridge tournament... My, Oh my...
Anonymous at 11:04 AM,
Bingo!!!
The only thing Pope Francis abrogated was his own credibility.
Tom Marcus,
You are correct.
This demographic sinkhole is widening and is fairly close to swallowing the Novus Ordo Church up. The Bishop from the Netherlands over at Rorate, pretty much confirms it. He says the Novus Ordo is collapsing and it certainly has in the Netherlands. The US Catholic Church is pretty much on life support. Of course, I believe what Our Lord said that the Church would last until the consummation of the world, but I also believe Pope Benedict was being prophetic when he said we would have a much smaller Church. The 3 generations below me, other than those who attend the EF, confirm this prediction. The vast majority of them simply have walked away. I see it in my own Irish, Catholic family. Pope Benedict issuing Summorum Pontificum was his last, best hope for slowing this trend down. Pope Francis is hell bent on snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
Our DIOSAV Bishop Parkes was here yesterday and told us that the already-scheduled TLM monthly masses will continue for now while he tries to discern the way forward in implementing the latest Motu Proprio. He also said he is meeting with “the priests” (it wasn’t clear if he meant just those who celebrate the TLM, or all priests of the diocese) on Thursday of this week. Prayers promised for you all!
Maybelle Latroll....why should anyone be concerned when the Pope says, "We got it all wrong, but THIS time we got it right!"?
The only people concerned are those who believe the Church is everything it has always claimed, which excludes you.
Now go have another beer and smoke and ponder your next true genius snide comment so you can impress everyone with your scintillating wit...or, at least impress yourself.
--Father Andrew J. Fabacher ("Jax" to my friends. Everyone else can simply call me "Father Andrew J. Fabacher")
Everyone is making much of the contradiction between Benedict and Francis here, but the really interesting contradiction is between Francis and Francis.
Last week, Bishop Fernando Rifan of the Prelature of Campos Brazil stated that Pope Francis told him that the Tridentine Mass was a treasure that should be preserved in a private audience a few years ago. (Bishop Rifan doesn't believe that the letter applies to his EF only community)
He told the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate in an audience that can be found on youtube that he has no problem with priests using the old rite if they believe that it helps them adore God better.
He approved an encouraging letter to the FSSP for their 25th anniversary.
In light of these, TC is just bizarre, and I wonder if someone took advantage of his poor health.
Here is the letter approved by Francis to the FSSP in 2013:
Blessing of Pope Francis on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of the FSSP
Published 28 October 2013
On the occasion of the 25th anniversary of the foundation of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter, Pope Francis joins the thanksgiving of her members for the work accomplished in this quarter-century spent at the service of ecclesial communion cum Petro et sub Petro.
It was in a moment of great trial for the Church that the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Peter was created. In a great spirit of obedience and hope, her founders turned with confidence to the Successor of Peter in order to offer the faithful attached to the Missal of 1962 the possibility of living their faith in the full communion of the Church. The Holy Father encourages them to pursue their mission of reconciliation between all the faithful, whichever may be their sensibility, and this to work so that all welcome one another in the profession of the same faith and the bond of an intense fraternal charity.
By way of the celebration of the sacred Mysteries according to the extraordinary form of the Roman rite and the orientations of the Constitution on the Liturgy Sacrosanctum Concilium, as well as by passing on the apostolic faith as it is presented in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, may they contribute, in fidelity to the living Tradition of the Church, to a better comprehension and implementation of the Second Vatican Council.
The Holy Father exhorts them, according to their own charism, to take an active part in the mission of the Church in the world of today, through the testimony of a holy life, a firm faith and an inventive and generous charity.
Entrusting to the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary and of Saint Peter, apostle, all the pilgrims assembled in Lourdes or at the church of Saint-Sulpice in Paris to give thanks to the Lord on this occasion, the Holy Father grants them with open heart the Apostolic Benediction.
Paris, October 28, 2013
On the feast of Saints Simon and Jude, Apostles.
+ Luigi VENTURA
Apostolic Nuncio
Anonymous,
You just ruined Maybelle Latrolls day. Bravo!
What seems really odd is that the subject document was probably signed by a signature machine while the Pope may have been under general anesthesia. He is not well obviously but very ill. Thank God he seems to be recovering after a life threatening surgical procedure. How do we know for sure he even knows about this letter?
Can you just imagine the curial bureaucracy? Msgr 1 to Msgr 2: We have a crisis! God forbid! What if he doe not make it? Hurry up and get this letter out pronto! (The would say it in Italian of course.)
The quality of the document is not quite up to snuff it has a few editing errors. That Jesuit education is not quite what it was before Vatican II either.
Anon 2:02-
Same as the way he is demonstrating to everyone that he is NOT an anti-Pope by abolishing the ancient Roman rite,
He is also, with same document, demonstrating to the SSPX that he truly CAN be trusted.
It makes perfect sense when you think about it, when properly approached with the correct mental outlook and disposition. ANY paranoid schizophrenic would see the logic instantly.
--Father Andrew J. Fabacher ("Jax" to my friends. Everyone else can simply call me "Father Andrew J. Fabacher")
Now, Fr. Fabacher, we're all Baptists here in Coweta County. But, you know, honey, we can read.
You say that your Pope Francis said, "We got it all wrong, but THIS time we got it right!"?"
Now, from what I've read, that just a teenie-weenie bit of an exaggeration, isn't it? I mean, it sounds like the fish tales my husband Sherman (No, He is NOT named for General Sherman) Lamar tells me when he gets back from a day on West Point Lake over by LaGrange.
And, honey, as I understand it, your Pope Benedict is a beer drinker too. In fact, I've seen the pictures. So when you want to try to insult someone, maybe you oughtn't be such a dumpfbacke.
By the way, was Ruth your granny? We knew a Ruth Fabacher when we lived in New Orleans. My husband Sherman Lamar was manager of Commander's Palace back then.
John-
The only problem with that scenario is that Francis personally broached the subject long ago to Italian bishops and floated several revisions to this final document. It was written well before the surgery, and the date is only the release date.
You DO have a point that it is a very sloppy document, but that is nothing new for Holy Pope Francis, and actually is par for the course.
--Father Andrew J. Fabacher ("Jax" to my friends. Everyone else can simply call me "Father Andrew J. Fabacher")
It just doesn't add up. Who would've expected that the same pope who gave blanket permission to the SSPX to validly hear confessions, and opened the door to them witnessing marriages, would then torpedo chances of reconciliation with them?
Indeed, I too read the article on Rorate and like Pierre said of all places the Netherlands that a bishop is defending the Latin Mass. Can you believe that prior to the Council, the Netherlands Mass attendance was at 80%! Now Mass attendance is at 1% to 5% depending on what city, oddly enough Amsterdam has the highest Mass attendance in the nation, do to its many non ethic Dutch citizens. The fastest growing religion in Holland is well no surprise ISLAM, Moroccan and Turkish immigrants are the prime reason for this and like England, Germany, France, Italy, Sweden, Norway, Belgium cannot be stopped. Thank God the Eastern European countries have staved off the Islamic takeover for now, knowing after centuries of fending off Turkish invasions what would be in-store for them if Islam ever took root in Eastern Europe. Western Europe for the most part don't believe in Catholicism or Lutheranism anymore so there is nothing to fight for and Muslims only have to conquer by birthrate alone and not a shot being fired.
Maybelle LaTroll is just the latest in Father K's attempts to be "clever."
Anonymous at 4:12 PM,
I always said that Vatican II was called to deal with the religious sickness on the European continent. At the time Catholicism was flourishing in the English speaking world: the US, Canada, and Australia. It was all about the Europeans. What the Council Fathers overlooked was a potential cause staring them in the face. The two world wars fought within 25 years of each other which had a material, adverse affect on society there. Of course, that would have required thinking on the European hierarchy's part. Perish the thought of that. The Council should have been limited to THEIR problems. They could have even called it a "Synod!"
Maybelle Latroll-
Pope Benedict never suffered from perpetually bloodshot eyes, nor did he pace around before Masses sucking down smokes like unto an employee who hates their job on their break time.
Very nice job of again taking on the persona of a woman, something you do quite frequently, and practice do tell.
No exaggeration saying anyone suppressing the ancient rite, while pushing the new rite as the only rite, is saying all which came before is wrong. And as if the rite is the only thing this papacy has tried to change in contrast to ancient disciplines? Sorry, I would need as much beer as you drink, and more, to agree with that, and I am quite attached to both my liver and lungs.
--Father Andrew J. Fabacher ("Jax" to my friends. Everyone else can simply call me "Father Andrew J. Fabacher")
Dear Fr Andrew @ 3.01,
Perhaps for not so much the traits of paranoia and or schizophrenia but more a case of "crazy like a fox"?
Anon above,
Re increasing Muslim numbers in the UK and Western Europe...well at least almost all of them actually BELIEVE in their God and most take their scriptures, the Koran, seriously...unlike tens of millions of people in Western Europe who were baptised Catholic or Lutheran but are now basically secular humanist agnostics with an outlook or world view and lifestyle that is: "sterile, deceptive and barbarous".
The most senior prelate in the Netherlands, Cardinal Willem Eijk, in 2018 publicly rebuked Pope Francis in an open letter for 'creating confusion' among the faithful, 'endangering the unity of the Church' and allowing 'a drift towards apostasy from the truth'.
A year later (May 2019) a number of eminent intellectuals wrote to all the bishops of the Roman Church effectively accusing Pope Francis of heresy. They might be dismissed as a coterie of ultra-conservative malcontents, but the lead signatory was Fr Aidan Nichols OP, a highly respected academic noted for his carefully considered and moderate views.
The Francis papacy is clearly dysfunctional but when did it start to unravel? In my view the turning point was the unholy farce that was the 2014 Synod on the family when PF's blatant attempt to rig it backfired spectacularly.
When this papacy comes to an end it will leave confusion and division in its wake. The longer it lasts, the less likely it is that his successor will want to continue on the road to ruin, which is some consolation.
Pope Francis isn't quite at Archbishop Ireland levels let, but he's trying.
Golly, the doom and gloom crowd is out in force! Meanwhile, tomorrow I mail in my contribution to the Archbishop's Annual Appeal for Atlanta, headed by the bishop who is Father M's former boss and thankfully not a glum prelate. Some 50 seminarians studying for priesthood. When the Archdiocese was established 59 years ago---I think that was during Vatican 2?---there were about 30,000 Catholics in the northern part of Georgia. Now, over a million. Many parishes over 10,000 members. If that is "life support", well, I can't imagine what prosperity is.
And what on earth, Michael, is "illegitimate lobbying" on behalf of Francis? Really? One can't seek the position? Maybe I need to read more about papal elections, the "dos" and "don'ts".
No, the Church in America is not overall on "life support"---in some areas yes, but some of that doubtless is do to folks leaving the cold Northeast for warm and (sometimes wet) Florida.
Anonymous K at 9:21 pm,
Please provide the conversion statistics since Vatican II for Atlanta, otherwise I will assume the “growth” came from Northerners fleeing the cold and burdensome taxes and regulations, otherwise why would they come to a “racist” state.
If the Church is not on life support, I would like your definition of “vibrancy” since there are less priests, less religious, less Catholic schools and institutions since the Council and far less Catholics attend Sunday Mass or believing in the Real Presence.
For a good many of the last 59 years, Atlanta was the fastest growing or in the top five fastest growing cities in the United States. Part of that population explosion would include Catholics--so to suggest that the archdiocese itself had some sort of incredible evangelization program that led to massive conversions to jump from merely 30,000 to more than a million Catholics is way off the mark. In 1960, the population of Atlanta was 776,000 and by 2010 the population had risen to 4,544,000. Any city with that kind of population growth would naturally include a substantial Catholic population.
Go into any Novus Ordo parish, even the "thriving" ones, and you will find that below the surface, the Catholic Church is evolving into something akin to what has happened to Judaism. A small core are "observant" Catholics. The overwhelming majority do not regularly attend Mass, strive to live in a state of grace or care much about what the Church teaches, except in a vague way ("Why would God send ME to Hell? I haven't murdered anyone?"). Go to most Novus Ordo parishes during the hours Confessions are heard--if they are even offered. You will not have to wait long, trust me. Compare Mass attendance on Christmas with Mass attendance on any Sunday in Ordinary Time. The same people who show up on Christmas only are the same people who believe they are entitled to a fancy church wedding and should not have to bother with any questions or training to get their children baptized. And polls consistently remind us that only about 30% of those people even BELIEVE in the Real Presence. Go into any Traditional Parish or Traditional Mass at a Novus Ordo parish. You will find a different culture altogether. You will see people who don't just behave at Mass, but are reverent. You will talk to people who actually BELIEVE what the Church teaches and embrace it. 99 percent of them BELIEVE in the Real Presence. They are raising children not to be successful people who happen to be Catholic. They are raising them to be SAINTS--and they are not contracepting like the rest of society--including Novus Ordo Catholics.
Finally, yes, you DO need to read about papal elections, because there are specific protocols that are forbidden, including trying to groom candidates and build voting factions for given candidates before the election. No one knows whether Bergoglio actually sought the position as pope, but the other members of the Sankt Gallen Mafia have left no doubt nor made any attempt to hide that they sought his candidacy as he was a favorite of their leader, the late Cardinal Martini. Instead, they boasted about it and that cloud of possible illegitimacy will always hang over Bergoglio's papacy.
So yeah, your feigned, "Golly, such doom and gloom" is correct. When you take the most productive arm of your church and try to shut them down, there is a lot to be gloomy about. But since we don't hinge our hopes on man, but on God, our gloom has a strong undercurrent of confidence in God.
Anyone else find it odd that searches for "Father Andrew J. Fabacher" come back with no results?
To the trolls having the fake name contest: Stop wasting our time. To the rest of the serious people ignoring them. Thank you and good work.
One of the constant themes heard here is that prior to Vatican Two, 95% (or some similarly high percentage) of all Catholic believed everything the Church taught.
This, despite the ownership of many thousands of slaves by Catholic "masters."
This, despite the participation by tens of thousands of Catholic Germans in the Nazi regime's war and attempted genocide.
This, despite the sack of Constantinople by Catholic forces in 1204.
This, despite the examples of such Catholic European political leaders as King Leopold II of Belgium and the genocide carried out in the Congo under his rule for his own personal enrichment.
This, despite the vocal opposition by Catholics to desegregation in the public AND parochial schools of Boston in the early 1970's.
It is one thing to say "I believe in..." It is another thing entirely to live the faith.
Anonymous at 8:27 AM,
He took lessons in sneakiness from "Anonymous K."
Anon827/Maybelline-girl Latroll-
If, as you state, you had spent ANY of your childhood or adulthood within 250 miles of New Orleans, you would know me instantly.
That you do not, shows you are simply a bald faced liar who really needs to not only fix your running mascara but also work extensively on your google skills before making up stories so easily disproved.
Now, suck down another cigarette to calm the nerves, and get busy creating a new persona so you can ignore multiple exellent rebuttals to prior troll posts of yours under other names, and get back to your true vocation of trying to disrupt a priest's website as your good works you will offer at your particular judgement, and good luck with that.
--Father Andrew J. Fabacher ("Jax" to my friends. Everyone else can simply call me "Father Andrew J. Fabacher")
Anonymous at 9:12 AM,
I see our resident sneak is back. Hey, here is something for you to chew on, although you may not understand it. It is about "unity."
"I think that it is he [Francis] who contradicts communion. We are witnessing a rare case, envisaged by theologians, where the pope destroys an effort at communion, one that is in progress and which of course requires time and a genuine trust on all sides. And it is this trust that he destroys. That a pope can undo what his predecessor has done, with such ease, in two pages, poses a problem for the institution he leads and its reliability. Moreover, the Pope had declared during one of his frequent airplane conferences, to the journalist of La Croix Nicolas Senèze, that he was not afraid of schisms. This flies in the face of his task as a pastor, as a steward of unity. We can observe today that he is indeed not afraid of schisms, of cutting through, of separating, rather than uniting."
Tom Marcus,
Thank you for your reply to Anon. Your answer is better than I would have. Most probable that Anon knows the rules better than either of us but as you mention there is a falseness to the comments. I didn't know that it was forbidden to attempt to build coalitions of support for a papal candidate and push for his election before the reports about the efforts to get Cardinal Bergoglio elected. He taught me something new about the rules of Church by breaking them. Thank you Pope Francis.
Today, the Becciu trial has just hit the mainstream media in the UK, not least because one of the shady property deals was in Chelsea, London. Now, coverage of the Catholic Church in the MSM is usually inaccurate and/or hostile, but this particular story is going to hang around, not least because Pope Francis is implicated.
In 2013 the cardinals had the opportunity to elect someone who would deal with institutional corruption in the Vatican. Instead they chose someone from South America, where there is not a single government that is not corrupt. Did Becciu and his crooked coterie which included his 'niece' (daughter) Cecilia Moragna frame Cardinal Pell because he refused to be corrupted? It is hoped that the truth will emerge in the trial, but it is more likely that PF will close down proceedings if and when they come close to his own personal involvement.
I lived through the disastrous pontificate of Paul VI but never dreamed we would be in the situation we find ourselves in now.
"One of the constant themes heard here is that prior to Vatican Two, 95% (or some similarly high percentage) of all Catholic believed everything the Church taught."
This quote, which raises a legitimate point, is followed by a short laundry list of the shortcomings of Catholics during various historical epochs. In actuality, if one did enough research, a list 10 times as long could easily be produced.
What is significant is that the failures of these Catholics was at no time ENCOURAGED by the Church. Since about 1967 or so and especially after 1970, we have had a Church that paid lip service to its dogmas, rules and disciplines, while hardly daring to criticize the public defiance of them or giving an implicit endorsement by their silence. The current pontificate takes this omission even further by refusing to name sins as sins ("Who am I to judge?" Hint: You're the pope, that's who!) and issuing documents that beg huge questions about whether we have decided to just plain contradict what the Church has always taught.
Perhaps your observation could best be answered by the observation of just one teaching of the Church. Even BEFORE Humanae Vitae, most Catholics understood that artificial contraception was forbidden. But Novus Ordo Catholics contracept at just about the same rate ae anyone else, and it is obvious when you see the few families who bother to come to Mass hauling their 2.5 children with them. Go to the Traditional Mass and you will see young, big families. They don't just pay "lip service" to their beliefs, but pay for those beliefs by living a less luxurious life, facing the daily anxiety of paying bills and taking the extra effort of homeschooling their children.
And we've had bad popes before. But if you look at the worst of those popes, they were bad because of personal sins or failures to lead or set good examples. But NONE of them DARED to tamper with the deposit of faith.
Until now.
Tom Marcus,
And "you know who" will not reply to you with counter arguments because there aren't any. Unlike Father McDonald who it trying, he will just continue to slop around doing the "same old, same old."
Mr Anon above,
Could all the bad things done by Christians, Catholics in mudieval times and Protestant and Catholics later maybe have something to do with fallen sunken human nature rather than the teachings given to us from the NT and the creeds etc? Maybe?
Regards,
Sammy Clutterbuck, aged 11.
PS - me and my buddy Billy Bob think the dear leader of the Chinese looks like Winnie the Poo...and later Billy Bob said something about what can said to be the cause of bad things done by men who follow or followed Mr Lenin, the Man of Steel and Meow Zo Dong and Che and so on...but_
Billy Bob lost me there!
Now we are going fishing ..
Sammy - EVERY bad thing done is due to our fallen nature.
I'm not blaming any Scriptural or Church teaching for the failures of Catholics.
I am saying that the halcyon days of yore, where, according to many here, everything was right with the Catholic world because 90% or thereabouts of Catholics believed the Church's teachings, weren't as hunky-dory as the legends purport.
Yes but, yes but...
IF every BAD thing done is caused by our naughty natures ...
Do those BAD things include my aunty Jilly Sue crossing the border to work as a nurse in womyns reproductive health care OR my uncle Clarence not just being you know what...but dressing like Jilly Sue... or more like old Aunty Mavis.. in New York libraries and reading Winnie the Poo and Doctor Sues to kids younger than me?
Could that bee?
Love and best wishes xxx,
Kylie Ann Clutterbuck aged 10 and a halve.
Out of the mouths of babes in the woods.
Post a Comment