Translate

Saturday, November 13, 2021

WHERE-IN POPE FRANCIS CONTRADICTS HIMSELF AS WELL AS HIS PREDECESSORS


With Pope Francis, did he cancel himself in Traditionis Custodes? Did he participate in the cancel culture of the day with this decree and cancel himself?

 I don’t normally suggest 1Peter5 because it can be like skating on thin ice when it comes to the full communion a Catholic owes to the Successor of Saint Peter. 

But the author of this article posted there makes some interesting points about the use of the 1962 Missal and establishing new feasts for it and prefaces under the pontificate of Pope Francis as well as liberalizing the use of the 1955 Roman Missal, again under the pontificate of Pope Francis and as early as one year ago, in the 2020’s!

It is said that Pope Francis gives his ear to all the wrong people and has surrounded himself with all the wrong people and since day one of his pontificate. These people were seeking revenge on Pope Benedict and Pope St. John Paul for putting the brakes on their agenda. These are progressive skullduggeries. Progressives in the Church, when you scratch them, are actually quite closed minded, to say the least. 

It is all really very sad but I think the last hurrah of the shrinking through death of the school of rupture with the Church prior to Vatican II rather than Pope Benedict’s well reasoned and sound school of renewal in continuity:

This article highlights the peculiar nature of the current pontificate and what Pope Francis originally allowed only to take it back. I think this is wrong to say today, but we use to call it an “Indian giver” no? 

Hidden Origins of Traditionis Custodes: Grillo and Francis’s Self-Abrogation

The Forgotten Francis Decrees On the twenty-second of February, 2020. The Feast of the Chair of Saint Peter. Quo magis. Cum sanctissima. Documents of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, released with the approval of the Supreme Pontiff …

READ MORE

2 comments:

Thomas Garrett said...

"Indian Giver" should not be an occasion for anyone among the "take offense" groups to take offense--not that it would stop them.

The entire point of the term is a reflection on The White Man--not the Indians. The White Man broke almost every treaty made with the Indians. They gave, they took back. That is what an "Indian Giver" is.

Now that we've got THAT straightened out, maybe we can burn down a city now with more "peaceful" BLM and ANTIFA protests and cancel me and everyone who agrees.

Tolerance. You gotta love it.

TJM said...

Tolerance for me but not for thee!