Translate

Tuesday, January 31, 2023

IT SEEMS THAT POPE FRANCIS IS MANAGING TO ANGER, INFURIATE AND POLARIZE BOTH THOSE WHO ARE ORTHODOX AND THOSE WHO ARE HETERODOX

 

Wow! Bishop  Bätzing of Germany has said this about Pope Francis and his way to teach and communicate via befuddled and confusing interviews is “extremely questionable.”

I have always thought that the ultra-traditionalists who want the exclusive use of the TLM as well as the Church without the Vatican II documents, because they are so organized and passionate about their views, would be the first to go into a full blown schism, although not an apostasy as they, like most Eastern Orthodox Churches, still maintain the Catholic Faith. The Orthodox don’t accept Vatican II either. 

Apart from Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, there were no other bishops advocating what the archbishop was advocating and being disobedient to Pope Paul VI at first and then Pope St. John Paul II, later, who excommunicated him when he ordained bishops. 

This is not true with the German hierarchy where there is not only the potential for schism, but also apostasy. They are creating an apostate Church and damning Pope Francis and others who dare question the German way. It is a kind of fascism that Germans and the rest of us know all too well!

Thus, the heterodox pose the greatest threat to a schism and not only that, to apostasy. 

This is really too hot to handle, like a hot German potato:

READ CNA’S NEWS STORY IN FULL HERE

HERE ARE EXCERPTS FROM THE CNA ARTICLE:

Bishop Georg Bätzing has criticized Pope Francis and dismissed the pope’s recent words that the controversial German Synodal Way is unhelpful, damaging, and ideologically poisoned, saying the Germans had “fundamentally different views of synodality” than Rome. 

In an interview published Jan. 27, the president of Germany’s Bishops’ Conference said Bätzing, considered the pope’s “way of leading the Church by way of interviews” as “extremely questionable,” reported CNA Deutsch, CNA’s German-language news partner. Bätzing was referring to comments Pope Francis made about the Synodal Way, among other subjects, in a wide-ranging interview last week with the Associated Press. 

“Why didn’t the pope talk to us about this when we were with him in November?” Bätzing asked. “There would have been the opportunity, but he did not take the opportunity for discussion then.”

‘The brink of schism’

Cardinal Walter Kasper also warned the German bishops that they could not sidestep “the authority of the pope and ultimately the Second Vatican Council” or be undermined by “tricky reinterpretation.” 

A bishop cannot “subsequently renounce, in whole or in part, the authority conferred sacramentally in the succession of the apostles” by binding himself to a synodal council “without violating the responsibility conferred on him personally,” Kasper emphasized, according to CNA Deutsch

“Resistance to the letter from Rome, or attempts to slyly reinterpret and avoid it, despite all well-intentioned protestations, inevitably lead to the brink of schism and thus plunge the people of God in Germany into an even deeper crisis.”



16 comments:

Tom Makin said...

Are we really surprised with all this. Batzing has a point re: HFPF's way of NOT communicating! He is VERY passive aggressive, the Pope that is. That said, and I have said this before, HFPF can bring this to an end very simply: "Just say NO". Replace these disenchanted Bishops immediately. Stack the deck in Germany the way he has with the College of Cardinal Electors. Surely the Pope knows all this. Inquiring minds would like to know what is really going on "behind the green curtain"...I mean Chasuble :)

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Tom, you hit the nail on the head about Pope Francis’ passive aggressive nature. It could be cultural, meaning “Italian” put on steroids by the Italian/Argentinian culture. That Pope Francis would not meet with nor respond to the Dubia Cardinals is a classic form of passive-aggressiveness, the silent treatment. The fact that he answered so quickly Fr. James Martin dubia questions, three in total, is a passive aggressive act against cardinals who question him. He answers a simple priest but not those who are suppose to be helping him in his administration of the worldwide Church, the Cardinals. That’s a passive aggressive way of sticking it to cardinals that question him. It’s all very sad and the basic problem of this papacy, and there are a few more of course, is a psychological one.

Anonymous said...

Father McDonald said..."Apart from Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, there were no other bishops advocating what the archbishop was advocating and being disobedient to Pope Paul VI at first and then Pope St. John Paul II, later, who excommunicated him when he ordained bishops."

On December 2, 1986 A.D., Bishop De Castro Mayer, as well as Archbishop Lefebvre, declared that Pope Saint John Paul II had rejected the Faith. (The same had applied to Pope Saint Paul VI.)

Bishop De Castro Mayer, as well as Archbishop Lefebvre, declared:

"...the Roman authorities turn their backs on their predecessors and break with the Catholic Church, and they put themselves at the service of the destroyers of Christianity and of the universal Kingdom of Our Lord Jesus Christ.

"The present acts of John Paul II and the national episcopates illustrates, year by year, this radical change in the conception of the Faith, the Church, the priesthood, the world, and salvation by grace."

"John Paul II encourages the false religions to pray to their false gods—an immeasurable, unprecedented scandal."

"The rupture does not come from us, but from Paul VI and John Paul II who break with their predecessors."

"This denial of the whole past of the Church by these two Popes and the bishops who imitate them is an inconceivable impiety for those who remain Catholic in fidelity to twenty centuries of the same Faith."

"Thus we consider as null everything inspired by this spirit of denial of the past: all the post-conciliar reforms, and all the acts of Rome accomplished in this impiety."

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Anonymous said...

Father McDonald said..."That Pope Francis would not meet with nor respond to the Dubia Cardinals is a classic form of passive-aggressiveness, the silent treatment. The fact that he answered so quickly Fr. James Martin dubia questions, three in total, is a passive aggressive act against cardinals who question him."

Numerous Churchmen/theologians declared that the dubia were designed to trap Pope Francis.

Also, numerous Churchmen had criticized the dubia Cardinals in the following fashion:

One report had noted:

"The Vatican’s doctrinal head (Cardinal Müller) has challenged several cardinals’ public questioning of the doctrinal validity of Amoris laetitia, saying the document is “very clear” on doctrine, and that making the discussion public is harmful to the Church."

Cardinal Müller:

“Everyone, above all the cardinals of the Roman Church, have a right to write a letter to the Pope. However, I was amazed because this was made public, almost forcing the Pope to say yes or no."

“I don’t like this,” he said, adding that “it does damage to the Church to discuss these things publicly.”

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Mueller doesn’t feel that way today, he’s grown up. Those who exposed the sex abuse scandal were told the same thing by prominent churchmen, but those churchmen have repented of advocating that kind of secrecy.

Anonymous said...

Pope Benedict XVI has provided us with the sure and certain way to avoid a schism: As he had declared toward the end of his 2013 A.D. address to Cardinals:

"Among you is the future pope, to whom I promise my unconditional reverence and obedience."

Pope Benedict XVI had reiterated Pope Saint Pius X's 1912 A.D. exhortation that called us to grant unconditional reverence and obedience to the Pope.

Cardinal Pell echoed the above-mentioned Popes: "The papacy is something, I believe, is willed by Christ and we have to respect the office, reverence the man and obey the papal directions."

Cardinal Sarah: "The truth is that the church is represented on earth by the vicar of Christ, that is by the pope. And whoever is against the pope is, ipso facto, outside the church."

Popes Benedict XVI, Saint Pius X, as well as Cardinals Pell, and Sarah, have blessed us with the guaranteed way to avoid schism.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Anonymous said...

Cardinal Müller has "grown up?" He has flip-flopped upon his then-public criticisms of the dubia Cardinals? Has he apologized for having cast the dubia Cardinals in such negative light?

I wonder what else he had declared in error when he headed the then-CDF?

As head of the then-CDF, he guaranteed that Amoris Laetitia was orthodox, and "very clear" in having taught Church doctrine. That alone had rendered as absurd the dubia Cardinals' antics in question.

What Cardinal Müller is unable to rescind is that he was correct when he denounced the dubia Cardinals' terrible decision to have made public the issue in question.

The public attempt to pressure Pope Francis violated Donum Veritatis #30.

When dealing with the Magisterium, it is required to "avoid turning to the "mass media", but have recourse to the responsible authority, for it is not by seeking to exert the pressure of public opinion that one contributes to the clarification of doctrinal issues and renders service to the truth."

Anyway, Cardinal Müller aside, there are plenty of Churchmen/theologians who have not rescinded their solid rejections (based upon such Church teachings as Donum Veritatis #30) of the dubia Cardinals' attempt to trap Pope Francis.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

The Dubia cardinals were doing their job and they and the entire Church deserved and deserve a coherent response from the pope at least through the proper dicastery. To say otherwise is intellectual dishonesty and shenanigans. The entire Church, if one is to respect the various aspects of the Church in her fullness deserve respect from this pope. .

Anonymous said...

In regard to the dubia:

Cardinal Burke, during a 2017 A.D. interview with The Remnant, revealed, almost certainly, on accident, that the fix was in via the attempt to trap Pope Francis.

The interviewer asked Cardinal Burke:

"So, is it even possible for you to envision a scenario whereby you suddenly discover that you’ve missed something, that the Four Cardinals are misinterpreting it, and that you’d have to concede you were wrong? I mean if that’s not possible, then what is the point of the dubia?

"Don’t you already know the answers to your five questions?"

Cardinal Burke: "Certainly we do."

Therefore, as the interviewer had noted, "then what is the point of the dubia?"

Cardinal Burke's answer revealed that the dubia were insincere. The point was to have forced Pope Francis to answer the questions in the manner in which Cardinal Burke had desired.

Cardinal Burke had set himself above Pope Francis. Cardinal Burke would have the final say in regard to Pope Francis' orthodoxy.

But Pope Francis was too clever to have fallen into the trap in question.

Conversely, it was The Remnant interviewer who, I am certain, inadvertently, had trapped Cardinal Burke.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Mark, you are living in the past. What are they saying today? Times, they have changed, especially since December 31, 2022.

TJM said...

Mark Thomas,

With every post, you reveal how little you know about the Catholic Faith. Please heed Father McDonald's advice.

Anonymous said...

Father McDonald, the dubia Cardinals did not do their jobs.

To begin, they violated the teaching of Donum Veritatis #30.

In addition, via his 2017 A.D. interview with The Remnant, Cardinal Burke revealed, inadvertently, I am sure, that the purpose was to pressure Pope Francis to respond publicly to questions that had been rigged.

That is, rigged to have been answered in the fashion that the Cardinals had designed.

Cardinal Burke's 2017 A.D. interview with The Remnant revealed that there had not been any desire to have engaged Pope Francis in sincere dialogue.

As I had noted in a different comment, even the anti-Pope Francis publication, The Remnant, had felt compelled to have asked Cardinal Burke:

"So, is it even possible for you to envision a scenario whereby you suddenly discover that you’ve missed something, that the Four Cardinals are misinterpreting it, and that you’d have to concede you were wrong?

"I mean if that’s not possible, then what is the point of the dubia?

"Don’t you already know the answers to your five questions?"

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Anonymous said...

Father McDonald, what are they saying today?

They have maintained that the dubia had been designed to have trapped Pope Francis.

Anyway, we disagree with each other in regard to the dubia.

Father McDonald, thank you for the frank, but respectful, manner in which we have engaged each other.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Jerome Merwick said...


"Cardinal Burke's answer revealed that the dubia were insincere. The point was to have forced Pope Francis to answer the questions in the manner in which Cardinal Burke had desired.

"Cardinal Burke had set himself above Pope Francis. Cardinal Burke would have the final say in regard to Pope Francis' orthodoxy.

"But Pope Francis was too clever to have fallen into the trap in question."

That's the Marvel Comics version.

However, there is NOTHING insincere about asking an authority hard questions when you have a deep inner conviction that the authority is in error--you can see how St. Paul dealt with that when Peter was wrong.

We don't worship a pope, we worship God and we obey the teachings that have come down through the authority of His Church as immutable, not evolutionary. Sin 2000 years ago is still sin today and will be sin 20 million years from now.

And while no one would deny that, on a human level, Bergoglio has a certain degree of human cleverness, this wasn't about "trapping" him. What he has actually done is avoid taking responsibility for what he has dared to publish. Confusion about what IS and IS NOT sin is NOT a "fruit" of the Holy Spirit. Further no one here can judge whether or not the Dubia Cardinals violated article 30 of the above cited instruction unless they are capable of reading the minds and hearts of Cardinal Burke and his fellow Dubia heroes.

Jorge "Francis" Bergoglio has a responsibility to uphold what the Church has always taught and is supposed to be at the service of tradition. However, some very incredulous people here apparently are still convinced that the Holy Spirit always chooses our popes. While we pray for that, the fact is, often men with conflicting and even nefarious agendas vote in those conclaves and we often get horrible popes like Leo X, Alexander VI or Benedict X to name but three. Even the most devout Catholic historians would disavow that these lousy popes were "chosen" by the Holy Spirit. Yet as historically bad as these popes were, they were not heretics. They didn't DARE tamper with the deposit of faith. They didn't bring idols in to the Vatican. They didn't flirt with the idolatry of the cult of environmental earth worship. They didn't address seminarians with obscene language or make public statements about people who eat feces.

Our current pope does. Enough said.

Jerome Merwick said...

I should have typed "credulous".

sorry.

TJM said...

Jerome Merwick,

Well said but you are whistling past the graveyard with that one - contumaciously ignorant!