John Allen writes a commentary in today’s Crux on what he initially describes as open warfare at the Vatican. He dampens down his own hyperbole in that regard, but one has to be deaf and blind not to know that things are in a catastrophic state in today’s Catholic Church, especially in Europe and particularly in Rome.
You can read Allen’s commentary HERE.
But, it seems, that new documents from Pope Benedict are now being released to include this bombshell from the late pope:
The new collection of Benedict’s own writings contains a previously unpublished essay titled “Monotheism and Tolerance,” in which the late pontiff criticizes what he saw as the increasingly intolerant ethos of modern Western societies, which, he warns, are increasingly intolerant of Christianity.
What’s garnered more attention, however, are three other points.
One doesn’t come in the book itself, but in a letter to the Italian journalist to whom Benedict entrusted the text, Elio Guerriero. Explaining his instruction that the volume not be published until after his death, Benedict wrote, “The fury of circles hostile to me in Germany is so strong that the appearance of every word I say provokes a verbal assassination. I want to spare myself, and Christianity, from that.”
In the book, Benedict addresses the sexual abuse scandals, blaming in part a “collapse” in seminary formation, such as the existence of “gay clubs” among seminarians, including in the United States. He asserts that he’s aware of one bishop who allowed his seminarians to watch pornographic films – “presumably with the intention of rendering them capable of resisting behaviors contrary to the faith,” he adds, in an ironic aside.
Finally, Benedict complains that “in not a few seminaries, students caught reading my books are considered unworthy for the priesthood. My books are concealed as dangerous literature, and, so to speak, are read only in hiding.”
But then, Allen quotes what Pope Francis has said in a new book interview:
In terms of Francis’s own new book, it’s garnered attention mostly for his language on gay persons – which, of course, has been styled as a strong contrast with Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI.
“God is a father who doesn’t renounce any of his children,” Francis says in the book. “The style of God is closeness, mercy and tenderness, not judgment and marginalization.”
MY COMMENTS:
This quote from Pope Francis is typical of his 1970’s shallow pastoral theology that is simply erroneous and enabling of what Pope Benedict decries in the seminaries and what exacerbated the abuse scandal in the 1970’s with 1974 being the apex of the upside down Church created by Catholic liberals on steroids following the Second Vatican Council.
While the first part of Pope Francis statement is true and supported by the Deposit of Faith, his last part is false and enables what has happened in the Church for the past 50 years. Pope Francis says in a dogmatic way that God is not a God of judgement and marginalization. That is false; it is a lie. God does judge and His judgments are just and true and no mistakes are ever made. God sends His people into exile, a marginalization if there ever was one, because of His people’s infidelity. As it concerns His perfect judgements at the our of our death, it can lead to our damnation and if we are damned it is perfectly reasonable as to why this has occurred. It is not a mistake made by a JUST JUDGE AND HIS JUDGEMENTS!
God’s marginalization of His people in Scripture, while a punishment, need not be permanent in this life. It is kind of like an excommunication, a grace to encourage, by searing the conscience of the one marginalized, to return to God, to Divine Truth and to orthodox living, the right practice of the faith, be it Judaism or Christianity. It is a call to repentance, seeking mercy and forgiveness and the willingness to do penance and make amendments in one’s life.
It is this pope’s talking off the cuff and making false “dogmatic” statements that has encourage what Pope Benedict correctly diagnosis as the source of the sex abuse scandal in seminaries and the priesthood, not to mention religious life.
37 comments:
Take a page from Avignon - depose him
Father McDonald said..."John Allen writes a commentary in today’s Crux on what he initially describes as open warfare at the Vatican. He dampens down his own hyperbole in that regard, but one has to be deaf and blind not to know that things are in a catastrophic state in today’s Catholic Church, especially in Europe and particularly in Rome."
Father McDonald, when I read your headline, I had anticipated an apocalyptic, sensationalistic article from John Allen.
In fairness to you, your commentary noted that John Allen had dampened "his own hyperbole in that regard." But he had done more than that. As his article continued, John Allen had dismissed the supposed chaos in question as much ado about nothing.
John Allen declared:
"This is all, frankly, “dog bites man” news, i.e., as predictable as the rising and setting of the sun."
"In itself, it’s hardly evidence that Catholicism is on the brink of chaos."
"Clashes between popes, or between bishops and popes, or between their respective followings, are as old as the church itself."
As the above has made clear, Pope Francis has not been compromised. His awesome God-given authority to teach, govern, and sanctify us has remained in place.
Much ado about nothing.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Father McDonald, you said that Pope Francis has enabled that which "Pope Benedict decries in the seminaries and what exacerbated the abuse scandal in the 1970’s with 1974 being the apex of the upside down Church created by Catholic liberals on steroids following the Second Vatican Council."
John Allen noted in regard to your above-mentioned comment, that Pope Benedict XVI "blames none of this on Pope Francis."
Father McDonald, near the end of the article that you have linked, and contrary to your negative assessment of Pope Francis, John Allen noted that:
"...it’s instructive to quote the final lines of Benedict’s post-mortem volume."
Pope Benedict XVI:
"At the end of my reflections, I want to thank Pope Francis for everything he does to constantly display the light of God, which, even today, has not faded."
Pope Benedict XVI continued: "Thank you, Holy Father!"
Pax.
Mark Thomas
The gloves might have come off, bit he brought this on himself.
Mt, my comment is from first hand experience of the 1970’s and in a very liberal seminary. The theology then is what Pope Francis continues to teach today as he is going backward to the theologies of the 1970’s. That theology, is what has caused the scandals in the Church especially in the 1970’s to be exacerbated and on steroids, culminating in about 1974 with more abuse of minor boys/teenagers by homosexually oriented priests. That was not because of Pope Francis, but rather the post-Vatican II ideology about mercy and healing all centered on perpetrators not victims.
Yes, mark, some people in the media just like to stir things up and feed “the outrage machine,” both in religion and in politics, typically because they make money off of it. And they have done so with Pope Francis, almost since the very first day of his pontificate, even including his decision to be called “Francis.” I well remember the consternation over which Francis he had in mind—not Francis of Assisi, surely, Heaven forfend! But we don’t have to take the bait, tempting though it often is.
Fr McDonald,
You are very kind and patient but you are speaking to a brick wall.
Father McDonald said..."The theology then is what Pope Francis continues to teach today as he is going backward to the theologies of the 1970’s."
Father McDonald, all that I can say is that, as I have noted over the years, Pope Emeritus/Benedict XVI promoted Pope Francis as an excellent, orthodox Pope, as well as fine man.
Then-Pope Emeritus had also praised Pope Francis' theological prowess.
Again, via his writings released post-mortem, Pope Benedict XVI declared:
"At the end of my reflections, I want to thank Pope Francis for everything he does to constantly display the light of God, which, even today, has not faded. Thank you, Holy Father!"
Pope Benedict XVI, even in death, as he had done in life, has promoted Pope Francis as a fine, orthodox, Pope who has displayed to the world the light of God.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
John Allen has attributed to the Italian right-wing press the notion that "the gloves have come off"...as well as that an horrific civil war against Pope Francis' Papal authority is in the offing.
John Allen on said chatter:
"Though Benedict blames none of this on Pope Francis, it’s nonetheless been enough for the right-wing Italian press to treat it like the Battle of the Bulge: “War of the Popes,” screamed the Sunday headline in Libero: “The posthumous accusations of Ratzinger at Bergoglio.”
John Allen dismissed the above:
"This is all, frankly, “dog bites man” news, i.e., as predictable as the rising and setting of the sun. In itself, it’s hardly evidence that Catholicism is on the brink of chaos. Clashes between popes, or between bishops and popes, or between their respective followings, are as old as the church itself."
The Pope Francis-hating right-wing will certainly continue their Satanic attacks against the Vicar of Christ. They will continue their disgraceful attempts to pit this, or that, Cardinal, bishop, as well as Pope, against Pope Francis.
But those who desire to stand with Jesus Christ will, in turn, stand with Pope Francis.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Father McDonald, we disagree in many ways about Pope Francis.
But as always, thank you for the opportunity to post comments to your blog.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
"The Pope Francis-hating right-wing will certainly continue their Satanic attacks against the Vicar of Christ."
"But those who desire to stand with Jesus Christ will, in turn, stand with Pope Francis."
I really resent this. Grow up, Mark Thomas, and open your mind to more than out of context quotations. Making "God-Man" out of a human who was elected by men is a cult of personality.
Mark Thomas,
You are free to believe as you choose; however, I am free not to agree, particularly with your suppositions. We, who feel the Pope has erred do not stand with Christ? The Cardinals who questioned the Pope, some of which are more learned than all of us combined, do not stand with Christ? We who do not subscribe to YOUR vision of what characterizes Pope Francis do not stand with Christ? Fr. AJM, your priest and pastor while you occupy his blog, based upon real-life experiences some of which support justifiable concerns regarding this pontificate does not stand with Christ? Really? Where do you get the nerve to draw such conclusions?
Kindly reflect on the following:
From Panachida, a Byzantine/Orthodox memorial service for those who have reposed in the Lord: "As a good God Who loves mankind, forgive every sin committed by him (her), in word or deed or thought, for THERE IS NO MAN WHO LIVES AND DOES NOT SIN."
https://www.byzcath.org/pdf/Funeral-Panachida-1998-2009.pdf
ByzRus,
Alas, MT’s robotic responses are tiring. Mouthing off about the rightwing, you know, the people who oppose abortion, gay marriage and transgenderism is very telling. He never acknowledges the Left supports the foregoing intrinsic evils. He is the original empty suit. I think from now on I will just ignore him. He can sit in momma’s basement all by himself
I said..."But those who desire to stand with Jesus Christ will, in turn, stand with Pope Francis."
ByzRus said..."I really resent this. Grow up, Mark Thomas, and open your mind to more than out of context quotations. Making "God-Man" out of a human who was elected by men is a cult of personality."
To stand with Jesus Christ requires one to stand with the Pope. That is Catholicism 101.
ByzRus, always recall the following from Pope Saint Pius X. This will keep you close to the Pope:
"Therefore, when we love the Pope, there are no discussions regarding what he orders or demands, or up to what point obedience must go, and in what things he is to be obeyed;"
"we do not place his orders in doubt...we do not limit the field in which he might and must exercise his authority;"
"we do not set above the authority of the Pope that of other persons, however learned, who dissent from the Pope, who, even though learned, are not holy, because whoever is holy cannot dissent from the Pope."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark Thomas,
If, tomorrow, the pope we're to decree that transubstantiation is invalid and the elements are mere symbols and part of a reenactment, would you be with the pope for the reasons you provided?
At the time Pius uttered these words, the turmoil most here have experienced during their Catholic lifetimes would have been unthinkable. Had this blog existed at that time, it would have likely been limited to Catholic eye candy pics as no one would have known any better. I wish current circumstances were different such that this type of dialogue would be unheard-of. This is not the reality for some.
Please note that nothing schismatic, or satanic occurs on this blog despite you declarations to the contrary.
I'll now resume being a Christ-centered orthodox sinner with, evidently, some pronounced Orthodox tendencies.
ByrRus,
MT would not know Catholicism 101 if it bit him in the posterior. Best to ignore this grossly malformed in the Faith person.
ByzRus, the Vicar of Christ is under Divine protection. He is protected from teaching error.
Therefore, your example — what if the Pope "we're to decree that transubstantiation is invalid and the elements are mere symbols" — is illogical.
The Papal Magisterium will never fail.
Holy Mother Church, as She reiterated at Vatican II, has guaranteed that he who hears the Pope, hears, in turn, Jesus Christ.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
ByzRus, when Pope Saint Pius X uttered the words that I had quoted, he insisted that Modernism had laid waste to the Church.
His Papal authority was under siege within the Church.
If you read Pope Saint Pius X's full exhortation in question, then you will encounter the following lament:
"It seems incredible, and is even painful, that there be priests to whom this recommendation must be made, but we are regrettably in our age in this hard, unhappy, situation of having to tell priests: love the Pope!"
Pax.
Mark Thomas
So what's more pathetic: The idolatry of a Council, or the idolatry of a pope?
Mark at 9:20 am, you are becoming a fundamentalist Catholic, We know that Pope Francis has warned against fundamentalism in the Church, be it left wing or right wing. By being a fundamentalist, you skew what the Church teaches about the Magisterium of the pope and bishops.
No pope can make up new teachings our of whole cloth and then declare it infallible. There has to be some belief in what is “dogmatized” in any infallible statement, be it from the pope alone or the pope and bishops together in an ecumenical council. There has to be belief in it from the earliest beginnings of the Church. That was and is the case with the only two infallible dogmatic statements by pope alone, that of the Immaculate Conception and Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Such a statement has to be declared as infallible not implied. There are no new infallible statements in Vatican II, although infallible teachings are reiterated. Newer teachings aren’t dogma, since these do not have the seal of “infallibility” on them. These are theologies.
Thus far this pope has made no infallible statements, thanks be to God. He can be wrong on the scientific cause of climate change. His political perspective can be ignored, debated and rejected.
He can’t infallibly declare the weather or how weather patterns change, either by natural processes or human activity.
He can’t make his synodal way infallible.
Fundamentalism as it regards any pope occurs when one applies a “creeping” infallibility to any pope on matters of discipline. Our teachings are out in the open. No pope and no bishop has an inside track to the truth. Any CAtholic from the most uneducated to the most educated can find what the Church teaches independently of any particular pope or bishop.
Agree to disagree, Mark.
The pope enjoys institutional doctrinal protections, not divine. To the best of my knowledge, only the Buddhists believe their leader to be an incarnation.
Canon law allows for the removal of a pope should his actions be deemed heretical.
Funny, that our resident papalator does not recognize this pope is a Modernist
Mark, again you pastor while you occupy this Page has provided guidance.
Being both receptive to that guidance as well as contrite would be the most reasonable and appropriate response you could give. Thoughts?
ByzRus..."The pope enjoys institutional doctrinal protections, not divine."
The Pope does not enjoy divine protection? The True Church teaches otherwise. But let us pretend that you are correct. Therefore, the Pope enjoys man-made protection.
Jesus Christ has built His Church upon the Rock of Saint Peter. The Church teaches that Jesus Christ protects Saint Peter/successors.
However, ByzRus, you have insisted that the Pope does not enjoys Divine protection. Therefore, the Papacy has been built upon sand.
Please correct me if I have misrepresented your comment in question.
Thank you.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Father McDonald said..."Mark at 9:20 am, you are becoming a fundamentalist Catholic..."
Father McDonald, at 9:20 A.M., I had noted that which the Church has taught in regard the Papal Magisterium.
I said that the "Vicar of Christ is under Divine protection. He is protected from teaching error. The Papal Magisterium will never fail. Holy Mother Church, as She reiterated at Vatican II, has guaranteed that he who hears the Pope, hears, in turn, Jesus Christ."
Father McDonald, that constitutes Fundamentalism?
Pax.
Mark Thomas
TJM,
Our priest/moderator who, to me, is indirectly responsible for my spiritual welfare while I participate on his blog (e.g. our pastor) has provided counsel to MT in a previous posting. See "fundamentalist". This would not be the first time our priest has provided such counsel. If the response, should there be one, is obstinance, I would conclude that dialog of any sort, as a lay person, is simply not possible and I will avoid any going forward. I would suggest the same for any laity posting here. Fr. AJM can, of course, engage and minister to this or any other individual whose posts he publishes as he sees fit.
To avoid harm, it's likely best that we avoid interaction deferring to those trained to provide guidance when and where it is needed.
Father McDonald, in regard to my supposed path toward Fundamentalism:
Does the following fall into the category of Fundamentalism?
"Pope Saint Pius X:
"Therefore, when we love the Pope, there are no discussions regarding what he orders or demands, or up to what point obedience must go, and in what things he is to be obeyed;"
"we do not place his orders in doubt...we do not limit the field in which he might and must exercise his authority;"
"we do not set above the authority of the Pope that of other persons, however learned, who dissent from the Pope, who, even though learned, are not holy, because whoever is holy cannot dissent from the Pope."
Thank You.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark, that is not an infallible teaching nor is it doctrine. It is the recipe for abuse of all kinds. I don’t accept it and in fact I criticize that pope for saying it.
Fr McDonald,
Wasting your breath - the papalator is a broken record. I suspect John Nolan could not take it any longer!
TJM,
As much as I enjoy some of the chop busting that we do here, I think a wider bearth is needed in this instance. Some hold fast to their beliefs and have a difficult time accepting otherwise.
We probably should hang back and let Fr. handle it.
Father McDonald, that which Pope Pius X declared had been reiterated for centuries by our holy Popes.
There are Cardinals and bishops who have carried to our time Pope Pius X's exhortation to love and obey the Pope.
Cardinal Pell: "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's declaration: "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."
But most important is that Holy Mother Church has declared that we are to submit to the Pope's God-given authority to teach, govern, and sanctify us.
Holy Mother Church teaches most definitely that to hear the Pope is to hear Jesus Christ.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Father McDonald, what in regard to Pope Saint Pius X's exhortation is not in line with Church teaching?
I appreciate your insight.
Thank you.
Mark Thomas
As one with some minor competence in history, I can not help but note that many comments have been made over the centuries by the highest ranking clergy that are largely forgotten or ignored today. There seems a certain self selection on most of the aberrant and/or foolish comments that consigns them to the forgotten part of the collective memory.
ByzRus,
I rarely read his nonsensical comments. My concern is that we have lost some great people who used to post here with great insights due to his puerile antics! John Nolan comes to mind. The one thing I like about The New Liturgical Movement is their willingness to toss certain provocateurs who post nonsense.
There is an article today at The New Liturgical Movement which demonstrates the Novus Ordo has been a failure in Africa as well, a so-called bright spot in Captain Clueless’ world. I encourage him to go there and make his usual arguments why reality is wrong! Greg DiPippo will not be amused!
TJM,
Understood. My sense is some deference and charity might be required here. This might be a little more than just antics. I think he's passionate about his beliefs not being sure how to distinguish between infallible teaching and doctrine, perhaps among other things. Simply stated, all is being considered as though it is "revealed truth". From his perspective, he's simply defending the faith per his understanding. Fr's gentle course corrections should help.
I do miss John Nolan's insights.
ByzRus,
I may have to travel to Oxford once again to see John Nolan. One of my old law partners is now a fellow at Oxford! So two delightful gents to see!
Post a Comment