tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post606580601505928539..comments2024-03-28T05:17:04.006-04:00Comments on southern orders: UNHOLY DISSENT AND CAUSING FURTHER DISUNITY TO THE CHURCHFr. Allan J. McDonaldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16986575955114152639noreply@blogger.comBlogger50125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-19792766283239991662013-01-26T22:26:54.022-05:002013-01-26T22:26:54.022-05:00"In reviewing his Bull Unam Sanctum, which is...<b>"In reviewing his Bull Unam Sanctum, which is addresses to the "Greeks", we see MI's analogy fall apart. For, in that Bull, the Pope says directly to the Eastern Churches that they must submit, collectively and individually, to the papacy or else they forfeit salvation. Yet, we later find these same "Greeks" called separated brethren, no longer the target of proselytization, a true Church with valid sacraments (therefore with the possibility of salvation as the presence of the valid sacraments cannot indicate otherwise).</b><br /><br />Marc, at that time the Greeks (what we now know as the Greek Orthodox Church) knowingly refused to submit to papal authority, and so they had no excuse. They essentially said, "Non serviam!" But now the Church takes a different approach (much as it does with Protestants) because the Orthodox have changed A LOT since the Great Schism, much like Protestants have changed a lot since Luther. Back then, the Greeks refused to be part of the Catholic Church because they hated her (much like the first Protestants). But with the centuries that have past, the Orthodox of today (much like the Protestants of today) don't know any better! With those who don't know any better, preaching to them that they'll go to hell if they don't convert will only drive them further away.<br /><br />And yes, the Orthodox have valid sacraments; that has ALWAYS been the case! Also, tell me where the pope has ever said the Orthodox don't need to convert.Militia Immaculatahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15021417068774633653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-87114909908791457632013-01-23T17:10:17.465-05:002013-01-23T17:10:17.465-05:00I agree that's not the way the Church SHOULD w...I agree that's not the way the Church SHOULD work and it would behoove our modern bishops to think more on those early councils. However, that's the way they've chosen to operate today and, for better or worse, we have to live with it. I don't like it, but I suck it up and look the other way. Those who don't look the other way often pay a terrible price.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-56458644385185890772013-01-23T16:47:15.096-05:002013-01-23T16:47:15.096-05:00John, I agree with your assessment. I was suggesti...John, I agree with your assessment. I was suggesting that, if they are not going to submit to the pope (whatever that means), perhaps the more honest position is to be overtly sedevacantist. In fact, defying a person whom you acknowledge to be the pope in the face of his direct order is probably more sinful than holding a position that the person claiming to be the pope is not actually the pope. <br /><br />After all, sedevacantists can in good faith claim full submission to the pope -- just as soon as an actual pope is installed. The SSPX, on the other hand, refuses to submit to a man they acknowledge to be their superior. They can argue a "state of emergency" all they want to: that seems to be code words for de facto sedevacantism in practice (that is, they continue on as if there were no pope and the only difference is they commemorate him in their Masses). Marcnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-55123511567991403882013-01-23T15:31:22.500-05:002013-01-23T15:31:22.500-05:00Anon 12:24. There is an exception to that. the c...Anon 12:24. There is an exception to that. the current Bishop of Rome has done just that, and more as in the case of the Bishop of Adelaide as well as the action taken with Mr. Bourgeois. I certainly feel your frustration and often express the same. But it is good that the Pope reserves much of that sort of action to his position. Otherwise you would end up with a group of peers jockeying for leadership as we see in many other Christian sects and numerous other religions. I am frustrated that the Pope is so slow to respond, but I think that is largely due to his insulation from these matters. This Pope is clearly exploiting the information age and I think his successors will be expected to, as well.rcghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09131930849106490711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-71026546352057237572013-01-23T15:18:16.679-05:002013-01-23T15:18:16.679-05:00Anonymous, I'm sorry, but that is not "ju...Anonymous, I'm sorry, but that is not "just the way the Church works." Bishops are supposed to criticize each other. That's why all those early councils were called and those bishops were excommunicated!Marcnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-15898628706983906932013-01-23T14:50:54.421-05:002013-01-23T14:50:54.421-05:00Marc, the SSPX cannot go into schism because they ...Marc, the SSPX cannot go into schism because they are Catholic. Unless and until Rome declares them to be schismatic, which is unlikely, that is how they remain.<br /><br />Anonymous, you are no doubt referring to Rembert Weakland. We all know about him.John Nolanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09027156691859606002noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-20011455982439714212013-01-23T14:33:35.958-05:002013-01-23T14:33:35.958-05:00This is not addressed to Marc -"With respect ...This is not addressed to Marc -"With respect to the Second Vatican Council itself, Archbishop Müller (Head of CDF) has insisted that “the Church cannot, on the doctrinal level, contradict herself—that is impossible. Any perceived contradiction is caused by a false interpretation.” In November, he went farther and called such interpretations “heretical”. Just last month he emphasized again the need to distinguish “between the true teaching…and specific abuses that occurred after the Council, but which are not founded in the Council’s documents.”<br /><br />Pater Ignotusnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-25827864862955323202013-01-23T14:13:15.639-05:002013-01-23T14:13:15.639-05:00Marc - A cursory re-read of my 11:45 a.m. post wil...Marc - A cursory re-read of my 11:45 a.m. post will show that I did not address you. Oddly enough, in your riposte, you address me.<br /><br />You are safe in your autocephalous religion where you are the final authority on liturgy, the ultimate judge of orthodoxy, and the all-knowing keeper of the deposit of faith. And until you come to terms with that anomalous situation, your discomfort will, I suspect, continue.Pater Ignotusnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-80956246926106949132013-01-23T12:24:42.401-05:002013-01-23T12:24:42.401-05:00You could have irrefutable proof that a bishop was...You could have irrefutable proof that a bishop was a drunken, abusive child molester who had pilfered the diocesan coffers to purchase male prostitutes and, guess what? You wouldn't be able to find ONE fellow bishop willing to even mildly criticize him.<br /><br />That's just the way it works. I love the Church. I'll never leave the Church. I believe in the Church, but that's one of the flaws that we have to tolerate just to be Catholics. It's also one of the reasons the Church is having such a credibility crisis.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-30289424947106905552013-01-23T12:22:10.736-05:002013-01-23T12:22:10.736-05:00Gleaned from the latest adult education class bull... Gleaned from the latest adult education class bulletin from my former parish:<br /><br />"Immortal Diamond: The Search for Our True Self" By Richard Rohr<br /><br />"The Gospel and Epistles of John: A Concise Commentary", by Raymond Brown<br /> <br />"The Mystery of Faith: An Introduction to Catholicism with Fr. Michael Himes"<br /><br />"Foundations of Christianity: Mystery, Conversion, Faith, Hope and Love with Fr. Michael Himes"<br /><br />"In Search of Belief", Sr. Joan Chittister<br /> <br />"Come as you are", Fr. Art Baranowski<br /><br />-- and --<br /><br />A Parish Mission to Celebrate the 50th Anniversary of Vatican II and the Year of Faith <br />with Fr. Bruce Nieli, CSP<br /><br />This could serve as a primary reference for authors and speakers who should be shunned! Not one of them supports the full teaching of Holy Mother Church. <br /><br />So much for the biological solution! This is the sort of teaching which perpetuates the problems we face in the Church today. So glad to be out of there!William Meyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07461907300761131481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-89527275016079066612013-01-23T12:02:25.795-05:002013-01-23T12:02:25.795-05:00Fr. Kavanaugh, please do not address me as I refus...Fr. Kavanaugh, please do not address me as I refuse to engage you in discussion. Obviouly, you are free to disregard me, but all comments from you directed at me will be ignored. Marcnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-35901061282306105972013-01-23T11:54:34.550-05:002013-01-23T11:54:34.550-05:00Marc claims there are "illegitimate doctrinal...Marc claims there are "illegitimate doctrinal developments of recent decades." Two questions follow. First, which are the illegitimate developments, and second, what gives Marc the authority to determine which are or are not legitimate?<br /><br />To say "I judge them not to be legitimate" or "I don't understand how these are legitimate" is not an assertion of proper authority.Pater Ignotusnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-2646392443397540832013-01-23T10:54:46.669-05:002013-01-23T10:54:46.669-05:00I would remind the commenters, in relation to Fr. ...I would remind the commenters, in relation to Fr. McDonald's latest point, that two of the Apostles did fall into error quite quickly: Judas betrayed Christ and St. Peter fell into the judaizing heresy. <br /><br />Judas refused correction and fell into despair. St. Peter was subjected to the rebuke of St. Paul and the issue was submitted to a council presided over by the bishop of Jerusalem, St. James, where the judaizing heresy was anathematized. In essence, St. Peter's decision did not rule the day. <br /><br />My point here is that collegiality maintains this delicate balance. Bishops should rebuke bishops when those bishops fall into error - this is one of the main ideas behind national bishops' conferences. Moreover, if the pope falls into error, a council rebukes the pope (as with St. Peter and later with other popes, including one who was posthumously anathematized). <br /><br />Currently, bishops are being rebuked by no one as far as we know. That is, the national conference is not acting in this way. The pope, admittedly, cannot be expected to know the teachings of every single bishop in the world. This is an excuse for existing bishops. My guess is the process for selecting bishops does a poor job of excising heterodox candidates as it likely involves heterodox local/regional people making the selection. Knowing that to be the case, the pope should conduct more intensive review of problem regions. <br /><br />But, again, we are far from the point -- there will always be bad bishops and, yes, bad popes. To put a cover over your eyes and pretend like this is not the case is bizarre, especially when you publicly criticize those who refuse to ignore the overwhelming evidence (and history) by pointing out the obvious. <br /><br />As regards the SSPX, I agree they should formally go Ito schism. As I've said before, their position is de facto sedevacantism. They are picking and choosing the time period they call "Tradition" and it is really a pious nostalgia. But, their position is at least more tenable than the liberals who would like to ignore 1,960 years of Church history and doctrinal development. I simply happen to recognize that the current and recent popes appear to favor this liberal tendency, perhaps in reaction to the false-nostalgic tendency on the other hand. The pervasive ultra-montanism, both here and by the SSPX, only serves to further complicate matters. <br /><br />At any rate, as today's blog indicates, the position is ridiculous. To say with a straight face that the Novus Ordo is not only in continuity, but is a legitimate development, is unbelievable. And that observation says nothing of the illegitimate doctrinal developments of recent decades and the lack of clarity flowing therefrom, as I've indicated in prior comments. Marcnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-13862770813876320752013-01-23T10:07:35.700-05:002013-01-23T10:07:35.700-05:00Fr. McD,
Are you arguing that just because God In...Fr. McD,<br /><br />Are you arguing that just because God Incarnate picked apostles that appear at first glance to us to be bad choices, that grace will therefore _always_ abound as a result of the bishops chosen by popes? That there can _never_ be such a thing as (as Henry Edwards might put it) a "Holocaust bishop?" (A phrase that I put forward to stand with the same stature as "pelvic issues," hehe.)Hammer of Fascistshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08647227447212096501noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-38636141587787182802013-01-23T09:53:03.753-05:002013-01-23T09:53:03.753-05:00I find it hard to see a considered and good-faith ...I find it hard to see a considered and good-faith attempt to abide by the Magisterium and doctrine as it has been enunciated by popes and councils over 2000 years as an "agenda." The very reason SSPX exists is because VII appears so out of step and discordant with all that has come before, it left them scratching their heads trying to figure out how in fact it _could_ be in continuity with the rest. (And I remind the readers here that I have never in my life attended an SSPX parish or Mass.)<br /><br />And it isn't disloyalty to the pope or to the papacy to say that post VII popes--while not having formally taught error--have still done (and perhaps said) some heterodox things. Lest we become ultramontanists, we should always recall popes such as Popes Alexander VI and John XII. A review of Popes Formosus, Stephen VI, and the Cadaver Synod by themselves should remind us that popes can say and do some highly questionable things, and that popes have even accused other popes of such (and in bizarre circumstances, no less).<br /><br />It isn't my intention here to smear post-VII popes or to equate anything they've done with the Borgia pope or his likes. I'm simply trying to point out that in a tumultuous time such as our own, merely to state that the pope isn't ultra-liberal or heterodox is not to put him beyond the reach of criticism. Anyone who argues that popes in the last 40 years have done nothing to worsen the crisis either through action or omission bears a very heavy burden of persuasion, IMHO. Hammer of Fascistshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08647227447212096501noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-39071091898075970192013-01-23T07:09:20.674-05:002013-01-23T07:09:20.674-05:00"Vast amounts of empires"? To the best o..."Vast amounts of empires"? To the best of my knowledge there was only one!<br /><br />Britain's African colonies and protectorates relied on 'indirect rule'. Native social and power structures remained in place, the British being content to 'hold the ring'. When we pulled out we largely washed our hands of them, as long as the natural resources could still be exploited to the benefit of the West.<br /><br />The French were far more 'hands on', and are more ready to inervene in their former colonies, Mali being the latest example. Ten years ago we did go back to sort out Sierra Leone, but that was atypical.John Nolanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09027156691859606002noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-79211211413976889942013-01-23T05:25:26.381-05:002013-01-23T05:25:26.381-05:00What was the education level of the 12 apostles? J...What was the education level of the 12 apostles? Jesus picked the wrong guys folks. Pack it up and go home!Fr. Allan J. McDonaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16986575955114152639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-5712444298974122972013-01-23T05:24:04.157-05:002013-01-23T05:24:04.157-05:00Keep in mind that Jesus Christ Himself appointed o...Keep in mind that Jesus Christ Himself appointed or called (better term) bad bishops, one who betrayed Him and another who denied Him three times. I suppose those in comment land here would take that right away from not only the Vicar of Christ, but Christ Himself all based upon our corrupt human nature due to original sin and its child actual sin?<br />Are you all a bunch of Puritans or a bunch of Catholics?Fr. Allan J. McDonaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16986575955114152639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-22724844305270645852013-01-22T20:32:56.982-05:002013-01-22T20:32:56.982-05:00When Benedict XVI visited America a few years ago,...When Benedict XVI visited America a few years ago, I entertained a fantasy of him walking into a meeting hall with all of the U.S. Bishops and saying, "Thank you for your service. However, your services are no longer required. Gentlemen: You're fired."<br /><br />No one can deny that we have had some very weak and even corrupt bishops in the U.S. in the last couple of decades. So where is the first place the Vatican looks for new bishops? THEY ASK THE OLD BISHOPS FOR THEIR SUGGESTIONS (the terna)! And, more often than not, these bishops will suggest someone who is like-minded and part of their "inside network".<br /><br />A few years ago, in one U.S. diocese, the bishop (a weak bishop who is still in charge) was asked to submit a terna for an auxiliary bishop. The Congregation for bishops told him that they already had one name on the terna and wanted to give him the option of submitting two others. The bishop submitted two other names, both priests who were yes-men and part of his little cadre. The Vatican chose their own man this time and the bishop was furious. The priest chosen was a younger, traditional and very orthodox priest. The two names submitted by the bishop were anything but that. That younger auxiliary has since gone on to become an archbishop of an important metropolitan diocese.<br /><br />The process for choosing bishops is flawed, but sometimes the best man wins anyway. However, whenever a good bishop retires, many of us wait in horror, for fear that another good old boy will get the nod because he did the right favors or it was "his turn".<br /><br />I propose that it be required that any candidate for bishop must demonstrate a love for the EF and say that form of the Mass regularly. He should also have experience ferreting out homosexual priests, since they have all but destroyed the priesthood. I don't think the Vatican will take my suggestion, but there it is.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-66632173293903567252013-01-22T20:31:47.983-05:002013-01-22T20:31:47.983-05:00MI, nice analogy. Perhaps you can point me to the ...MI, nice analogy. Perhaps you can point me to the Chech teaching that supports it? <br /><br />Everyone will please forgive me for referencing Pope Urban when I intended to reference Pope Boniface. In reviewing his Bull Unam Sanctum, which is addresses to the "Greeks", we see MI's analogy fall apart. For, in that Bull, the Pope says directly to the Eastern Churches that they must submit, collectively and individually, to the papacy or else they forfeit salvation. Yet, we later find these same "Greeks" called separated brethren, no longer the target of proselytization, a true Church with valid sacraments (therefore with the possibility of salvation as the presence of the valid sacraments cannot indicate otherwise). <br /><br />So, while the analogy is well-intentioned it does not address the subject matter directly. And my stated point was not the so-called development of doctrine, it was a lack of clarity of doctrine. Say what you will of Unam Sanctum, but it is certainly a model of clarity. And one demanding obedience thereby: Query precisely who is being disobedient to Pope Boniface's purported ex cathedra statement in Unam Sanctum... Pondering that leads precisely to the quandary that I am raising. Marcnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-10532188196016141822013-01-22T19:56:29.043-05:002013-01-22T19:56:29.043-05:00I read recently that one's love of the liturgy...I read recently that one's love of the liturgy may be measured by his distress when it is done poorly. Perhaps it is true similarly that one's respect for the papacy can be measured by his distress when it is done poorly. <br /><br />In any event, I believe the present distress in the Church is largely the result of a single papacy whose disastrous mistakes the current pope and his predecessor have not yet been able to overcome. For instance, the bulk of the "bad apples" that remain in the U.S. episcopacy--and largely controlled it for a period--are probably the heritage of a single episcopal figure who was appointed and rose to such power and influence during that papacy and the following one that (it's generally believed) for a couple of decades no U.S. terna went to Rome without his consent. And this was just one of the areas of calamity during that papacy.Henry Edwardsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-13427853422181706552013-01-22T19:35:27.872-05:002013-01-22T19:35:27.872-05:00Marc, Church teachings can develop in that, as doc...Marc, Church teachings can develop in that, as doctrines are examined more fully, the Church comes to understand them more deeply, but she never understands them to mean the opposite of what they once meant. All ecumenical councils -- including Vatican II -- have examples doctrinal development therein. As for your Pope Benedict vs. Pope Urban example, it is indeed possible that one can be submissive to the pope without knowing of the necessity of this submission. An analogy may show this point. For example, during the Colonial times, Great Britain owned vast amounts of empires in Asia and Africa. All the people who lived in those areas were indeed truly under the authority of Great Britain; however, if one went into the bushes of Asia or Africa, there were probably people who did not know about the authority of Great Britain and did not know that they had to submit to it. In a sense, they were submissive to Great Britain without knowing of the need to. If once they learned of the necessity of being submissive to the colonial rule of Great Britain, they would then become submissive when they knew they had to. However, if they learned of this authority and rejected this authority, they cut themselves off. In the same way, the pope truly has authority over all the earth; nevertheless, there are some who do not know or have not seriously studied that indeed he has this authority. However, if they submit to whatever grace that Christ has given them, then they can (note that I said <b>can</b>, not <b>will</b>) achieve salvation; nevertheless, if they have truly heard the message of the full gospel (which includes papal authority), and they refuse to submit to this authority, the people very well cut themselves off from salvation. No one who has truly heard this message and knowingly rejects this truth for whatever reason can be saved. Militia Immaculatahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15021417068774633653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-61165595719277147832013-01-22T18:53:12.980-05:002013-01-22T18:53:12.980-05:00Fr Allan,
It is possible to be ultra-conservative...Fr Allan,<br /><br />It is possible to be ultra-conservative; it is not possible to be ultra-orthodox. <br /><br />There is an extreme right, the sedevacantists (most of them are in the USA), and it is they, not the SSPX, who should be equated with dissidents like Bourgeois and the LCWR. SSPX represents mainstream Catholicism as traditionally understood; they have reservations about certain V2 documents, but so did Cardinal Heenan and so did Cardinal Ratzinger.<br /><br />The last ten years of Paul VI's papacy were an unmitigated disaster for the Church. Lefebvre was not the only prelate to be shabbily treated during those shameful years - look what happened to Cardinal Mindszenty.<br /><br />In France, where the Conciliar Church (for want of a better term) has all but collapsed, SSPX is the most important traditionalist movement. In Brussels it runs the National Monument church of St Joseph in the Leopold quarter. If there is going to be a Catholic revival in France and Belgium, its role will be crucial.<br /><br />It is easy for Catholics in the USA or the UK, neither of which are Catholic countries, to be sniffy about the SSPX. But Europe matters.John Nolanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09027156691859606002noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-60686015505555492842013-01-22T18:52:40.995-05:002013-01-22T18:52:40.995-05:00(continued from previous)
So then, now that we ar...(continued from previous)<br /><br />So then, now that we are in this situation, however, why can't we work for the long term by evangelizing the culture and thereby fostering holy and strong bishops AS WELL AS removing the weak bishops already in place?<br /> <br />That's a legitimate question. Let's take a look at that.<br /> <br />#1 - There have been bishops who have been reproached and reprimanded. Some have even been suspended from their office. Admittedly, the numbers have not been very high, but then again, mass suspensions are not a real alternative as we shall soon discover.<br /> <br />#2 - Just because it's not available for public commentary, we have no idea of the pressure the Vatican is applying to individual bishops. That is not the way the Church operates. It does not call a news conference every time a bishop fails in his office. Americans are great for parades and flash, but that does not necessarily translate into how the universal church handles these matters.<br /> <br />#3 - If we begin to single out one bishop for removal, where will the inquisition stop? The ousted bishop will rightfully ask that the criteria be applied fairly and uniformly. And then? Well, then you have a situation of a complete purging of virtually the entire hierarchy of the U.S.! In fact, why should we stop at the U.S.? How about the whole Western world? OK,, then. Why not? Let's do it. Very well, then, what are we left with? We are left with 1250 vacant Sees to fill. And who, pray tell, are going to fill these Sees? A currently orthodox priesthood who will do a much better job? Yeah, right. If only that were the case! And what happens when the next bishop is just as bad or perhaps even worse than the guy you booted out? What then? More bouncing? Do you see by now that Rome should not be in the business of babysitting and bouncing? The culture gets the bishops that it wants. Rome's job is to convince the culture to open themselves up to Christ and select, for themselves, holy men who will guard the truth.<br /><br />#4 - And what about this little judicial and legislative war that we've started? Do you really think that the fan is only pointed towards the leftists when the proverbial dung hits it? I don't think so. As Rome begins the purging process, the persecution of faithful Catholics will not be a small thing -- far worse than they are now, as hard as that is to believe. The puny concessions the left has allowed for traditional Catholics, for instance, would be wiped out overnight. Think of those who have recourse to one church in a whole diocese for the Traditional Mass. Now, picture this: those Catholics going to a Novus Ordo Mass because your lefty bishop wants to play hardball and refuses to allow the Latin mass any longer. Chilling sight, no?<br /><br />#5 What is the Church's mission? It is to evangelize the world. In our day, that includes not only evangelizing non-Catholics but even those Catholics within the Church. If the Vatican's focus was on playing powerball with every recalcitrant bishop in this world, we'd have to hire even more Vatican bureaucrats to deal with the diocesan bureaucrats. Now, why would we want to do that? There is no point in wasting time, money and talent in policing and enforcing conformity with the truth, and all of the stonewalling, yelping, and back-stabbing that goes with it. We cannot force people to accept the truth. In the end, they'll do what they want, in any case. The best approach - the approach in the Pope's view -- is to go right for the jugular and change what people want. This is the most effective and efficient approach to the dilemma in the long run.Militia Immaculatahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15021417068774633653noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7846189835239594160.post-58006286369849249872013-01-22T18:52:03.065-05:002013-01-22T18:52:03.065-05:00So... Your suggestion is that, out of all the unma...<b>So... Your suggestion is that, out of all the unmarried men in the world, which is the candidacy pool for the selection of bishops, it is possible for there to be no better qualified candidates at any time?<br /><br />How plausible does that sound to you? Or is it more likely that liberal popes select bishops of their own ilk?</b><br /><br />The first question that we must ask is: why not just simply choose a "good bishop" in the first place instead of going through the headaches and politics of removing a bishop from his See? Are we really to believe that the pope wants incompetent or doctrinally unsound leaders of the flock? That does not make much sense. OK, then could the process be flawed? Not really. There are sufficient checks in place to ensure that generally speaking better candidates are chosen. So then, we are left with some scary conclusions.<br /><br />Sure, you find it unbelievable that the bad bishops we've had over the past several years were truly the best there were at that point in time, but humor me for a moment: why couldn't that be a theoretical possibility? I mean, we could have had FAR WORSE bishops! Secondly, if, generally speaking, we have the "best of a bad bunch", what does that say of the pool of candidates Rome has been given to make a decision? Answer: the pool needs some cleaning. I mean, really, if we could only be a fly on the wall every Saturday evening in the Pope's apartment, maybe we'd hear the other side of the story: "Gosh darn it, what the heck is this? Larry, Moe, and Curly yet again? Please don't make me appoint one of these guys?"<br /><br />But this brings us to yet another question. From whence do these priests come? They come from and are influenced by the current culture of death. Now, then, let's see if we can understand this simple connection: strong culture, strong bishops with a time delay. Ergo, if you want strong bishops, you evangelize the culture first. You need to squeeze the orange before you get the juice. Incidentally, this explains a strong hierarchy in Pre-V2 days and a weak hierarchy in Post-V2 days. The culture in the decades immediately preceding Vatican II was already beginning to degenerate, thereby influencing the quality of the next generation of bishops.<br /><br />(to be continued)<br />Militia Immaculatahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15021417068774633653noreply@blogger.com