No Mercy For Critics of Pope Francis
Archbishop Fisichella, President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting the New Evangelization, has stirred controversy by suggesting that some criticisms of Pope Francis might result in automatic excommunication.
Archbishop Fisichella made his remarks while explaining how Pope Francis’s new “Missionaries of Mercy” will operate. The 800 “missionaries” will have the power to absolve from penalties previously reserved to the Holy See.
In reference to Canon 1370, which imposes automatic excommunication for “physical violence” against the Roman Pontiff, Archbishop Fisichella said:
“I would say that we need to understand well ‘physical violence,’ because sometimes words, too, are rocks and stones, and therefore I believe some of these sins, too, are far more widespread than we might think.”
Archbishop Fisichella’s comments will be interpreted by many as an attempt to silence faithful Catholics who are deeply concerned by the direction currently being taken by those who hold offices at the highest levels of the Church. Serious concerns have been raised over the last two and half years concerning:
- The alleged manipulation of the 2014 Extraordinary Synod and the 2015 Ordinary Synod
- The publication of a heterodox Relatio Synodi of the Extraordinary Synod
- The publication of a heterodox Instrumentum Laboris for the Ordinary Synod
- The publication of a heterodox Relazione Finale of the Ordinary Synod
- The radical reforms to the canonical procedures governing declaration of nullity of marriage
- The open collaboration between the Holy See and leading global advocates of population control
- The confusing remarks made by the Holy Father about who is able to receive Holy Communion
- The confusing remarks made by the Holy Father about the relationship between condoms and AIDS
- The confusing remarks and actions of the Holy Father on the subject of homosexuality
- The endorsement, by official bodies of the Holy See, of pro-abortion, pro-contraception UN Sustainable Development Goals
- The endorsement of the environmental agenda in the encyclical letter Laudato Si, without sufficient recognition of the profound connection between environmentalism and the population control movement
- The public association of Laudato Si with the most radical elements of the environmental/population control movement and dissent from the doctrine of Humanae Vitae
- The appointment, promotion or elevation to ecclesiastical offices or to positions of influence, by the Holy Father, of many openly heterodox prelates including, but not limited to: Bishop Franz-Josef Bode, Archbishop Blaise Cupich, Godfried Cardinal Danneels, John Cardinal Dew, Walter Cardinal Kasper, Bishop Heiner Koch, Reinhard Cardinal Marx, Vincent Cardinal Nichols, Christoph Cardinal Schönborn and Donald Cardinal Wuerl.Can. 211 All the Christian faithful have the duty and right to work so that the divine message of salvation more and more reaches all people in every age and in every land.§2. The Christian faithful are free to make known to the pastors of the Church their needs, especially spiritual ones, and their desires.Voice of the Family is confident that Catholics at every level of the Church will continue to fulfil their duty of defending the Catholic faith throughout the “Year of Mercy” and during the years ahead.
- §3. According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful, without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons.
- Can. 212 §1. Conscious of their own responsibility, the Christian faithful are bound to follow with Christian obedience those things which the sacred pastors, inasmuch as they represent Christ, declare as teachers of the faith or establish as rulers of the Church.
- In the face of these and other scandals Catholics have not only the right but also the duty to offer respectful, but forceful, criticism. This grave duty is outlined in Canons 211 and 212 of the Code of Canon Law:
- Can. 211 All the Christian faithful have the duty and right to work so that the divine message of salvation more and more reaches all people in every age and in every land.
- Can. 212 §1. Conscious of their own responsibility, the Christian faithful are bound to follow with Christian obedience those things which the sacred pastors, inasmuch as they represent Christ, declare as teachers of the faith or establish as rulers of the Church.
- 2. The Christian faithful are free to make known to the pastors of the Church their needs, especially spiritual ones, and their desires.
- 3. According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful, without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons.
Voice of the Family is confident that Catholics at every level of the Church will continue to fulfil their duty of defending the Catholic faith throughout the “Year of Mercy” and during the years ahead. Source
Comments invited – with caution!
Comments (102)
Click here to sign the petition over at The Remnant, asking Pope Francis either to change course or to renounce the Petrine Office.
Petition signed, sealed and delivered. We all might receive a writ of excommunication, and such a writ will leave me feeling satisfied for two reasons. Firstly because I am defending the Gospel of Jesus Christ and secondly because the Pope, by excommunicating the faithful is proving himself to be a manifest heretic. Pure Stalinism!
Petion also signed by me.
Athanasius,
If Catholic Convert’s signature doesn’t do the trick, yours will for sure. He now knows we mean business! I mean, for starters, look at the comments pouring in here. Yes, we’re sending out the right signals, all right. No messing with Catholics in the UK. That’s for sure 😯
Testing. Once more with feeling…
Editor,
It’s just a case of where do we start with this Pope. I mean, it’s not as though he’s just a bit liberally confused about certain aspects of the Faith, he’s on another planet completely. I really don’t know what else to add to the litany of catastrophes since Francis was elected. And I’m trying my best not to think what often occurs to me as quite likely, which is that he knows the damage he’s doing. I still have to give him the benefit of the doubt in charity and hope that he somehow thinks that what he does is good for the Church. Can a Pope be that blind, though?
I think I can see where you are coming from in a certain respect. The Pope entered the Jesuits in the late 1950’s and had his theological ‘training’ with them through the 1960’s until his ordination in 1969, so he will have been indoctrinated with and fully imbibed the modernist cancer raging in the Jesuits at that time. To be honest, and I don’t mean to sound uncharitable, I don’t think the Pope is all that bright and I think he is quite impressionable, hence why he is so easily influenced by liberal prelates. Liberalism relies far too much on the emotions and not the intellect, hence his Liberalism. He doesn’t think, which he continually proves by his adlibbing and unguarded statements. I sometimes want to give him the benefit of the doubt, as you say, and hope that he thinks what he is doing is for the good of the Church. Then I think to myself, he must have some idea of what true Catholicism is given his upbringing in Argentina in the 1930’s, 40’s and 50’s by devoutly Catholic parents and grandparents. Argentina was one of the most conservative Catholic nations in the world. Likewise, the chorus of traditional Prelates, Priests and Laity challenging him grows by the day. He has got to listen to some of it, surely?
I should have become Russian Orthodox, they seem to be doing well 🙂
Catholic Convert1,
“I don’t think the Pope is all that bright and I think he is quite impressionable, hence why he is so easily influenced by liberal prelates. Liberalism relies far too much on the emotions and not the intellect, hence his Liberalism. He doesn’t think, which he continually proves by his adlibbing and unguarded statements”
I completely agree with the above statement, in fact, with your whole post at 1.46pm. I don’t think it’s uncharitable to say what you have said, as I think it is a legitimate point of view. He doesn’t seem to be too bright IMHO.
Well well it’s about time that the Higherarchy of the Church came out and opposed anyone who dare speak against them . Welcome all those Lutherans etc ,etc,and another thousand Protestant Sects to Communion but ban those irritant faithful Catholics as we just don’t seem to get the message. Have Clown Masses ,Dancing Masses ,Halloween Masses but for Gods sake don’t have a Faithful Holy Mass. They who are at the Top supposedly in our Church know exactly what they’re doing and that is to bring it crashing down . Francis knows that it’s Christ ,the real faithful take their lead from -is it this that’s really scaring him -.
Unlike Athanasius, I cannot make allowances for this Pope. Like every other person in a position of responsibility, not knowing is no excuse. He SHOULD know or should have had the humility to say, when elected, that he really didn’t know enough about Catholic dogma and morality to accept the position of pope… that he had different ideas about what was good for the Church but that, to get the kind of Church HE wanted, would mean contradicting Catholic Tradition. He did not do that, so, as far as I’m concerned, the buck stops right at his desk and if I had harboured any doubts after reading Athanasius’ kind forbearance above, the latest shocking news/gimmick would have resolved them – big time. Click here to see, with your own eyes, the unbelievable abuse of Church property – by the senior hierarchy, Pope included.
Outrageous. I’m not sure that these petitions do any good but would urge everyone to sign this one, in the above linked article, because the Holy See, the papacy and the Church itself are all being mocked very publicly, by the very people who should be defending it from such degradation.
Editor,
If the Papal knighhood, that should be mine, goes to the Archlayman of Canterbury, then I might be in the mood to commit a little more. In the meantime, I’m hedging my bets.
I really shouldn’t make light of this tragic situation in the Church, but a little humour every now and then helps with the heartache.
What I want to know is, when will they be introducing Papal Damehoods and will I get one?
Editor,
There are a number of Papal hoodies being created right now, so just hang on in there!!
As of yesterday, there were already 2,285 ready for distribution.
Unique Selling Point? At the Pope’s personal request, the hoods are on back to front.
I read that as ‘Paypal’. My eyesight getting worse.
Constantine,
Well, I wouldn’t say no to a few free blessings from PayPal either!
Editor,
I think the Remnant petition will enrage him and cause further destructive behavior to the Church and more condemnations of faithful Catholics from “Who am I to judge?” But just as a psychological reference point for what this personality type is capable of, I offer these “Ten Absolute Truths of Narcissism” from Facebook.com/BarbedWire.Narcissism:
1. Yes, they know what they’re doing.
2. Yes, they know they’re hurting you.
3. Yes, they’re doing it on purpose.
4. Yes, they can control it, just as they do when they’re trying to impress someone.
5. Yes, they could stop if they wanted to.
6. No, they don’t love you, even if they say they do (substitute “mercy” for “love” in this case).
7. No, they’re not capable of empathy, compassion or remorse.
8. No, you cannot change them.
9. Yes, they’re only capable of manipulation and control.
10. No, they will not apologize. Ever.
All this seems to match up quite well with Bergoglio.
Phew! For a minute I thought you were describing Athanasius!
Editor,
Sounds like the government to me!
Editor/Athanasius,
LOL !
Fr Z is quoted in the Lifesitenews report about the Vatican sacrilege, and I was pleasantly surprised at what he said about this latest scandal – he describes it as “beyond ridiculous”. However, when I then paid a visit to his blog, there he is peddling the same nonsense about the SSPX – it’s ok to attend their Masses out of curiosity about the TLM, but don’t receive Holy Communion. And this carrying today’s date. Click here if you want to check it out. But don’t waste time writing up a lengthy contribution to the discussion, such as it is. Fr Z heavily censors comments and few of mine have ever made it onto the page. If you do decide to comment, keep a copy and then post it here for us to read.
It’s really hard to believe that there is ANYONE out there who still doesn’t get it; who still can’t see that the SSPX is a God-given lifeboat in this time of crisis. Incredible stuff. Is it a spiritual blindness or a lack of elementary intelligence? I can’t make up my mind.
Editor,
For those who are alarmed by the threat of automatic excommunication for criticising Pope Francis, this article by a Canon Lawyer is well worth reading.
I hope it brings peace of mind to anyone who is suffering because of Archbishop Fisichella’s threat.
https://canonlawblog.wordpress.com/2015/12/07/most-words-are-not-crimes/
Gerontius,
That blog is written by a Canon Lawyer of such standing that he persists in his ignorant belief that the original SSPX excommunications were valid, and, for all I know, I’m not sure, may continue to consider them excommunicate. I stop reading when I see his name!
And I have no doubt that you are writing tongue in cheek when you suggest anyone would be suffering because of Archbishop Fisichella’s daft threat. I’ve never slept more soundly 😀
Sister Lucia of Fatima said that the diabolical disorientation would affect those who held responsibility – she never excluded any Pope from that statement, so it seems clear (to me, at least) that Pope Francis has been affected by it:- Sister Lucia said:- “Unfortunately, in religious matters, the people for the most part are ignorant, and follow wherever they are led. Hence the great responsibility of those who have the duty of leading them…. It is painful to see such a great disorientation and in so many persons who occupy places of responsibility….
“[T]he devil has succeeded in infiltrating evil under cover of good, and the blind are beginning to guide others, as the Lord tells us in His Gospel, and souls are letting themselves be deceived. … And the worst is that he [the devil] has succeeded in leading into error and deceiving souls having a heavy responsibility through the place which they occupy…. They are blind men guiding other blind men…. “Gladly I sacrifice myself and offer my life to God for peace in His Church, for priests and for all consecrated souls, especially for those who are so deceived and misled! … “People must recite the Rosary every day. Our Lady repeated this in all Her apparitions, as if to arm us in advance against these times of diabolical disorientation, so that we would not allow ourselves to be deceived by false doctrines….” http://www.crucialtruths.com/read.html
WF,
Thank you for reminding us of that quote from Sister Lucia – it is a stark reminder that all that we are experiencing today was foretold, and, really, that quote says it all.
That has to be an act of blasphemy to project that lion onto the walls of St Peter’s, surely? There’s a thin line, IMHO, between abusing a sacred place or object (sacrilege) and insulting God (blasphemy). It’s really incredible that the pope has got caught up in the climate change fraud.
Ive signed it – is there any way to check the number of signatures?
Gabriel Syme,
The number is given at the top of the Lifesitenews page, at the right above where we sign the petition – 2,285 at the time of writing this comment.
Madame Editor,
Just to interject whilst on the subject of numbers signing the petition (2,285 so far, you say): Newly-crowned heavy weight boxing champion Tyson Fury has declared himself against gays, pedophiles and abortion. He has also revealed that he and his wife did not sleep together until after they were married.
He has been nominated for consideration as Sportsman of the Year which could lead to him being a role model for young people. However, more than 400,000 people have signed a petition demanding that he be struck off for his old fashioned views!
Where is this country heading?
Leprechaun,
“Where is this country heading?”
Actually, I think this country has arrived – we’re now a liberal fascist state where only one opinion is permitted on every issue;
And don’t you dare try to tell me differently! 😀
There are a fair number of people who are likely to vote for Tyson Fury including myself although I had not previously heard of him. Nor have I voted in SPOYT before this. I just do it to be bolshie and resist the manacles of the PC chatterati. (I also note that a NI pastor is to be tried for hate crime for a homily in which he mentioned islam and Satan in the same sentence, or similar. We need to push back.)
Maybe this will encourage more signatures:
(same story, different outlets)
Vatican cardinal claims Pope called for ‘birth control’
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/vatican-cardinal-claims-pope-called-for-birth-control-suggests-it-as-soluti
http://eponymousflower.blogspot.co.uk/2015/12/heretical-cardinal-says-pope-is.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-35040477
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3352990/Is-Vatican-promoting-birth-control-tackle-climate-change-Senior-Papal-adviser-claims-offer-solution-spiralling-population.html
Faith of Our Fathers,
If we listen to the words of the Pope and his liberal brothers in the hierarchy, it’s almost as if they don’t believe in the supernatural. Their entire preoccupation is with this world, with social injustice, poverty, the climate and other such secondary issues. The dignity of God, the shortness of life, the length of eternity and the destiny of immortal souls, which should be their priority, barely, if ever, gets a mention. They seem to have this definite idea about Our Lord as a hippie figure who came to found an earthly commune, quite Masonic in orientation, where the emphasis is on liberty, equality and fraternity. It’s all ordered to suit the myth that man is on an evolutionary projection to divinity, the “Omega Point” exemplified by the perfect man made God, Jesus Christ.
It is astounding pride which is exposed in that brilliant Encyclical of St. Pius X on Modernism, Pacendi Dominici Gregis.
Couldn’t agree more . It’s as if some of our so called top men haven’t read or heard The Sermon on The Mount . As for Our Lady well that’s another story altogether . I hate to say this but I was at Mass a couple of months ago -I won’t say where -and during the Homlly the Priest said some of us would be surprised if we knew of the homage that Muslims payed to Our Lady .Do these men really realise what they say. Also was at Mass and during another Homily a man from the congregation shouted at the Priest and walked out. It’s plain our Church is going down The Masonic route when men like Elton John say make Francis a sain NOW .
Faith of Our Fathers,
It is true that the Muslims hold Our Lady in high esteem, but not as the Mother of God, merely as the mother of a great prophet. Still, maybe one day that particular devotion, seriously flawed as it is, will win conversion for them to the true faith through Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart.
It is well known that when the pilgrim virgin statue (of Our Lady of Fatima) was passing through highly populated Muslim lands during its world travels in the 1950s, the Muslims came out in the hundreds of thousands to pay homage. It is also a fact, however, that those countries were the only ones in which the renowned miracle of doves did not take place at Our Lady’s statue, as it did in every Christian country. The message from heaven couldn’t have been clearer with regard to Islam.
FOOF
MEN like Elton John?
Is (s)he not someone`s wife?
I’ve often wondered if the wife gets the courtesy of first visit to the shaving bowl every morning.
Ha! Funny you should mention that. An individual by the name of Rylan Clark was a contestant on X Factor. I didn’t watch the programme, I only saw a snippet whilst channel hopping. Anyway, my grandfather was watching a programme that had this Rylan on, and Rylan was talking about his ‘fiancé’. My grandfather thought a nice young lady would come on, and then as my grandfather said ‘another beard appeared’. What a hoot!
Athanasius, don’t be ridiculous, you know how long women take to get ready in the morning.
Frankier,
I have wondered often how they decide who is the “female” partner and who is the “male”, when they’re both the same sex. I really wonder how they decide that, does anybody know (or maybe I shouldn’t ask – LOL!)
Margaret Mary
The wife’s the one with the muscles and the rolling pin.
After the burglary.
Q. How can one tell if the culprits were ‘kwers’?
A. The furniture’s been re-arranged and there’s a quiche in the oven….
Margaret Mary,
You really should NOT have asked that question – it has, predictably, encouraged responses that are best not put in writing.
We try to keep a high standard of Catholicity on this blog, so language and humour need to be tailored accordingly. There’s an article on purity in the current (December) newsletter, so we don’t want to be saying one thing in the newsletter and quite another on the blog.
I’ll leave what’s here this time but any additions and I will delete your question and all responses. I hope you understand. If not, as they say, tough 😯
Oops, sorry! I realised too late that the question was inappropriate for this blog. I’m very sorry, and please be free to delete it.
I’ve had a similar experience to you FOOF. It was last year on the Feast of the Assumption, and the Priest, in his sermon, included a snippet stating that the Quran praises Our Blessed Lady and that Muslims venerate Her. Muslim women pray to Our Blessed Lady when they are pregnant I believe. To be honest, I didn’t have a problem with it. In fact, I think Priests, when preaching on Our Blessed Lady, should mention what the Protestant ‘Reformers’ such as Martin Luther, Huldrych Zwingli, John Calvin and John Wesley believed about Our Blessed Lady, as well as what Muslims believe. They should of course mention all of this as a footnote to Catholic doctrine, to prove the universality of the cultus of Our Blessed Lady. As Athanasius said earlier, I hope that Islamic devotion to Our Blessed Lady will serve as a source of grace to them and lead them to the True Faith.
Athanasius et. al.,
On the subject of lack of belief in the supernatural, I thought this article put it rather nicely: https://theweek.com/articles/581178/does-pope-francis-fear-god-synod-family-fracturing-catholic-church
Gabriel Syme,
Thanks for posting those links. It truly beggars belief that a senior Cardinal would speak in this way. Where, for example, is His Eminence’ trust in God, the Creator? This is what I meant in my other post about these high prelates having no supernatural faith. They are all worldlings obsessed with worldly concerns.
The clerical motivation behind the reports initially baffled me Athanasius, but you have succinctly put your finger on it – a lack of trust in God and of supernatural faith. That is exactly why someone would look towards man-made solutions.
As someone raised in the ambiguous Novus Ordo Church, this whole idea of “trusting in God” is actually still relatively to me! And very interesting, refreshing and consoling it is too, as is the notion that everything which comes to us – good or bad – comes from God and is always what we need at that time (even if we do not understand why).
One would have thought the N.O. clergy might have deigned to mention this at some juncture – but, no.
Gabriel Syme,
Yes, indeed. If you listen to all these Modernist reformers and watch their actions, it is clear that their agenda is way more natural than supernatural, which indicates a loss of divine faith. This first became evident when Pope Paul VI addressed the United Nations, calling it “the last hope of mankind for peace”. He spoke these words knowing the message and secret confided by Our Lady at Fatima. This is classic of the mistrust of God and heaven in the Modernist psyche. And so it continues under Francis.
Athanasius,
“when Pope Paul VI addressed the United Nations, calling it “the last hope of mankind for peace”. He spoke these words knowing the message and secret confided by Our Lady at Fatima.”
That’s shocking in the extreme.
Maybe we should be thankful it wasn’t a ‘gay’ porn show that got projected onto St. Peter’s…..
It’s interesting to note how more and more prominent Catholics are beginning to see the light (pardon the pun). Only a few weeks ago, convert Steve Mosher of Population Research was saying that the ‘who am I to judge? tee shirts should be put away, now that the real Francis has stood up for pro-life and pro-family values.’
“I am sorry that the facade of St. Peter’s has been turned into a propaganda stage for the scientific fraud known as ‘Catastrophic Man-Caused Global Warming,’” Steven Mosher, president of the Population Research Institute, told LifeSiteNews.
“I am sick at the thought that this most sacred space — St. Peter’s Basilica — will be the backdrop for the further dissemination of this fraud, whose ultimate goal is to impose a ‘Carbon Tax’ on the developed countries. This tax will not only cripple global economic growth and undermine democracy, its proceeds will be used to fund even more population control programs in the developing world,” he said.
Pat McKay,
You are correct, in that the one good thing about this terrible pontificate, is that – at long last – Catholics, who should have been alert a long time ago to the extent of the crisis in the Church, can now deny it no longer.
There’s no need for Catholic Truth to make decisions about which scandal to report, which one would be most likely to shake our readers out of their apathy or misguided papolatry because this pope is doing our work for us. Nobody, with an ounce of true Catholic Faith, with the slightest drop of Catholic sensibility, can possibly be anything but appalled at the words and behaviour of Papa Francis.
Only yesterday, I was speaking to someone who expressed pleasure at seeing Pope Benedict on the TV news alongside Pope Francis for the opening of the Holy Door. Nostalgic, he was, about the good old days when we had Pope Benedict at the helm.
When I looked askance and reminded him of some of Pope Benedict’s statements and pointed out the fact that if he had stood his ground against the “wolves”, we wouldn’t be suffering the antics of the present incumbent, he clearly didn’t know whether to agree or disagree. And when I further pointed out that Pope Benedict has not said a single word to indicate that he disapproves of the anti-Catholic statements from his successor, but has, instead, given the clear impression that he wholly approves of him, well, again, I refer you to our newsletter reports over the years, in which we have lamented the lack of a good pontiff since Vatican II first took us down that diabolically disorientated road predicted by Our Lady at Fatima.
So, yes, it’s good that Steven Mosher and many others are now seeing the light, to steal your pun. Just let’s hope that they don’t go falling for the Modernist trick of – having said the wrong thing, to put it mildly – Papa Francis comes out to denounce some anti-life activity, in a Catholicism-Light manner, and the Moshers of this world clap their hands and say “Oops, it was all a mistake. He’s really a good Catholic pope after all.” Nope. He’s not. And unless he publicly retracts the many scandalous things he’s said and done, apologises for causing such confusion and starts to speak and act like a Catholic, let alone a pontiff, then he never will be a good pope. Well, that’s my story, and I’m sticking to it 😀
All the critics of Pope Francis are dooooooooomed.
Dooooooooomed I tell ye.
I wonder if the only people criticising Pope Francis are traditionalists. I think some of the liberals are also criticising him for not acting quickly enough to reform the curia.
Just in case you might be interested I did indeed use your link to The Remnant and signed the petition. I would indeed like to see this Pope gone.
Have I missed something? Many who write here say a Pope cannot abdicate The Papal Office, and, therefore, Pope Benedict didn’t, and yet they call on the current Bishop of Rome to emulate Celestine as the same Benedict did! You can’t make it up!
CMJ,
You sure have missed something – you really do need to pay closer attention.
In our March 2013 edition, Issue No. 76, I had to scramble our editorial comment page to allow me to include some commentary on the resignation/abdication of Pope Benedict which became public just as we were about to send our copy to the printers. You can read it for yourself, if you click on the downward arrow in the Archives section of our Newsletter page here and select the March 2013 edition. (Be patient, though, takes a while for the Archives folder to download.)
The article on page 4, take note, had been in place well before the abdication/resignation of Pope Benedict. I had no need to – and would have had no time to – write and place that article at the last minute. I had enough on my plate to hurry to include my brief comment on the abdication/resignation – see page 24.
And the article on page 4? Headlined: St Catherine of Siena – “Insolent” Doctor of the Church… Catherine Benincasa to Pope: Use Your Power Or Resign!”
In other words, our message to Pope Benedict in that edition was the same as the message of St Catherine of Siena – “use your authority/power or resign”! How was I to know he would take me literally in advance, so to speak?!
Clearly, then, any comments you may have read in our discussions to the effect that such resignations/abdications should not be a regular feature of the papacy, does not preclude necessary resignations/abdications on occasion.
Indeed, in the current December edition I have included an extract from the letters of St Catherine of Siena in which she calls for the pope to resign. I can’t imagine her writing to congratulate Pope Francis on his good governance of the Church today – can you?
Having said that: I hope we would all agree that such resignations are, and should be, rare occurrences, for the simple reason that popes guilty of bad governance – whether of the apparent weakness of character seen in the papacy of Pope Benedict, or in the Modernism of Pope Francis – should be few and far between. And having said THAT, who knows, I may have to rush to include some comment on Pope Francis’s resignation in our next edition… well, it worked with Pope Benedict, why not Papa Francis? I might at least get a phone call 😀
So, I suggest, with all due respect, that you read the blog with a tad more care in future, and ensure that you are not taking comments out of the context of any wider debate.
Please and thank you!
I too have signed the petition via the link to the Remnant Newspaper.
What is happening now has its’ beginnings with Vatican II and also Pope Paul VI.
http://fatima.org/perspectives/sv/perspective811.asp
Theresa Rose,
Thank you for that very good article – reading about the nativity scene shrouded in darkness while the various pictures (animals, climate change stuff, a Muslim woman in prayer) were lit up on the walls of St Peter’s, is poignant through to chilling.
I think I am right that, even in relatively recent times, and certainly before The Council we now celebrate, Nativity Scenes were not publicly erected prior to Christmas Eve. Any true Traditionalist would surely observe, and be seen to observe in eager anticipation, The Season of Advent.
It is fitting that The Church adds her support to worthy campaigns especially one to preserve creation, and aid the poor nations of the world.
Crying for mercy and justice,
I don’t know whether nativity scenes were publicly erected prior to Christmas Eve or not before the Council (which I, for one, don’t celebrate!) It seems a bit late, since we are supposed to be preparing for the coming of Christ at Christmas during Advent. I don’t see your point, I’m sorry. I also don’t know how you know the “true traditionalists” from the rest, please let me know. I don’t see any contradiction in having a nativity scene put up during Advent. I put mine up the first Sunday in Advent, usually, so that I can prepare properly to celebrate Christmas when the time comes. Seeing the crib scene reminds me of the Advent sacrifices I’m supposed to make in thanksgiving for the humbling of God the Son who came to earth to suffer and die for my sins. I really don’t understand that first paragraph of yours so would be interested to know if I am right in thinking that you seem to be saying that any Catholic who puts up a crib scene before Christmas Eve is not a true Catholic. If I’ve misunderstood, please let me know.
I disagree with your connection between the Church supporting worthy campaigns which she has always done, by building hospitals and schools etc. and the climate change campaign, which isn’t about “preserving creation”, but about population control and making money.
The Church is about saving people from losing their souls in Hell. This message is being lost in Pope Francis’s desperation to be popular with worldly people. I read the Open Letter on this blog which is from a priest who worked in the Roman curia who is very outspoken about the damage this pope is doing through what he says and his affiliation to the climate change agenda. I agreed with his brave letter. He said he wouldn’t put his name to it out of fear of reprisals which actually shows that the “humble” pope is really quite a bully, very merciful, LOL!
Crying For Mercy And Justice
It is not so fitting to support evolution and population control, which those worldly campaigns you speak of proudly proclaim.
Only those who have no faith and trust in the Creator become fearful for the welfare and future of “Mother Earth” Well, Our Lord has told us what her future is – “Heaven and earth will pass away”.
Athanasius,
I’ve no idea why your post (and before you, Fidelis’ earlier on) went into moderation. Cant work it out, but I released both as soon as I saw them, so apologies for the delays, folks.
Public Nativity Scenes (in shops, schools etc) usually appeared in the middle of Advent, usually as a way of focusing people’s minds on the true message of Christmas. Churches Nativities were erected in time for Midnight Mass. In some churches it is the custom to have the stable in place for the fourth Sunday in Advent with the empty manger giving a feeling of expectation. We do this in our church in Edinburgh with Mary and Joseph (and the donkey) in front of the Scared Heart Altar on their way to Bethlehem. On Christmas Eve they are moved into the stable and are replaced with the Kings making their journey to the Christ Child.
Thank You for that reply which at least partly reinforces my observation about Nativity Scenes, and the proper time for the erection of them.
I think I am right that, for example, in many places crucifixes, and statues, are covered for a significant part of Lent for much the same reason. To help people focus on what it is they will celebrate in a particular way when the Feast comes.
As for caring for creation, and saving lives, I can’t think of much more central to the teaching and example of Jesus Christ, Holy Scripture, Tradition and The Commandments.
Is this a “Traditional” blog wholly given to relativism, and pick and mix fidelity to truth?
Crying For Mercy And Justice
I wonder if you would please provide examples from Jesus Christ, Holy Scripture, Tradition and the Commandments to support your claim that caring for Creation is central to the Church’s mission on earth.
I always understood the Church’s mission to be the salvation of immortal souls, not worldly programmes to save the planet. Perhaps it is you who picks and mixes in relativism. Anyway, I can provide many examples to support my claim, beginning with a litany of Papal Encyclicals, not to mention Our Lord’s own words “My Kingdom is not of this world”. So, over to you.
Athanasius,
They say nothing’s perfect in this world but that answer about creation is perfect, IMHO!
A
I said “As for caring for creation, and saving lives, I can’t think of much more central to the teaching and example of Jesus Christ, Holy Scripture, Tradition and The Commandments.” I didn’t mention “The Church”.
However if as humans we are meant to cultivate and care for the earth, then I assume that includes members of The Church, and, if it is parts of God’s plan, even more so.
Crying For Mercy and Justice,
I’m afraid you are deliberately evading my request that you provide evidence in support of your claim, and I note that you have added “and saving lives” to the original debating point.
The Church has always done her utmost to save lives, which goes without saying. However, this new climate change initiative that Rome has endorsed is not only not in line with Church teaching but is actually contrary to it, since it shifts the focus of the Church’s mission from saving souls to saving the planet.
Anyway, I await any Traditional evidence you think you can provide demonstrating the Church’s central mission as that of saving the earth.
A
If we follow your, perverse, logic we should all commit suicide if life on earth means nothing! Exactly why did Jesus cure people and raise some who had died?
Saving lives is obviously an aspect of caring for creation, as human beings are the pinnacle of that which God has made.
Crying For Mercy and Justice,
I didn’t say life on earth means nothing. Please stop twisting my words. I said that life on earth is not the Church’s central mission, as you claimed. Once again, you avoid providing contrary evidence to support your claim. Understandable, since there is none.
Incidentally, Jesus cured people and raised them from the dead primarily to confirm His Divinity. That’s pretty basic stuff.
A
Not all the miracles are presented as “signs” by each of The Evangelists. Indeed, the sole motive, in raising the son of the widow of Nain, was compassion. A theme well fitted to The Year of Mercy to commemorate The Great Council.
If 95% of scientists concur we are damaging the lives of the poor, and destroying the earth, and therefore, indirectly, rejecting “The Gospel of Life”, of which Pope St John Paul was a wonderful preacher, shouldn’t The Church listen, and proclaim that message more boldly?
CMJ,
“If 95% of scientists concur we are damaging the lives of the poor, and destroying the earth, …shouldn’t The Church listen, and proclaim that message more boldly?”
Well, the Church “listened” when the majority of scientists condemned Galileo, and look at the result. We’ve had to defend the Church for being anti-scientific ever since.
It’s not the Church’s mission to treat every scientific theory as a source of divine revelation.
As for Christ’s “sole motive” in performing any miracle being “compassion” – crass nonsense. The purpose of ALL miracles was, essentially, to demonstrate the divinity of Christ. Why this particular cure rather than that particular healing, why one or two people raised from the dead and not all, is a mystery of faith. The supernatural underpins the miracles of Our Lord. That you don’t comprehend that, sits perfectly logically with your blind acceptance of loopy scientific theories, such as blaming a few hairsprays for the weather. Gerragrip. .
Crying For Mercy And Justice,
I see you have again ignored my request for evidence to support your claim that the Church’s central mission on earth is to save the planet, not souls.
Anyway, nothing remotely close to 95% of scientists are in agreement about climate change. In fact, it is so controversial a theory that it has split the scientific world. I would say on average there are fewer scientists for climate change than against. I really don’t know where you got that outrageous figure from. Perhaps the BBC?
Now, typical of these confused times, you sem to think that the life of the body is of greater value than the life of the soul. This is a very dangerous error. Saving souls is far more important a work than saving lives, even though the Church does her utmost to foster and preserve both. Do you see how the primary supernatural end of Catholicism has been eroded away to leave just a superficial humanitarianism? I hope you do see this.
CFM
Did Christ only have compassion for certain people?
Crying For Mercy and Justice,
Here is a scientist who talks about climate change “outside the box” – in other words, he looks at the facts doesn’t just drink in what the BBC tells us.
[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Owm25OHGglk?feature=player_detailpage&w=640&h=360%5D
A
At no time have I written about care for the earth and where it comes in a list of priorities and nowhere have I said it is the primary mission of The Church. False claims rob you of any credibility.
I have said it could form part of The Gospel of Life as did Pope Saint John Paul, and his successors, and based on Holy Scripture, sound theology and science.
Editor
I did say that the miracles are presented in some Gospels as “signs”, but for, example, such thinking would be alien to the Mark which is more concerned with what is termed “The Messianic Secret”. If you can find one scholar, or preacher, that does not put the emphasis on compassion with regards the raising in Nain please highlight them, and what of his speaking with compassion for sheep without a Shepherd, or his thoughts before the feeding of large crowds with small quantities. It is Holy Scripture, not me, that emphasises his feelings for those entrusted to him.
The Year of Mercy invites us to reflect on such love for us each day, a sit celebrates, and marks, The Second Vatican Council.
CMJ,
“At no time have I written about care for the earth and where it comes in a list of priorities and nowhere have I said it is the primary mission of The Church. False claims rob you of any credibility.
I have said it could form part of The Gospel of Life as did Pope Saint John Paul, and his successors, and based on Holy Scripture, sound theology and science.
Now, here is your original statement.
“As for caring for creation, and saving lives, I can’t think of much more central to the teaching and example of Jesus Christ, Holy Scripture, Tradition and The Commandments.”
If that’s not saying that saving the planet is the primary mission of the Church, then I don’t know what is.
As a result, I fear it is your credibility rather than mine which is now in question.
By the way, the “Gospel of Life” of Pope John Paul II you speak of was his response to “the culture of death,” namely, a reiteration of the Church’s infallible moral teaching to combat abortion, homosexual activity, contraception and couples living in sin. There was nothing new or unique in it, no save the planet from climate change rubbish.
A
Alas for you, my “original” statement was not about The Primary Mission of The Church, something I have still not mentioned or discussed, but it was contributed to a discussion which dismisses outright the contribution The Bishop of Rome says The Church can, and should, contribute to that life saving work.
I think Wittgenstein said words derive their meaning in the context in which they are used.
CJM,
I did say that the miracles are presented in some Gospels as “signs”, but for, example, such thinking would be alien to the Mark which is more concerned with what is termed “The Messianic Secret”. If you can find one scholar, or preacher, that does not put the emphasis on compassion with regards the raising in Nain please highlight them, and what of his speaking with compassion for sheep without a Shepherd, or his thoughts before the feeding of large crowds with small quantities. It is Holy Scripture, not me, that emphasises his feelings for those entrusted to him.
Once again you halt at the human level, completely missing the supernatural realities that enrich these Gospel truths.
Yes, Our Lord is the very source of compassion, and of course He felt for the people he helped materially. Is not Our Saviour both God and Man?
But the primary message of Our Lord in the Gospels, even when relieving material misery, is that He is God and He wishes more to give eternal bliss to souls by relieving their sin and filling them with grace. Our Lord never promised us a happy life here below. His was hard and deprived, a life of poverty and suffering. “If you want to be like me take up your cross daily and follow me.
Now this is not to say that we should not help the poor, suffering, etc., if we have the means and opportunity to do so. On the contrary, this is a Christian duty. But it is NOT our central duty. Our central duty is to love God supernaturally, which means staying in a state of grace in our soul so that we can go to heaven, regardless of how hard a life we have.
Remember what Our Lady said to St. Bernadette at Lourdes: “I cannot promise you happiness in this life, only in the next.” These words apply equally to all Catholics, and so this new modern idea that humanitarian social work is at the heart of the Saviour’s message is an illusion.
Just to take your example above, to show how you look at things from a worldly rather than heavenly point of view. Our Lord’s feeding of the multitudes, apart from being a great act of mercy and kindness to the hungry at the time, was essentially a divine revelation concerning Holy Communion. It seems you missed that essential truth.
And did Our Lord not say: Therefore I say to you, be not solicitous for your life, what you shall eat, nor for your body, what you shall put on. Is not the life more than the meat: and the body more than the raiment? Behold the birds of the air, for they neither sow, nor do they reap, nor gather into barns: and your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are not you of much more value than they? And which of you by taking thought, can add to his stature by one cubit? And for raiment why are you solicitous? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they labour not, neither do they spin. But I say to you, that not even Solomon in all his glory was arrayed as one of these. And if the grass of the field, which is to day, and to morrow is cast into the oven, God doth so clothe: how much more you, O ye of little faith? Be not solicitous therefore, saying, What shall we eat: or what shall we drink, or wherewith shall we be clothed? For after all these things do the heathens seek. For your Father knoweth that you have need of all these things.Seek ye therefore first the kingdom of God, and his justice, and all these things shall be added unto you.
Be not therefore solicitous for tomorrow; for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof.
This last sentence is surely the killer sentence for those who mistrust God and fear so-called climate change.
CMJ,
“Alas for you, my “original” statement was not about The Primary Mission of The Church…”
I think we’ll let readers judge for themselves what you originally said, and in what context. For me, there is no question that you are altering your position as each irrefutable correction of your errors presents itself. That is dishonest. Ever considered politics for a living?
A
You quote what you call a “killer” statement about trusting in Divine Providence.
Did Jesus not also condemn those who cannot read the sign of the times, and at least one parable about wise and foolish people who fail to plan?
CJM,
Yes, the foolish people who failed to plan were the foolish bridesmaids who, being so taken up with worldly affairs, failed to trim their lamps (sanctify their souls).
And Jesus admonition to read the signs of the times is all too urgent today in the present apostasy. There is far more emphasis placed today on saving the planet than saving souls. A kind of counter-Gospel, if you like. And so many poor souls are embracing it.
Our Lord said: >i>”Not all those who say lord, lord shall enter into the kingdom of heaven. But he who does the will of Father, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven.”
The will of the Father is to keep the Commandments (“if you love me, you will keep my Commandments”) and obey the precepts of the Church. In other words, as St. Paul says: “The will of God is your sanctification”.
LILY
Tim Ball lost a Court Case in which it was claimed he falsified parts of his C.V., and where it was proved his PhD was not in Climatology as he had claimed.
I don’t think so, read this report
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2014/02/21/has-mickey-manns-case-against-tim-ball-collapsed/
CMJ,
He still has a PhD in Geography, quite an important aspect of the climate change theory, and he has studied his subject for a long time. This man is no idiot, he’s a well educated university graduate and professor.
Lily
In 2007 Ball withdrew in a lawsuit against a critic and acknowledged he had wrongly claimed to be a professor for 28 years, and that his doctorate had anything, at all, to do with climatology.
Crying…
Would you provide a link to that information, please, as I can’t find it online.
Read his Wikipedia profile.Simple really.
CMJ,
You don’t want to be quoting Wikipedia as your source. It is hardly considered to be the most accurate of resource sites.
I wouldn’t take Wikipedia for my source unless they had a footnote to a reliable article or report.
I can’t find anything that says he withdrew from a lawsuit and said he had wrongly claimed to be a professor etc. Nothing at all, so if someone has written that on wiki, it could be a mistake or malicious. I hardly ever look at wiki because they are known to have wrong information and anyone who signs up can go in and change things. So, if you don’t have a link to another source, I would advise you not to believe wiki. He comes across to me as a very knowledgeable and sincere expert.
http://www.cfnews.org/page88/files/ec6484b88efa6f5bde22e239395452fc-502.html
I am not sure if the above link is apt for this thread. But, John Vennari does talk about –
“Who are Pope Fundamentalists”. Looks like those who uphold Catholic Doctrines and Teaching.
Crying for mercy and Justice, I suggest you Google:
“heaven and earth shall pass away but my words shall stand forever”
And you’ll find more than ample evidence that the planet WILL pass away so it cannot be Christ’s Church mission to save it!
Even a kid at primary school kid would be able to tell you that much of The NT was written in expectation of an imminent end, and to follow your logic we should cease immediately seeking to find medicines to prolong life, something contrary to The Gospel of Life, and dare I say it many of us should stop ordering repeat prescriptions, and crowding surgeries. However, I should counsel you that Jesus nowhere advocates such an approach.
CMJ
Are you suggesting that Our Lord was expecting an imminent end to the world when He said what Crofterlady quoted? If not, what’s the point of your reply to her?
BTW, if you seriously believe that children at primary school “would be able to tell you that much of the NT was written in expectation of an imminent end” you must be living on another planet.
CMJ,
You really are a master of false dichotomies. Nobody is saying we don’t use medicines to restore health or any such nonsense.
As for your uncritical acceptance of some biblical “scholarship”, without due thought and interpretation (we’re all awaiting the “imminent” end of the world – it’s coming to us all, each one, soon: life is very short) I suggest your read the landmark encyclical Providentissimus Deus, of Pope Leo XIII to help you steer clear of unthinkingly going along with every utterance of the pseudo-experts who populate (and often drive) the Biblical Studies classrooms. They usually make it up as they go along. Stay a step ahead of them, and know what the Church teaches. It’s the Catholic Church which has the authority to interpret and teach the meaning of Scripture – not any self-styled “scholar” and certainly not any scientist, although, as you will see if you take the time to read the encyclical, Pope Leo XIII gives them their due place.
As for pupils in primary school being able to cite biblical theories about the NT – you gotta be kidding: most of them couldn’t tell you what the NT IS never mind any theory about it being written/”imminent” end of the world. Most of them couldn’t tell you why poetry is written, never mind the New Testament!
Sometimes we say things because we don’t know the truth of the matter. However, when we are disabused with sound evidence, we should have the humility to admit we were wrong and to learn from it. Now, it seems to me that CMJ is not in that ilk but is just sparring for a fight, so therefore I suggest that we all just ignore him / her from now on.
Helen
You’re not wrong.
CMJ,
I’ve had to skim the comments here and haven’t time to research your claims about Professor Tim Ball, but the fact is, there are plenty of scientists who do not subscribe to the global warming/climate change theories, and so Pope Francis is silly, to say the least, to follow the (apparent) crowd. Click here to read about the alleged consensus.
And anyone else who goes with the flow on this, and anything else, is also silly. With bells on.
I have to say CMJ, that I strongly (with more bells on) suspect that you are one of our erstwhile trolls come back to haunt us in another guise. Certain giveaways tend to, how shall I put it, giveaway that apparent fact. Most notably your refusal to acknowledge an argument that corrects you in some way and your persistent failure to provide evidence and links. I’m watching you, big time, and will not hesitate to put you into moderation if I find you taking up our time and energy for your own personal sport. Won’t happen. Trust me.
I have checked his CV on his own website and it says he was a professor for 8 years. Wikipedia must be right on that one. Strange that!
CMJ,
Who knows, the 28 may have been a typo or a genuine mistake on someone’s part. I doubt if he types his own CVs and even when we type something ourselves, we can make a mistake. I don’t know. I really don’t care, but I doubt if anyone with his credentials, needs to falsify his CV.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bI2X34v8QY0
The above link is from the Remnant, a discussion between Michael Matt and Chris Ferrara. It is about the scandals emerging from Pope Francis and the Vatican. Think back to the Feast of the Immaculate Conception and what was seen on the walls of St. Peter.
Comments are closed.