8th April: Start of Greatest Revolution in Church in 1500 Years – Cardinal Kasper

8th April: Start of Greatest Revolution in Church in 1500 Years – Cardinal Kasper

As we prepare  for the release of the Pope’s post-synodal Exhortation on Friday 8th April, it might be useful to reflect on the issues raised in the following article published by Catholic Family News.

 

The Exhortation will be presented to journalists at the Holy See’s Press Office on Friday 8 April at 11.30am (Rome time).
The Exhortation will be presented to journalists at the Holy See’s Press Office on Friday 8 April at 11.30 am (Rome time) 10.30.am UK time. 


When the document is released on Friday, we will discuss it on this thread and rejoice – absolutely – if the fears implicit below, turn out to be groundless. I’m sure we are all praying to that end.  Feel free to read the article below, but refrain from commenting until the Exhortation is released on Friday, if you wish – that’s perfectly acceptable. However, we’ll leave the thread open for those who do wish to comment before Friday.  At the end of the article,  there is a video link to the live-stream of the Presentation of the Apostolic Exhortation, available to view at 10.30 am (UK time) on Friday 8th April. If you click on the image above, that will also take you through to the live-stream video.

Francis’ Synod Exhortation: Brace Yourself for Revolution?

The Past is Prologue

by John Vennari

The Vatican announced Francis’ post-synodal Exhortation, titled Amoris Laetitia (“On Love in the Family”), will be released on Friday, April 8.

            Vatican spokesman, Fr. Federico Lombardi, said the document will be presented in the Vatican newsroom at 11:30 am by Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, the Synod’s secretary, Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, Archbishop of Vienna and a married couple, Francesco and Giuseppina Miano who participated in the Synod discussions.

            Both Baldisseri and Schönborn are very much in line with Pope Francis’ thinking.     

Pope Francis
Pope Francis

            The National Catholic Reporter quoted Australia’s progressivist Archbishop Mark Coleridge who rejoiced, “I expect the papal document to be a typical Bergoglio combination of challenge and encouragement.”[1]

            Cardinal Walter Kasper already announced the text will be revolutionary. “The document,” said Kasper, “will mark the start of the greatest revolution experienced by the Church in 1500 years.”[2] 

Cardinal Walter Kasper
Cardinal Walter Kasper

            I travelled to Rome to cover the October 2015 Synod, along with my friend and colleague Chris Ferrara. Spent 14 days there, the final two weeks of the event. Based on what we saw coming from the Synod, as well as the daily Vatican press briefings, there is good reason to fear the new Exhortation will be every bit as “revolutionary” as Cardinal Kasper pledges.

            After some preliminary remarks, we will take a close look at these press briefings, especially some revealing comments of the liberal Archbishop Coleridge. The final week of the Synod was one of revolutionary expectations.

“Resist Not the Spirit”?

            From the beginning of his pontificate, Francis made clear his resolve to advance the Conciliar agenda. He sees the modernist updating from John XXIII’s Second Vatican Council as a work of the Holy Ghost to be embraced, not resisted. Vatican II ushered us into the evolutionary process of continuous aggiornamento, justified by the changing pastoral needs of the time. Francis implies we should be attentive to the alleged call of the spirit to even more revolutionary change, and more razing of Catholic bastions that block the way for renewal.

            Thus we better understand Francis’ exaltation of Vatican II and his scolding of “hard-headed” Catholics. This oft-quoted speech took place on April 14, 2013, only a month after his election to the papacy.

            “The Council was a beautiful work of the Holy Spirit,” said Francis. “Consider Pope John. He looked like a good parish priest; he was obedient to the Holy Spirit and he did it. But after 50 years, have we done everything the Holy Spirit told us in the Council? In the continuity of growth of the Church that was the Council? No. We celebrate this anniversary; we make a monument, as long as it does not bother us. We do not want to change. What is more, some people want to go back. This is hard-headedness. This is what we call, trying to tame the Holy Spirit, this is what we call becoming foolish and slow of heart.”[3]

            The Synod is a main engine in furthering this “work of the Spirit”. As I’ve noted in the past, the Synod has been established in order to advance the implementation of Vatican II throughout the world. That is how it was defined by Father Kenneth Boyack, a Paulist who had worked with the NCCB.[4]

            Likewise, Tad Szulc, in his biography of Pope John Paul II, explained that the Synod is a “permanent organ to implement the decisions of the Second Vatican Council.”[5]

            Thus the purpose of the Synod is to keep the continuous aggiornamento alive, to keep the accomodata renovatio in motion, in order to implement the Council throughout the world, through the collegial method. The Synod is an ever-present extension of Vatican II into the future.

            The tumult leading up to the 2015 Synod is well known: Cardinal Kasper’s call in February 2014 to pave the way for divorced and remarried Catholics to receive the Eucharist; Francis’ public praise and support for the Kasper proposal; the working document for the 2014 Synod containing an avalanche of perverse proposals such as “new language” to replace natural law, openness towards the homosexual lifestyle, including the tacit nod for homosexuals to be godparents; the tumultuous 2014 Synod; the scandalous pro-homosexual, pro-cohabitation mid-term report; the subsequent Vatican questionnaire in which the bishops were told not to form their responses merely based on doctrine; the 2015 Instrumentum Laboris forcefully criticized by the more orthodox prelates, including Archbishop Schneider who warned that it pushes an agenda contrary to Divine Law.

            In short, we see a process in which the integrity of Catholic doctrine appears to be the last concern of those steering the events.

            The final Francis-offensive in favor of breaking down the Church’s moral edifice in the name of “Mercy” was manifest in the final week of Press Briefings.

            I had arrived in Rome on October 12, and went to the various press briefings during the second week. These sessions included various lay participants of the Synod who were so happy, so happy, so happy to be there. I paid little attention to these useless sessions, as I knew the key briefings would take place the third week

            Sure enough, this was the case.

            Each day of the final week, the most radical prelates were trotted out by the Vatican Press Office to tell the world what the Synod was, and what were the true goals for the future. These prelates included Archbishop Mark Coleridge, Cardinal Reinhard Marx (outspoken supporter of the Kasper Proposal), Cardinal Oswald Gracias (on record calling outto homosexuals, “the Church embraces you, wants you, and the Church needs you”),[6] Spirit-of-Assisi Cardinal Paul Turkson, and Cardinal Christophe Schonborn (who appears to be of one mind with Cardinal Marx). One had the sense the entire week of press conferences was staged-managed for a pre-determined result.

“No Black or White” Coleridge

            Archbishop Mark Coleridge of Brisbane, Australia kicked off the final week of Synod Press Briefings. Each daily press event of the final week comprised at least three synod prelates (different prelates every day) along with Father Frederico Lombardi, Vatican Press Secretary. Coleridge, by far, was the most colorful. He was also the most helpful, as he gave the game away in clear crystal tones.

            I spotlight Coleridge’s October 19 comments as he represents to a more or less degree the position of the most radical Synod prelates, including – according to all available evidence – that of Pope Francis himself. His testimony is crucial, as it indicates the thinking behind the maneuvering, and the path Francis is most likely to take in the future.

            Coleridge insists that doctrine is one thing, and pastoral practice is another. It’s all about starting from human experience (as we repeatedly warned would be the case in previous issues of CFN). In this regard, Cardinal Wuerl and others say, “We must meet people where they are.” Coleridge likewise insists the Church “must put down its roots in human experience.” This is code for accepting the person’s sinful lifestyles as is, and then bend pastoral practice to accommodate it. This is called the “creative” pastoral approach.

            Though he claims to respect the Church’s traditional teaching regarding divorce and remarried, Coleridge says, “not every case [of adultery] is the same, and that’s where the pastoral approach needs to take account … just to say every second marriage or second union [divorced and remarried] is adulterous is perhaps too sweeping.”

            In one sense Coleridge says nothing new. The Church always noted there can be different degrees of culpability regarding such sins – but also insists that these grievous sins remain grievous sins that bar the soul from the Eucharist. The new “discernment” approach, however, favored by modern ecclesial delinquents, looks to pry open a way to grant access to the Eucharist for couples living in adultery who will not correct their lifestyle.

            Coleridge derides the “all or nothing” attitude, saying there is “no black or white.” He frowns upon the word “adultery,” claiming that it is a “convenient and apparently clear blanket term” that does not deal with the reality of human experience in this life or that life.

             All of this twaddle is camouflage for the old heresy of Situation Ethics: the belief that there is no objective morality, and everything depends on the circumstances of the person. Coleridge calls for a whole new language – thus further discarding irreplaceable scholastic precision – so that those living in moral turpitude will not feel “excluded” or “alienated.”

            When asked what terminology he would like to see changed, Coleridge responded he would do away with the term “indissolubility,” which he says is “negative in form.” He also wants to discard the phrase “intrinsically disordered act” – a term despised by those who embrace situation ethics, and the term used by the 1993 Catechism to describe homosexuality.

            Worse, Coleridge goes on to say, “These are just two examples, there would be many, many other” traditional Catholic terms he wants to shed.

            As a true revolutionary, Coleridge sums up his hope that the synod “would bring the whole Church to a new listening, for the sake of a new language, that would open new doors and new possibilities.”

            He also rightly explains that the effects of this Synod will not end with the closing of the October event, but will extend far into the future.

“Theology progresses”?

            Other prelates from the final Synod week piped a similar tune.

            During the October 22 Press Briefing, Cardinal Gracias ladled out his subversion of Catholic truth claiming, “Theology progresses, the doctrine remains the same, and our understanding of Church discipline progresses.” – words that would warm Teilhard’s heart. After spouting the false claim that John Paul II’s Familiaris Consortio opened the doors to ‘different circumstances’ that could lead the way for some divorced and remarried to receive the Eucharist, Gracias said, “I don’t think we have seen the solution … this has got to be tackled, this has got to be studied … as we deepen our understanding … I am sure you will find a way forward.”   Gracias acts as if the solution does not already exist, that those in a second “marriage” must repent of their adultery in order for readmission to the Sacraments, a clear teaching of Familiaris Consortio that Gracias does not mention.

            Likewise Germany’s rootin’tootin’ Cardinal Marx at the October 21 press briefing noted that German-speaking bishops made their own proposal to deal with divorced and remarried. It comprises an appeal to the internal forum, where the priest “in dialogue” with various couples will judge each situation on a case-by-case basis. This too opens the door to sacrilegious Communion under the rubric of a counterfeit compassion.

            Other prelates at the third week’s press conference touted a parallel line. This is what Francis’ Vatican presented to the world by means of the press as the major goals and themes of the Synod.

The Final Thud!

            On the evening of October 24, I picked up the final Synod Document from the Vatican press office. The result was every bit as disastrous as we predicted: a mish-mash of imprecision that opens the door – overtly and covertly – to eventual acceptance of various practices always considered gravely sinful. The document has the atmosphere of an insipid humanism with a Christian veneer. Despite its God-talk, it is bereft of the sense of the supernatural.

            Cardinal Burke put it mildly when he lamented the final document “lacks clarity on the indissolubility of marriage”. A number of us have elsewhere listed its numerous deficiencies.

            Of course there is the obvious omission: The Synod’s final Relatio contains no mention of sin or sinful behavior. Yet the number one incentive for most souls to resist immoral behavior is the truth that sexual sins are mortal sins that bring eternal damnation if the sins are not confessed – in other words, a realistic dread of mortal sin and fear of hell.

            Yet the final document contains no reminder that engagement of the ‘marital act’ is thoroughly forbidden outside of the marriage. There is no word about “avoiding the occasion of sin” – which was always a pastoral admonition. Sin is mentioned only in passing (Christ has saved man from sin, etc.). Regarding homosexuality, cohabitation, adultery, fornication, there is no mention of sin whatsoever.

            One would never know Our Lady of Fatima warned, “More souls go to hell for sins of the flesh than for any other reason.” All so-called “negative language” and “language of exclusion” is expunged from the text. This omission itself is a grave sin of those who dish out this toxin as if it were genuine Catholic nourishment.

            Catholics need to pray, arm themselves with traditional doctrine, teach the truth to those in their sphere of influence, and publicly resist.

            The 2015 Synod and its final document represent an attack on the Church’s entire moral edifice, and points to institutionalized scandal for the future.

            There is every indication that Francis’ April 8 Apostolic Exhortation will proceed according to the same revolutionary spirit..[7] Source 

Comments (317)

  • Athanasius

    Fr. Arthur,

    On this occasion I was also touched by your comment. I was particularly annoyed by the priest who refused the Last Rites to this woman while she was still conscious. Our Lord gives us all the opportunity right up to the last breath in our body to turn to Him and be saved, no matter what our lives have been, such is His infinite mercy. It is a great pity the priest in question forgot that essential truth when it mattered most to that poor soul, assuming of course that she was prepared at that point in time to repent of the adulterous union she had entered into so many years before. You see, emotions aside, we all must deeply regret our transgressions against the divine law if we truly hope to receive mercy. As a priest you of all people will know that past as well as present mortal sins must be deeply detested and repented of. As things stood in this case, it seem this lady was ready to be reconciled to God and should have been given the opportunity to make her peace with Him and receive the great consoling Sacrament of Extreme Unction. It grieves me to learn that she was denied this merciful act. Still, Our Lord reads the heart and we may only hope that hers was true and that He Himself made up for the failing of His priest.

    I don’t think any of us, conscious as we all are of our own human weaknesses and falls, would ever deny that people get caught up in all kinds of situations in their lives that are harmful to themselves and others. Divorce and remarriage, irregular unions, etc., are amongst the most common of these tragedies. Emotions are involved and so it is never an easy thing for a priest to insist that they must be subdued in favour of the divine law. We all get emotionally involved in the troubles of family and friends, or even sometimes strangers whose plight touches us.

    But then we have to ask ourselves what was the emotional turmoil Our Blessed Lord suffered in the Garden when our sins were presented in all their ugliness before His mind, as well as the suffering He was about to endure to redeem us from them. His emotional turmoil was such that He sweated blood from every pour of His Sacred Body, and yet still He fulfilled the will of His Father and sacrificed Himself for us.

    How can we then claim that emotional considerations should take precedence in these cases of divorced and remarried couples or of those in irregular relationships, especially when those who enter into such relationships do so in the knowledge that they offend against God? Our Lord was innocent of sin but resisted all human emotion to spare Himself, yet those who do commit very serious mortal sins think that because their sin is longstanding and difficult to correct they should be dispensed from having to do penance and rectify their state. We live in times where the gravity of sin is largely forgotten. Our supernatural understanding has become so dimmed in these times that many have become blind to the gravity of mortal sin in God’s eyes.

    One single mortal sin committed by our first parents Adam and Eve was sufficient to close the gates of heaven to all mankind and required that the Son of God become incarnate and suffer the most horrendous death to redeem us in justice and re-open those gates. “You were bought at a great price,” said St. Paul, and yet we now find ourselves in the tragic situation today where mortal sins are not only committed with regularity but often with no sign of remorse or willingness to do what it takes to put matters right. Everyone wants the crown but no one wants the cross by which it is won.

    This is how the Church has always viewed matters of morality. It is not sufficient that people regret sinful unions while seeking at the same time to excuse their continuation on the grounds of emotional bonds. That’s not supernatural sorrow, it is self pity.

    God, as we know, is all merciful, and yet He does not dispense any soul from the obligation upon repentance of amending their lives, however hard it may be. His grace is always there to help us through.

    Too many people are inclined to forget that God has foreseen all the arguments and all the emotional human turmoil, and yet does not dispense anyone from His divine law in these moral matters. The choice is always clear, especially at the outset of these relationships. We choose God and His Commandments or we choose ourselves and our passions. It has always been the same choice for human beings and it always will be, no matter what mortal sin we are tempted to. Do we choose God or ourselves? That’s why grace is so important and why those in long term irregular unions become, in many cases, hardened in their sin, seeking to excuse rather than rectify their offences against God.

    In fine, none of us is without sympathy for the situations others get themselves into, often through weakness and/or emotional instability. Nevertheless, Our human sympathy must never be permitted to obscure, much less trump, the divine law of God. I think we would unanimously accept that we are not more charitable than God, nor more merciful, nor more understanding and sympathetic to human miseries. But is it the case today that some within the Church, who seek to play down the ugliness of mortal sin and the offence it represents before the divine majesty, think themselves more just than God? It seems from recent noises emanating from Rome and elsewhere that there is a definite tendency in this direction. The Church has not been wrong all these past centuries when insisting upon the divine law, despite what some today insinuate. A doctrine of mercy without justice is simply an invitation to licensciousness. Martin Luther was the first to preach it.

    April 26, 2016 at 9:30 pm
    • editor

      Athanasius,

      Well said.

      And here’s some very encouraging news for us here Glaswegians. Father Mark Morris of the Immaculate Heart of Mary parish, spoke out clearly, in his homily, to correct the errors in AL on the Sunday following the release of the document on Friday 8th April. Then, wait for this, instead of thanking God for sending them a faithful priest, around half a dozen parishioners walked out. When he gave the same homily in the Sacred Heart parish in Bridgeton, one person walked out at the end. Pseudo-Catholics, Catholics in name only.

      I’m told that Father wrote about this on Twitter, so it’s out there in the public domain, but I’m not on Twitter and can’t find it when I Google,so If anyone else is a Twitterati, please post a link so we can at least read the posts even if those of us, like moi, who refuse to become Twits, can’t comment!

      I think it’s very good news, though, and hope that other priests follow his courageous example. It really shouldn’t take courage to defend the Faith but it does for priests who risk being labelled “difficult” when the Catholics in name only start lodging complaints about them.

      That’s why we need more and more priests to follow Father Morris’s example – there’s safety in numbers – and we need the bishops to speak out clearly on this. Who remembers the mystery blogger who came on here to tell us that Archbishop Tartaglia had told a meeting of priests that if the synod continued in the same vein that it has begun, he “may not be archbishop any more”? Well, the prelates who have already spoken out are saying that AL is even worse than the original submissions, so let Archbishop Tartaglia speak out now, without apology.

      Bishop Robson’s tweets, if you recall, contained links to critical analyses of AL, but while that serves a purpose, it is not enough. He needs to say that he AGREES with those analyses and he needs to speak out clearly, to prevent the further growth in numbers of Catholics in name only in his diocese.

      We need the bishops to speak out. We need the priests to speak out. NOW!

      Father Morris has our support and admiration 500%. I’m sure I can speak for all of us here, when I say that. A minority of his parishioners don’t appreciate his words, his fidelity to the Faith. That’s because they’re not really Catholics at all. They are, how can I put it… oh yes… Catholics in name only.

      April 28, 2016 at 8:45 pm
      • Michaela

        Editor,

        That’s fantastic news about Father Morris. What a great priest. I do hope others follow his example but I won’t be holding my breath. There’s not a lot of evidence of heroism in the clergy these days, most seem to be laying low about AL, which is all the more reason to be thanking God for Father Morris. Count me in on that 500% support and admiration, definitely!

        April 28, 2016 at 9:18 pm
      • editor

        Thank you for that, Michaela – I hope and pray that other priests/bishops DO follow Fr Morris’s example, and that they do so without delay. One lives and one hopes, as one lives and one breathes.. Doesn’t one? 😀

        April 28, 2016 at 9:39 pm
      • Christina

        One does indeed. I’ve been wonderiñg if anything was said in the ‘new’ ICKSP and FSSP parishes in Shrewsbury and Lancaster, or by some of the ‘traditionalist’ priests in England (e.g. the Oratorians) that come up for praise from time to time on this blog.

        April 28, 2016 at 10:23 pm
      • Margaret Mary

        Bravo Father Morris! If only there were more priests with his faith and courage. Too many are going along with this pope and will do until the bishops speak out. They are career priests so will always follow the line of their bishop, IMHO.

        April 29, 2016 at 10:19 am
  • Helen

    Well I think Fr. Morris is a hero. It is so difficult to find a way through this awful modernist maze, and, to hear a faithful priest like Fr. Morris speak out, is sooo heartening. Thank you Father and God bless you.

    April 28, 2016 at 10:41 pm
    • editor

      Christina,

      It will, indeed, be interesting to learn what the ICKSP and FSSP parish priests say about AL – it would be hugely disappointing if they remain silent. The time has come for the clergy to stand up and speak out. If they don’t, it will be a scandal.

      Helen,

      The news of Fr Morris’s homilies on the subject of AL is, indeed, heartening. I’ve not been able to trace the Twitter feed in which he is apparently taken to task by critics, so if anyone can post a link to it, that would be of interest.

      April 29, 2016 at 12:36 am
      • Gerontius

        Editor,
        I wonder if Fr.Morris has/would consider contributing here. HE doesn’t keep silent.

        Come to think of it, the words “One of the ways of participating in another’s sin is BY SILENCE” come to mind.

        April 29, 2016 at 9:51 am
      • editor

        Gerontius,

        Father Morris has NOT kept silent. That’s the point. It would be great if he contributed here, but the fact that he speaks out in his own parish is not to be under-estimated. Very few do and so the laity is left thinking there is nothing wrong, and that folks like us are agin the pope for the sake of it.

        there’s a very interesting article this morning on the blog, One Peter Five – it concludes with this exhortation:

        “Each individual cardinal, as well as each bishop and each priest is now called to preserve in his field of authority the Catholic Sacramental Order and to confess it publicly. If the pope is not willing to make a correction, it is up to another pontificate to officially put things back into order.” Read source – AL will split the Church

        April 29, 2016 at 10:04 am
      • Gerontius

        Editor,

        Yes a very interesting article indeed and gratifying to know that the 1P5 article was written by a German lady, Frau Maike Hickson.

        “Each individual cardinal, as well as each bishop and each priest is now called to preserve in his field of authority the Catholic Sacramental Order and to confess it publicly. If the pope is not willing to make a correction, it is up to another pontificate to officially put things back into order.

        By the way, some the comments agreeing with her are ferocious!

        These lyrics from the Simon & Garfunkel hit song “The Sound Of Silence”
        (Released: 1964) seem somewhat appropriate.

        People hearing without listening, People writing songs that voices never share. And no one dare. Disturb the sound of silence.

        Again – The words, “One of the ways of participating in another’s sin is BY SILENCE” come to mind.

        April 29, 2016 at 12:46 pm
      • Petrus

        Editor,

        I agree. It would be great if he contributed to the blog but it shows more courage to speak out in a parish where you cannot hide behind a username. God bless him!

        April 30, 2016 at 9:16 am
      • editor

        Petrus,

        Well said. Father Morris has been subject to lots of criticism in his parish – I know that from lay people who are involved in his parish; yet he won’t back down. He still preaches the Faith, whole and entire. He’s such a gentle person, but clearly a very strong character with very strong faith. If only we had more like him in Glasgow. If only.

        April 30, 2016 at 1:55 pm
      • Vianney

        Editor, the problem is that some of Fathers critics might try to cause trouble for him. I remember a few years ago there was a Jesuit PP in Lerwick who gave a sermon explaining why women could never become priests (and before anyone asks, no he didn’t use our dear Editor as an example.) This angered some of his parishioners who complained to the Bishop of Aberdeen, who went by the name of Conti, and the priest was removed from the parish and ended up going to stay at the Jesuit House in Edinburgh.

        May 10, 2016 at 9:57 pm
  • Athanasius

    Editor

    I agree that Fr. Morris is one of those oasis in the desert kinds of priest. He is faithful to Our Lord and the Church, and he defends the truth no matter what. When you spoke of those who left the church following Father’s criticism of AL, I was reminded of the Gospel account of those who abandoned Our Lord when He spoke of the necessity of eating His body and drinking His blood for salvation. Fr. Morris is in very good company, God bless him.

    April 29, 2016 at 10:15 pm
    • editor

      Athanasius,

      Here is a discussion on Twitter – see how Fr M holds his own brilliantly against the sedevacantis novusordowatch bunch (of loonies!)

      https://twitter.com/ihomglasgow/status/722158946295881728

      I’m puzzled at the above link – it’s not the way it opened for me when I received it by email. Not sure what is going on but there is an excellent exchange between Fr M and the NOW bunch and he wins, hands down. It must be in there somewhere…

      April 30, 2016 at 1:49 pm
      • Athanasius

        Editor

        Twitter frustrates me because I don’t like it or use it as a medium for communication or exchange. I do wish people would stop using it.

        You’re right, though, Fr. Morris silences his critics with just a few short but pointed remarks. Well done Fr. Morris.

        April 30, 2016 at 1:56 pm
  • RCA Victor

    Editor,

    We need the bishops to speak out. We need the priests to speak out. NOW!

    In fact, those who don’t speak out will inevitably find themselves caught between a rock (Francis – pun intended) and a hard place, i.e. the laity who will surely start demanding the sort of “mercy” called for by their “extenuating sexual circumstances,” and who, if they fail to receive said “mercy,” will certainly go caterwauling as far up the hierarchy as they can go.

    So one way or another, the clerical silence will be rewarded! And with an entirely different sort of “mercy.”

    April 30, 2016 at 12:22 am
  • editor

    I think I posted the statements from the SSPX above (not sure – I read them on the SSPX site when published) but here they are on One Peter Five.

    April 30, 2016 at 8:55 am
  • Gerontius

    Sorry Ed, I meant to post this on General Discussion (11)

    April 30, 2016 at 4:33 pm
    • editor

      I took a few minutes to post a comment on 1P5 here this morning.
      Seems people are still agonising over how to keep the Faith in the face of AL, so I mentioned (yet again) abandoning the novus ordo Mass for the traditional Mass, preferably in SSPX chapels…

      It’s an interesting article because the person quoted “John” is frustrated at all the talk of “hardline” preaching about marriage, his rationale being that it’s too late now. I paraphrase of course, but worth a read.

      May 4, 2016 at 9:18 am
  • editor

    I took a few minutes to post a comment on 1P5 here this morning.

    Seems people are still agonising over how to keep the Faith in the face of AL, so I mentioned (yet again) abandoning the novus ordo Mass for the traditional Mass, preferably in SSPX chapels…

    It’s an interesting article because the blogger quoted in the article (“John”) is frustrated at all the talk of “hardline” preaching about marriage, his rationale being that it’s too late now. I paraphrase of course, but worth a read.

    May 4, 2016 at 9:23 am
  • Pat McKay

    Please see ‘message of thanks’ from Bishop Peter Doyle…..

    http://us6.campaign-archive1.com/?u=8bfb372c271fbad8a971552fb&id=2f30287c92&e=682d982476

    May 4, 2016 at 8:51 pm
    • editor

      Pat,

      Bishop Doyle’s delight is a little premature. Read this

      May 6, 2016 at 9:25 am
  • Gerontius

    Where have all our “Big Guns” gone? Check this out:

    https://akacatholic.com/we-are-become-orphans-without-a-father/

    It’s enough to tempt anyone to discouragement! But then again, “The only way is UP”

    May 6, 2016 at 4:25 pm
  • jimislander

    Quito ” And those who should speak out will remain silent” Thats where we are now,and Akita to follow

    May 7, 2016 at 12:56 am
  • gabriel syme

    Archbishop Forte has in fact revealed a “behind the scenes” [moment] from the Synod: “If we speak explicitly about communion for the divorced and remarried,” said Archbishop Forte, reporting a joke of Pope Francis, “you do not know what a terrible mess we will make. So we won’t speak plainly, do it in a way that the premises are there, then I will draw out the conclusions.

    http://www.onepeterfive.com/pope-speaking-plainly-communion-divorced-messy/

    May 9, 2016 at 11:21 pm
    • editor

      Gabriel Syme,

      Thank you for that link to the OnePeterFive (IP5) blog item on Archbishop Forte, which I read yesterday, without raising an eyebrow, I have to say. We know that the entire Synod process was shrouded in deceit and double-dealing, so no big surprise there, really – although shocking.

      And now, at last, we have the neo-Catholics wakening up, laughably to the point where they, like people who have just realised it’s time for breakfast, announce, with due solemnity, that “it’s time for a Catholic resistance movement.”

      Breaking News, Mr Smeaton & Company – we’ve had a Catholic resistance movement since the dawn of Vatican II, made up of those Catholics, ordained (think SSPX) and lay (think The Remnant, Catholic Family News and other traditional groups, ourselves, the smallest cog in the wheel, included, albeit a fair bit later in the day, since 1999 to be precise.)

      Still, it’s never TOO late, as the saying goes, so welcome aboard to all those Catholics for whom Papa Francis is a step too far down the Modernist route trod by the post-Vatican II popes. Click here to reach the IP5 report

      May 10, 2016 at 9:30 am
  • editor

    Here’s something just arrived in my inbox – to be honest, I’ve not had time to read it myself, but looks very interesting given that the headline is Cardinal Burke on Martyrdom for the Faith in our times. I’m guessing (hoping!) that he means the kind of martyrdom that doesn’t involve blood-shedding. I never like it when people describe me as a devout Catholic but I do own up to being a VERY devout coward…

    This thread is now too lengthy, so we continue to discuss AL
    here

    May 13, 2016 at 10:19 pm

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: