Pope: Take Risks With Your Salvation?

Pope: Take Risks With Your Salvation?

In his homily at Casa Santa Marta, Pope Francis explained what paralyzes Christians with a very graphic example.
“‘Not taking risks, please, no… prudence…’ ‘Obeying all the commandments, all of them…’ Yes, it’s true, but this paralyzes you too, it makes you forget so many graces received, it takes away memory, it takes away hope, because it doesn’t allow you to go forward. And the present of a Christian, of such a Christian, is like when one goes along the street and an unexpected rain comes, and the garment is not so good and the fabric shrinks… Confined souls… This is cowardliness: this is the sin against memory, courage, patience, and hope.”
He also added that pusillanimity and fear of everything are two sins contrary to giving up one’s life in service to others, as Christ asks.
(Source: Vatican Radio)
“‘Brothers, call to mind those first days’: the days of enthusiasm, of going forward in the faith, when you began to live the faith, the anguished trials… You don’t understand the Christian life, even the spiritual life of each day, without memory. Not only do you not understand: You can’t live in a Christian way without memory. The memory of the salvation of God in my life, the memory of my troubles in my life; but how has the Lord saved me from these troubles? Memory is a grace: a grace to ask for. ‘Lord, may I not forget your step in my life, may I not forget the good moments, also the ugly; the joys and the crosses.’ The Christian is a man of memory.”
“Hope: Looking to the future. Just as one cannot live a Christian life without memory of the steps taken, one cannot live a Christian life without looking to the future with hope… of the encounter with the Lord. And he uses a beautiful phrase: ‘just a brief moment…’ Eh, life is a breath, eh? It passes. When one is young, he thinks he has so much time before him, but then life teaches us that those words that we all say: ‘But how time passes! I knew this person as a child, now they’re getting married! How time passes!’ It comes soon. But the hope of encountering it is a life in tension, between memory and hope, the past and the future.”
“‘Not taking risks, please, no… prudence…’ All the commandments, all of them… Yes, it’s true, but this paralyzes you too, it makes you forget so many graces received, it takes away memory, it takes away hope, because it doesn’t allow you to go forward. And the present of a Christian, of such a Christian, is how when one goes along the street and an unexpected rain comes, and the garment is not so good and the fabric shrinks… Confined souls… This is faintheartedness: this is the sin against memory, courage, patience, and hope. May the Lord make us grow in memory, make us grow in hope, give us courage and patience each and free us from that which is faintheartedness, being afraid of everything…  Confined souls in order to save ourselves. And Jesus says: ‘He who wills to save his life will lose it.’”   Source
Am I misunderstanding what the Pope is saying here?  IS he belittling the danger of breaking the Commandments? There is, believe it or not, a “Theology of Risk” (Google if you don’t believe me) but surely this is not what Pope Francis is advocating? You tell me…

Comments (71)

  • Benedict Carter

    Who in Heaven or on earth knows what the man is wittering about? Perhaps he had in mind some half-remembered verbiage from one of the last books he read (in around 1972), probably by soem way-out Jesuit positing approaching Christ via LSD, the music of Emerson, Lake and Palmer and bell-bottoms. “Hey man, bad acid dude”.

    I know this blog tries to stay on the Catholic side of open mockery of this awful man, but how can one properly describe the vacuity of his inanities without using the many words of derision offered by the English language?

    February 5, 2017 at 3:00 pm
    • Elizabeth

      Well I have read it twice and can make no sense of it. To be charitable, maybe it is a poor translation? Otherwise one does worry about what clarity of mind and thought this Pope has. If any.

      February 5, 2017 at 4:01 pm
      • Benedict Carter

        Forget the poor translation bit. That excuse has been trotted out so often, it would seem that Italian to English is of the same difficulty as translating the clicking language of the Kalahari Bushmen into Papua New Guinean.

        The man is utterly incoherent, his mind is a complete mess; and he’s a tyrant with it.

        February 5, 2017 at 4:10 pm
      • Laura

        Benedict Carter,

        Nobody has any bother understanding him when he said he didn’t need to give a reason for sacking a priest, he was pope so that’s that, was the gist of what he said. He is a tyrant all right.

        February 5, 2017 at 4:34 pm
      • Nicky


        I did wonder about the translation myself. If he wasn’t forever saying shocking things, that’s what most of us would probably say but he’s so notorious now, that it’s impossible to know.

        February 5, 2017 at 4:19 pm
      • Benedict Carter

        On the contrary Nicky, it is entirely possible to know. Trust the translations! What he wibbles, he really does wibble. The translators don;t make it up.

        February 5, 2017 at 11:28 pm
    • St Miguel

      Agree BC and further what I do not get is why he gets away with it. Fat chance he will ever answer the Dubia either. We got Benedict to thank for all of this. Dereliction of Duty! Deserted the vineyard.

      February 5, 2017 at 6:10 pm
      • Benedict Carter

        I am sorry to say that I agree as far as Ratzinger is concerned. A disgraceful act of cowardice.

        February 5, 2017 at 9:34 pm
  • Lily

    I agree. How can anyone sin against memory? What a load of hogwash.

    February 5, 2017 at 3:52 pm
    • Nicky


      “sinning” against memory, I’d say is impossible. If so, most of us are real sinners, as my memory is worse than it’s ever been, LOL! I can’t remember the most obvious stuff, like where I put my specs when I’m holding them! That can’t be a sin.

      February 5, 2017 at 4:21 pm
  • Laura

    “‘Not taking risks, please, no… prudence…’ ‘Obeying all the commandments, all of them…’ Yes, it’s true, but this paralyzes you too,”

    I’m afraid I think he’s being clear enough. He’s saying that yes, obey the commandments but it can “paralyse” us to do that, in other words, we need to be not afraid to disobey, then we can practise hope etc.

    That’s how I read it anyway. Whatever, he’s a really poor communicator.

    February 5, 2017 at 4:32 pm
  • editor

    Please sign Open Letter to the Bishops of Malta, led by the faithful in Malta to defend marriage (against AL)

    February 5, 2017 at 4:40 pm
    • Therese

      Already signed.

      As to the pope’s incoherent train of thought. There is no charitable way I can comment, unless he’s lost his mind.

      February 5, 2017 at 5:02 pm
    • St Miguel


      February 5, 2017 at 5:31 pm
    • Elizabeth


      February 5, 2017 at 5:54 pm
  • crofterlady

    Yes, it’s clear in an abstract sort of mumbo jumbo way but he is saying that it’s ok to sin. Maybe he’s referring to “Oh happy sin that merited us such a Saviour” or some such thing but it sure smacks of belittling the Sacraments to me.

    February 5, 2017 at 5:02 pm
  • St Miguel

    Sick and tired of the drivel that is coming out of this Pontificate. Oxymorons and absurdity in speech is de riguer these days.

    February 5, 2017 at 5:33 pm
  • Bernadette Milliken

    The apostosy is coming from the top as out Lady of Fatima said

    Sent from my iPad


    February 5, 2017 at 5:46 pm
  • RCA Victor

    Careful now, Pope Francis: you’ve been bombarding faithful Catholics with insults ever since you were elected, but now you’re calling memory a grace? You mean the memory by which Tradition is preserved? Oops!!

    That said, I come away with two other things from this pile of reeking roundabout rubbish: one, this is an indirect way of endorsing Luther’s infamous “sin boldly” dictum (part of the Luther Rehabilitation Project, dontcha know, and one of the goals of ecumenism). Two, it is a less indirect way of continuing his condemnation of faithful Catholics – those who obey the Commandments, Church doctrine, Church precepts, Church discipline….now this fidelity is described as “paralyzing.” And obedience is now associated with fear of taking risks…perhaps that might even be a small improvement over obedience characterized as a mental illness?

    This man is a dangerous lunatic, and those who arranged his election have gravely miscalculated, if by their choice they were trying to further the Vatican II objective of “collegiality” as a decentralization of papal power. Francis has done precisely the opposite of decentralization: he has not only gathered unheard of power to himself, he is also continuously abusing it and fomenting an environment of complete lawlessness and fear within the Church. And as a further sign of his hypocrisy, he cultivates the fear of disobeying him, even as he harangues about a manufactured fear of taking risks.

    (I notice a new post on Rorate Caeli, pointing out that anti-Francis posters have now suddenly appeared all over Rome…)

    February 5, 2017 at 6:25 pm
    • St Miguel

      At the risk of being accused of banging on about this subject, but I cannot get my head around to the idea that this character wants ANYTHING to do with the SSPX.
      Given all the stuff about rigidity and giving people stones instead of bread. The Knights of Malta caper, trivialising abortion, who am I to judge baloney,calling traditionists Fundamentalists and MENTALLY ILL and such like, makes me think that he only wishes to harm the SSPX.

      February 5, 2017 at 7:54 pm
      • editor

        St Miguel,

        The answer, perhaps, lies in the words of Joseph to his [jealous] brothers who had mistreated him, sold him into slavery, and were later stunned to find that he had risen to great heights in the government of Egypt, second in importance only to the Pharaoh himself; when they were eventually re-united, Joseph gave the answer to the question you raise about how it could possibly be that such a bad pope, with very possibly bad motives against the Society, would be the instrument for regularising the SSPX: “You thought to do evil against me, but God turned it into good that he might exalt me, as at present you see, and might save many people.” (end of Book of Genesis).

        In other words, I believe that looking for natural or purely humanly rational answers is a fundamental mistake in this matter. Things are so bad now, that we can only look to the supernatural for an end to this mess or any part of it.

        Not sure if this all makes sense but if not, don’t blame me. My Guardian Angel tends to get carried away, from time to time 😀

        February 5, 2017 at 8:42 pm
      • St Miguel

        OK Madame Editor I will accept that only a supernatural intervention can sort this mess out now and trust in Divine Providence that a solution will be found even though it may be beyond our understanding.Thank You.

        February 5, 2017 at 9:31 pm
  • Theresa Rose

    Have signed the open letter too.

    RCA Victor, your are saying what I have been thinking.

    Pope Francis is continuing with the ambiguities begun in Vatican II. I have no wish of playing follow my leader along a slippery road that may well lead to hell. This kind of risk is not worth anyone’s salvation. There is little if any mention of the four last things – Death, judgement, Heaven, Hell.

    February 5, 2017 at 7:37 pm
  • Athanasius

    Have signed the petition to the Bishops of Malta.

    February 5, 2017 at 8:08 pm
  • Athanasius

    I have read Pope Francis’ words twice and unless there is a translation error I cannot read anything other than that the Pope is making light of mortal sin.

    He seems to be saying that not falling into mortal sin is to deprive God of the pleasure of forgiving us and bestowing His graces upon us. At the very least Pope Francis is not declaring the utter horror of mortal sin before the face of God. It seems he has forgotten that one mortal sin was sufficient to cause the Son of God to have to become incarnate and die a terrible death on the Cross to Redeem mankind.

    I don’t want to misinterpret what the Pope actually meant by these obscure words but it really did sound a little like “let us do evil that good may come of it”. If that is indeed what he meant to say then he is not only in danger of Hell himself but is placing a good many other souls in danger by encouraging them to presume upon the mercy of God.

    Our Lord is merciful to poor sinners who fall into mortal sin through human weakness but then genuinely repent of it. He is not merciful, however, to those who think that frequent mortal sin is the way to sanctity.

    I have never known a Pope to speak in riddles like this Pope, he is so unlike Our Lord who spoke plainly and clearly so that all could understand Him. We Catholics are so accustomed to the Roman Pontiffs speaking transparently to us, like the Good Shepherd, that’s it’s difficult to come to terms with a man like Francis. He puts me very much in mind of Pilate, the cowardly Procurator who tried to play the diplomatic game when Our Lord was accused before Him.

    When Our Saviour said to Him “I have come to bear witness to the truth”, Pilate asked “and what is truth?” Pope Francis seems to be asking the same question today on behalf of this liberal age, afraid to declare in favour of Our Lord for fear of the consternation of a relativist world that is intent on crucifying Him. At the same time he wants to try to impress on himself and the rest of us that he really does think Our Lord innocent. So perhaps a little scourging will calm the mob? He’ll surely end up consenting to the crucifixion if he doesn’t alter that dangerous position. Perhaps he already has by his encouragment of the bishops to admit those in objective mortal sin to Holy Communion.

    The memory Pope Francis should keep in clear view is that of Pilate washing his hands while declaring that he is innocent of the blood of the Son of God.

    Today is the Feast of St. Agatha, a 3rd century virgin martyr. She suffered horrendous tortures rather than give place to a single mortal sin (in her case impurity). Yet, here is Pope Francis apparently saying that mortal sin is really no big deal. He’s beginning to sound more and more like a man of lost faith, sad to say.

    February 5, 2017 at 8:46 pm
    • Josephine

      I have had to read the Pope’s words more than once, as well and I can’t make much of any of it, but I do get the drift, that he is not taking mortal sin seriously at all. Shame on him.

      February 6, 2017 at 4:45 pm
  • JohnR

    I too am of the mind that the Pope is making light of mortal sin. I too have signed the letter to the bishops of Malta and I have contributed to Veri Catholici to help them post the same script in Italian in Italy. It is one way that we may get through the head of Papa Bergoglio that there are people out there who do not accept his favourite line of “mercy” when it comes to the clear teaching of the Church and the acceptance of mortal sin.

    February 6, 2017 at 4:40 am
  • St Miguel

    The upshot of this nonsense is that in the future, a gay couple will be married by a female priest in a Catholic Church and EVERYONE in the audience (catholic or otherwise) will go to communion as this is what an all merciful “accompanying” God would want and anyway the Blessed Sacrament is only symbolic,ergo NO sacrelege and this is a “Community Meal”.There is Now NO SENSE OF SIN…..even Abortion is trivialised by Rome.This has now reached horrific proportions which has been deliberately manufactured by a cabal of so called Prelates.

    February 6, 2017 at 8:17 am
  • JohnR

    I do not agree with you St. Miguel. You are forgetting the promise of Jesus that he will be with his Church until the end of time. There will never be a female priest in a Catholic Church and if such a parody ever came about then the “audience” would not all go to Holy Communion since the female “priest” would not be a priest and hence there would not be any Holy Communion for the audience to go to because the fake priest would not have the power to bring about the transubstantiation of the bread and the wine into the true body and blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ. A woman can indeed go through the trappings of ordination….indeed some actually claim to have undertaken this charade… but that charade cannot bring about a true Ordination of a woman.

    February 6, 2017 at 12:18 pm
    • St Miguel

      John R..the problem is that an ever increasing majority of modern priests (and some older ones) do NOT believe in Transubstantiation….if they DID, there would be NO Eucharistic Ministers as anyone other than a priest could not handle the Blessed Sacrament as I was taught 60+ years ago.Add Ecumania, Luther baloney and we have a perfect storm of cafeteria catholicism…I have watched for years and the very word, deeds and omissions of NO PRIESTS these days tell me that they do not believe. If they did believe they could NOT allow the Blessed Sacrament to languish in some so called Eucharistic Minister’s hand bag while she was out shopping or at the Bingo !

      February 6, 2017 at 3:54 pm
    • St Miguel

      And another point, at Benediction and Exposition, where we kneel adoring on BOTH knees (which is too much for the current Pontiff and so many priests these days) it is the VERY SAME Blessed Sacrament that is so casually treated by Communion in the hand and residing in Mrs Mc Glumphers handbag that she may even have forgotten about….I was TOLD as a CHILD to salute a priest in the street as he may be carrying the Blessed Sacrament on his person as he was liable to to be on his way to a sick or dying person. We also got taught to make the sign of the cross on our foreheads as we passed a Catholic Church, for there resided the Blessed Sacrament and of course a Sanctuary Lamp was never allowed to go out. We made the sign of the cross when a hearse passed by.So what happened…..Vat 2 that’s what happened.

      February 6, 2017 at 4:28 pm
  • Steve Finnell


    God predestined that the church of Christ would received salvation. God did not preselect every individual that was to be saved.
    If God selected each individual for salvation, then that would mean He selected every other person to be lost.

    Ephesians 1:4-13 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to to the kind intention of His will, ……..13 In Him you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were seal in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise.

    Who was predestined? Those who believed were predestined. God’s will was that all who believed would be saved.


    John 3:16 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

    God loves the whole world, not just a preselected few.

    1 Timothy 2:5-6 …that man Jesus Christ, 6 who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony given at the proper time.

    Jesus paid the ransom for all men, not just for a preselected few.

    1 Timothy 2:3-4 ….God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

    God wants all men to be saved, not just those who believe they have been preselected for salvation.

    2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

    The Lord does not wish for any to perish. God does not preselect men to spend eternity in hell. Men go there by choice. If God preselected who was going to be the saved and lost, then He would not have to be patient.

    Matthew 10:32-33 “Therefore everyone who confesses Me before men, I will also confess him before My Father who is in heaven. 33 But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father in heaven.

    Everyone who confesses Jesus will be saved. Everyone who denies Jesus will be lost. Salvation is a choice, it is not a mandate. God does not preselect men to confess Jesus nor to deny Him.

    Hebrew 2:9….Jesus…so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone.

    Jesus died for everyone, not just for those who embrace the doctrines of John Calvin.

    Romans 10:13 for “Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

    The apostle Paul did not say whoever has been preselected for salvation and calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.

    Acts 17:30-31 Therefore having overlooked times of ignorance,God is now declaring to men that people everywhere should repent….

    Why would God tell men who had been preselected to be lost, to repent? Why? Because there is no preselection. Why? Because the gospel is available to all men, not just a preselected few.

    Titus 2:11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men,

    God grace is available to all men who hear the gospel and obey God’s terms for pardon. THERE IS NO PRESELECTION OF INDIVIDUALS FOR SALVATION!

    February 6, 2017 at 2:16 pm
    • editor


      Since I don’t have time to study your comment right now, but don’t want you leave you languishing in moderation, and suspecting that you are not a Catholic, I am popping in just to post this link to Catholic teaching on predestination – hope it helps to clarify what the Church teaches on the subject.

      God bless

      February 6, 2017 at 2:45 pm
  • Pastoor Geudens February 6, 2017 at 6:56 pm
    • editor

      Thank you, Pastoor Geudens.

      February 6, 2017 at 9:02 pm
  • John Kearney

    I note your caution Editor, but when the Popoe backs this up by telling journalists that the Commandments are not Divine then he is saying that Jesus Christ Himself is not divine. He is in fact guilty of heresy. the Gospel on Sunday is from the Sermon on the Mount Matthew 5 where Jesus speaks on sin. I wonder if the Pope will appreciate just how Rigid Jesus is in this Gospel. A man so rigid and judgmental would be turned away from many Catholic Churches. How many priests will not this Gospela and preach on it? I guess very few for they have a false Christ in the Church, one who is gentle and kind and does not give a damn how people live their lives. The Jesus of Scripture has been replaced.

    February 10, 2017 at 12:34 pm
    • St Miguel

      Praying for this Pope is flogging a dead horse.Too far gone now.

      February 11, 2017 at 2:34 pm
      • Athanasius

        St. Miguel

        Judas himself could have been saved had he not thought within himself that his sin was too great to be forgiven. Your failure to grasp the power of prayer for the conversion of souls is worrying for a Catholic. Just as well St. Mary Magdalene wasn’t dependent upon your prayers for her conversion.

        February 11, 2017 at 3:40 pm
  • St Miguel

    Finally, would this man really want or appreciate so called rigid rad-trads, pelagianists , SSPX ,Rosary Counters,givers of stone instead of bread and defined as mentally ill, saying prayers for him.

    February 11, 2017 at 2:40 pm
    • Athanasius

      St. Miguel

      It makes little odds what the Pope wants as regards the prayers of others. We pray for him out of Catholic charity, as well as duty before God. It was the prayers of the faithful, says Sacred Scripture, that secured the miraculous deliverance of St. Peter from Herod’s prison. This present Pope is every bit as bound as Peter was, except it is by the chains of Modernism. Don’t you want to pray for him that he may be released from his chains?

      February 11, 2017 at 3:46 pm
      • St Miguel

        Released from his chains of Modernism? He is a Modernist and loving every minute of it ! Gerragrip !

        February 11, 2017 at 5:47 pm
      • Athanasius

        St. Miguel

        Don’t worry about it, our prayers can alter the Pope’s likes and dislikes very profoundly. ‘Tis a great game changer, divine grace!

        February 11, 2017 at 7:03 pm
      • editor

        ““The Most Holy Virgin in these last times in which we live has given a new efficacy to the recitation of the Rosary to such an extent that there is no problem, no matter how difficult it is, whether temporal or above all, spiritual, in the personal life of each one of us, of our families, of the families of the world, or of the religious communities, or even of the life of peoples and nations, that cannot be solved by the Rosary. There is no problem I tell you, no matter how difficult it is, that we cannot resolve by the prayer of the Holy Rosary.” Source

        St Miguel,

        There you have it – Our Lady’s own assurance of the power of prayer. Do not underestimate the power of prayer – it is so basic, so central to the spiritual life, that Our Lord Himself taught us the importance of prayer, even to giving us the precise words with which to address God; Our Father, Who art in Heaven…

        If you really believe that prayer cannot change even the greatest sinner, even bad popes, then you need to tell us precisely how hardened sinners and modernists can be converted – or are you saying that they cannot be changed, that is to say, there is no use imploring God in prayer, because HE has no power to change anything? Is that, incredibly, what you are saying?

        February 11, 2017 at 9:52 pm
  • St Miguel

    OK folks, read this and digest and take in to consideration that Paul Ehrlich is a guest speaker at the Vatican.http://www.onepeterfive.com/the-pontifical-academy-for-life-currently-has-no-members/

    February 12, 2017 at 10:08 pm
  • St Miguel

    My point is given that what is coming out of Rome in the past few days in particular, does anyone really believe that post Personal Prelature the SSPX will get a fair crack of the whip? It will have to be Divine Intervention at that point.

    February 12, 2017 at 10:11 pm
  • editor

    Here’s more unbelievable stuff from Papa Francis…


    “Yes, Pope Francis actually sent a personal video message to the Super Bowl. What does the Super Bowl have to do with the august office of the Vicar of Christ, divinely appointed helmsman of the sole ark of salvation, charged with the task of teaching, governing and sanctifying a billion souls for their eternal welfare? Don’t ask.

    Yet Francis tried to make something spiritual out of the event, which included a massive, over-the-top, neo-pagan halftime spectacle verging on the crowd’s worship of “Lady Gaga” (née Stefani Joanne Angelina Germanotta) as if she were a kind of semi-divinity, a status the foremost American celebrities are generally accorded.

    “Great sporting events like today’s Super Bowl,” said Francis in all seriousness, “are highly symbolic, showing that it is possible to build a culture of encounter and a world of peace. By participating in sport we are able to go beyond our own self interest and in a healthy way, we learn to sacrifice, to grow in fidelity and respect the rules.

    Respect the rules! That phrase has explosive implications for the Bergoglian pontificate, which thus far has been all about disparaging “respect for the rules” the Church has laid down in obedience to the instructions of Our Lord.” Click here to read the entire article by Christopher Ferrara

    February 13, 2017 at 7:45 pm
    • St Miguel

      I would not trust this character to walk my dog. He is a capricious narcissist who once said “being Pope is fun”.

      February 13, 2017 at 8:22 pm
    • Athanasius


      To make matters worse, the Super Bowl was used to screen huge advertisements hostile to the Trump administration. Maybe that was the message the Pope was really sending out, a message of support to the liberal destroyers of America.

      February 13, 2017 at 9:31 pm
      • St Miguel

        One of Lady Gaga’s gimmicks is to wear INVERTED crosses and swallowing Rosary Beads……all totally harmless of course…nothing to see here folks, move on….It is SATANIC.

        February 17, 2017 at 10:53 pm
  • St Miguel

    And as regards the Dubia…we have this http://www.onepeterfive.com/vatican-mounts-unofficial-official-response-to-dubia/

    and now we have THIS http://voxcantor.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/bergoglios-puppy-coco-cant-even-show-up.html

    I should CoCo…..pathetic shower.

    February 14, 2017 at 11:28 am
    • Lily

      St Miguel,

      I always think you are a “glass half empty” person when I read your posts, LOL!

      February 14, 2017 at 12:07 pm
      • St Miguel

        Just a total Realist Lily.

        February 14, 2017 at 12:20 pm
      • Athanasius

        St. Miguel

        And yet you appear not to accept the reality of the power of prayer for the conversion of sinners and that Our Lord is still in charge of His Church despite appearances. Or am I misjudging your disposition?

        February 14, 2017 at 1:26 pm
      • St Miguel

        Prayer is one thing Athanasius, but invincible naivety is another.This so called Regularisation is akin to Neville Chamberlain with his piece of paper signed by Herr Hitler saying “Peace in our Time”. Judge my disposition all you want. The evidence is coming in fast and furious now that Bergoglio will hammer the SSPX in to the ground.

        February 16, 2017 at 11:52 am
  • Therese February 15, 2017 at 10:24 pm
    • St Miguel

      Therese, I totally agree with Michael Matt, especially from from point 21.27 onwards. Bergoglio totally despises the likes of us….it is absolutely unworkable.

      February 16, 2017 at 11:48 am
    • editor


      Haven’t time to watch videos today but the heading puts me off – I detest this stuff about “rad trads” etc. Bad enough that we have to use the term “traditionalist” to identify that we are not one of the “new Catholics” , but to take that a step further with “rad trad” – not for me. I’m not one of them. I hope!

      February 16, 2017 at 6:04 pm
      • Therese


        Ignore the heading – Michael Matt agrees with your statement 100%; it’s just what the meeja are calling Catholics.

        February 16, 2017 at 6:36 pm
      • editor


        Great. I’m pleased about that.

        Signed NON-Rad-Trad… 😀

        February 16, 2017 at 9:20 pm
  • Therese

    St Miguel

    Me too.

    February 16, 2017 at 5:41 pm
    • St Miguel

      The “RAD” part conveys the word “Radical”, which evokes the idea of a “Menace to Society” which translates from Fanatics/Fundamentalists and we all know where that leads….(ending up on a Watch List). Join the dots and Rad Trads are RADICALISED rigid fanatics and that is a not where the NewChurch want to be. Then ask the question again….Rome wants the SSPX under it’s umbrella?

      February 16, 2017 at 9:49 pm
      • Athanasius

        St. Miguel

        No, Rome does not want the SSPX under its umbrella. Pope Francis is personally driving the negotiations with Bishop Fellay without reference to the Roman authorities, much to their frustration. Bishop Fellay has had access directly to Pope Francis at Casa Santa Marta and the authorities have known nothing about it. That has never happened before.

        February 16, 2017 at 10:50 pm
      • editor

        St Miguel,

        Don’t be TOO surprised, but I did/do actually know that “RAD” is the short form for “radical”. Yip. They don’t call me clever clogs for nothing.

        I’d be very happy if “fanatics” were on a watch list somewhere.

        Still, maybe you’re right after all. Much better for the SSPX to go on quietly about its business, and wait for the storm to pass.

        In fact, an SSPX priest once opined – in the pulpit and in private conversation(s) that I know about, personally – that it may well be that God will send another “lifeboat” to see us through this crisis; it may not BE the Society after all.

        We’ll see. Certainly, we do need someone/group within the Vatican walls, to fight for Christ. But maybe not the Society. I’m beginning to agree with that assessment, given that those who claim to be 100% ++ “RAD TRADS” don’t trust the Society to do the job. As I say… we’ll see.

        February 16, 2017 at 11:57 pm
      • WurdeSmythe

        > an SSPX priest once opined…that it may well be that God will send another “lifeboat” to see us through this crisis…

        Could be. The priority is honor God, save my soul, help the Church and my Catholic brethren. To lose my own soul in the process of ending the crisis would make the devil happy enough. Stay the course and don’t presume; test the spirits; adhere to what is good – that is how the crisis will be brought to a close.

        1 Corinthians 9:27: “I buffet my own body, and make it my slave; or I, who have preached to others, may myself be rejected as worthless.”

        February 17, 2017 at 1:32 am
  • WurdeSmythe

    > Am I misunderstanding what the Pope is saying here? IS he belittling the danger of breaking the Commandments?

    This sounds like more talk of the God of Surprises and being too rigid in one’s life. The theology of risk notion is a liberal protestant concoction. One’s obligation is to avoid unnecessary risks to one’s faith; otherwise one flirts with presumption, which is a sin against the Holy Ghost that will not be forgiven.

    Here’s an illustration: a man who professes he loves his wife while spending his evenings in houses of ill repute because he doesn’t want to be “rigid” in his adherence to his wedding vow and because he doesn’t want to be “paralyzed” by a risk-free marriage.

    Benedict Carter wrote “The man is utterly incoherent, his mind is a complete mess; and he’s a tyrant with it.”

    Spot on.

    February 17, 2017 at 1:26 am
    • St Miguel


      Interesting, as all the problems we tend to discuss on this blog stem from this Vat 2 organised shambles. And now and again we get a glimpse of the Periti with their masks ripped off. If I recall correctly, leading Periti included the then Fr. Joseph Ratzinger.

      Would you buy a second hand car from any of these gentlemen?

      I would rather go to Arfur Daley (my word is my bond).

      February 17, 2017 at 11:48 am
  • Athanasius

    St. Miguel

    You’re right, Fr. Joseph Ratzinger was one of the leading periti at Vatican II. He was in the forefront of the liberal revolution alongside his then-friend Fr. Hans Kung. The two of them attended Council sessions dressed in collar and tie. What some people don’t know is that Fr. Ratzinger was at that time on the Holy Office wach list of “those suspected of heresy”. I have no doubt Kung was on the same list by order of Pius XII. There were others also amongst the periti, most notably Henri de Lubac S.J. who pius XII suspended from writing or teaching. John XXIII, without seeking a retraction of de Lubac’s errors, very grave errors that Pius XII specifically wrote Humani Generis to combat, It is said that de lubac went on to substantially influence the construction of the two most controversial documents of Vatican II, Lumen Gentium and Gaudium et Spes.

    Dodgy car salesmen are veritable saints in comparison with liberal theologians, especially, sad to say, the Jesuit ones!

    February 17, 2017 at 10:14 pm
  • Athanasius

    I should have mentioned that it is against Church law for suspect theolgians to be permitted to participate in the formal proceedings of ecumenical Councils, but it seems John XXIII and Paul VI paid no heed whatsoever to this prudential wisdom. We see now the price of their folly!

    February 17, 2017 at 10:18 pm
    • St Miguel

      We do indeed and then add Annibale Bugnini to this mess with several PROTESTANT vicars (expert advisors) sticking their oars in to the New Mass, (lessening any offensive nature of the Liturgy) and there is the perfect storm. We add Baum to this stuff, then Nostra Aeatate and no doubt the Good Friday prayer will surface again this year.

      February 17, 2017 at 10:46 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: