Disastrous Pontificate Persists – Yet No Sense of Urgency From “Opponents”…

Disastrous Pontificate Persists – Yet No Sense of Urgency From “Opponents”…

Me? Damaging the Church? No way!

A friend rang me last night to say he’d attended a Summorum Pontificum Traditional Mass and found himself chatting afterwards with a couple who were not husband and wife, but “partners” …   My friend was downhearted, dispirited that even the better priests seem to be willing to tolerate such scandals. 

Then this from The American Conservative “The president of the German Bishops’ Conference has declared that, in his view, Catholic priests can conduct blessing ceremonies for homosexual couples.”

The list of scandalous words and actions from this current shocking pope, or tolerated by him, grows day and daily. Too much to list here – and anyway, would, more likely than not, be out of date before I press the “publish” button on this page. 

There is no lack of evidence that Pope Francis is a danger to Catholic Faith and Morals.  Quite the reverse – there’s an abundance of evidence. Even as I type this, a report has come in questioning the pope’s integrity – would he blatantly impart falsehoods, we have to ask? Click here to answer that for yourself. 

The question is, why are the supposedly concerned bishops who allegedly oppose him remaining silent – such as Cardinal Burke and the Captain and Crew of the Lifeboat SSPX?  Why no sense of urgency? Why have they all gone to ground? 

It’s one thing to pick one’s fights, but not to fight at all?  Take a few minutes to view the short video in the News section of the Dici website here.  Who, on this earth, would ever imagine that the Church is suffering the worst crisis ever in its entire history, watching that broadcast?  Lovely reports, sure, but there’s been nothing about any attempt to fight as members of the Church Militant, under our banner as Soldiers of Christ,  in any of the recent videos posted on Dici  in January, which I’ve viewed with surprise and disappointment.  This latest one, linked above, dated 2nd February, is no different. Plenty of devotional content, suggesting the danger of becoming so heavenly minded that we’re no earthly use.  

What should the supposed opponents of this dreadful pontificate be doing, in addition to prayer. Concrete action, surely – but what, precisely? 

Comments invited… 

Comments (77)

  • gabriel syme

    As Bishop Fellay and the SSPX have been part of this discussion, I thought it apt to post this here:

    One Peter Five has published a new interview with +Fellay, which was conducted this month based on questions sent to him at the close of 2017. The interview regards Fatima and the Church crisis.

    The bit most pertinent to this thread is probably:

    Interviewer: In light of the seemingly growing apostasy from the Catholic Faith within the Catholic Church, could you tell us at the end of this interview how you see your own mission and the SSPX’s mission and specific role?

    Bishop Fellay: We could say, that the Society of St Pius X, by Divine Providence, not by our own merits, represents the past of the Church, what we call Tradition. This cannot be erased from the Catholic Church or Catholic life. So our mission is to remember this. We are not simply a monument to the past; we are a living witness of Tradition in the Church, which is above all the changes and moods of the modern world. The Faith remains our mission, specifically by reviving the Christian spirit, especially for the priests of the Catholic Church. Our specific role is to help restore the priesthood, in all its purity, to the Church. Every aspect of Christian life and even of the Church follows by consequence from this principle. If you want to help restore the Church, one must start with the priesthood.

    https://onepeterfive.com/interview-bishop-bernard-fellay-on-the-fatima-centenary-church-crisis/

    February 9, 2018 at 8:25 am
    • editor

      Gabriel Syme,

      I hear this argument all the time, that the Society’s aim was always the sanctification of its priests, as if that means they need not engage in apostolic work. But none of us can be sanctified alone. And we are all baptised and confirmed before we make married or religious vows or are ordained. Our duty to be Soldiers of Christ is a permanent duty. Thus, priests, responsible, of course, for administering the sacraments, cannot use that priestly work as an excuse not to engage in the apostolate. Certainly, Archbishop Lefebvre didn’t make that excuse. And when we asked for the support of our then serving priests to help us at a Fatima event, they accepted, so lest there be any misunderstanding about that extract from the Bishop’s interview, I thought I would throw in my tuppence worth again, for good measure 😀

      PS – I’m also interested that One Peter Five had the privilege of an interview with Bishop Fellay, given that their blog administrator (Steve something) went out of his way to distance himself from the Society at a time when I used to read that blog. Indeed, it was because of his ambivalent attitude to the Society that I stopped visiting! I wonder what would happen if I asked for an interview with the Bishop to publish in Catholic Truth? I’m not going to risk finding out!

      February 9, 2018 at 10:23 am
  • St Miguel February 10, 2018 at 4:55 pm
    • RCAVictor

      St Miguel,

      Before Editor puts down her chocolates and whips out her rolling pin on you, just wanted to say: “Buyer Beware! Hilary White at work!”

      February 10, 2018 at 10:57 pm
      • St Miguel

        Yes, as you say RCA Victor, Caveat Emptor..!…Anyway the comments attached at the bottom of the article are worth a read too.

        February 11, 2018 at 10:46 am
  • St Miguel

    Wonder if this is the only Disastrous Papacy???…..MIchael Matt latest, hot off the press.

    https://remnantnewspaper.com/web/index.php/articles/item/3726-saint-pope-paul-vi-when-pigs-fly

    February 11, 2018 at 2:05 pm
  • gabriel syme

    Some more salvos appearing against Francis – regarding his record on abuse and the closely linked homosexuality – which are even more devastating in that come from sources normally guilty of papolatry (Catholic Herald) or those normally restricted in speech due to being part of the Diocesan structure (Fr Ray Blake):

    Fr Blake asks “Dare we join the dots?” and gives a run down of Francis’ dismal record on abuse and his obvious toleration of sexual deviancy. The piece ends with a picture of Francis kissing a young boy. The suggestion is obviously that Francis himself is a homosexual, even a pederast who looks out for his own.

    http://marymagdalen.blogspot.co.uk/2018/02/dare-we-join-dots.html

    (I’m amused to think of Cardinal Nichols’ reaction to the above article).

    The Catholic Herald also examines the Pope’s record on abuse, and concludes:

    ” Pope Francis is not only part of the problem, but that he is the problem.”

    http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2018/02/10/the-bishop-barros-crisis-how-bad-is-it/

    February 13, 2018 at 8:24 am
    • editor

      Gabriel Syme,

      I’m surprised that Fr Ray Blake has taken this line. more than hinting that Pope Francis is a homosexual. He doesn’t say that, but from the piece and accompanying photographs, that is the obvious conclusion to draw. This is not something anyone can know for certain and so Fr Ray Blake has strayed into dangerous territory. One commentator said that he has enlarged the photo of the child and the kiss was on the child’s cheek, not on the lips. Doesn’t look right, nevertheless, I agree. And in this day and age, better to avoid such possible misinterpretation.

      I don’t recall Fr Ray Blake being hard-hitting about the previous modernist popes, from John XXIII through to Benedict XVI, but, like others, as you say, he has overcome his papolatry to speak out about the errors of Francis, albeit possibly falling into another error in so doing; some Catholics just cannot get it into their heads that it is possible to have a bad pope, now, as in ages past, and so they have to look for something “other” [than weak or lost Faith, spiritual blindness] to explain it and what better than moral deviancy?

      Whether or not Francis is of homosexual inclination, we do not know, certainly not for certain, and it is, in any case, irrelevant now. If he IS of that inclination and knew so at the time of his application to seminary, he should not have been admitted and not ordained to the priesthood. Now, however, we have to leave that aside and focus on the execution of his pontificate. No, I didn’t say that, I say execution of his pontificate!

      And yes, I’ve noted for a while now that there are some pieces in the Catholic Herald (at least online – I do not read the hard copy any longer) that are recognising the “Francis Factor” in the decline of the Church. Took their time about it, and still not wholly there, but certainly an improvement. Six years into this pontificate they are realising that Pope Francis IS the problem. Some of us realised that when he walked out onto the balcony after his election in 2013.

      February 13, 2018 at 11:48 am
  • Helen

    Most of the bairns are down with this spewey bug so I haven’t time to check if someone else has posted this Guardian article. So even Pope Francis’ left wing fan club are waking up to his shenanigans, even if they have somewhat got the wrong end of the stick!

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/11/the-guardian-view-on-the-catholic-church-and-child-abuse-pope-francis-gets-it-wrong

    February 13, 2018 at 10:54 am
    • editor

      Helen,

      Someone did post that news, but not the same link, so thank you for that.

      Now, back to those weans before we call Social Services!

      February 13, 2018 at 11:53 am
  • RCAVictor

    I would like to use this thread to call out the blogger Louie Verrecchio, who, in his latest piece linked on another site, has conjured up a “crisis” within the SSPX because – wait for it – he has not received any answers from SSPX leadership to his emails regarding That’s Amoris. Apparently he thinks that a person of his importance deserves immediate attention to his concerns, and failing that, decided to discern a tempest in his teapot. I also called him out on his blog, the link to which I will not post, since he is a disgrace and a hot-headed egomaniac.

    Judging from his rubbish, he’s been reading “Resistance-to-Nothing” literature, since his piece makes about as much sense as their rot, and displays the same arrogance.

    God save us from these people.

    February 13, 2018 at 6:48 pm
    • editor

      RCA Victor,

      You aroused my curiosity with your remarks about Louie V, so despite my own dislike of that site, I have just paid a visit and read the “biretta” article and the one below that, dated 12 Feb about Bishop Fellay. I was stunned to find that his anger is directed at the Bishop because he has broken with past practice by not answering all of Louie’s communications! Gimme a break! Some folk (naming no names) don’t EVER get a reply from Bishop Fellay! I once found myself engaged in email correspondence with a very helpful priest close to the Bishop, who relayed my messages (nothing exciting and a couple of years ago, now) and then relayed the Bishop’s replies back to me, but a direct line? Maybe I’ll try writing under a pseudonym… Louise Verily might do the trick… 😀

      Phew! Louie does have a few bees in his bonnet… You truly couldn’t make it up. He’s gunning for the SSPX now, albeit slipping in, here and there, the fact that he has “friends” in high places there (I paraphrase) and that at a meeting with some “top brass” (again, I paraphrase) he was told off for something and “in humility” (quoting, not paraphrasing) he accepted the criticism.

      “In humility”? Elementary spiritual stuff: the minute we think we’re humble, we can lodge a very safe bet at the nearest bookies’ – we’re not! In recognition that he was in the wrong, or that those correcting him had the right to do so, fine; but “in humility”? Classic.

      It’s clear from these latest writings that he is desperate to justify his position (that the pope is not the pope) and since the SSPX won’t agree with him, it has to be chucked out with the bath-water. Here’s an excellent comment from one of Louie’s bloggers who is not in his adoring fan-club: he/she says it all, so I’ll finish with this…

      “Louie, in some perverse way, you should actually be grateful the Church is in as confused a state as she is today, because if there ever does come a time in history, when the Church does return to anywhere near the state she enjoyed during the [reign] of St Pope Pius X, life will not be good for you, as you are a very confused man.

      Yes, you’re bright enough to figure things out, and you certainly possess as much book knowledge on the Catholic faith as most. But it has become increasingly clear to me over the past few years that I’ve been reading you, that notwithstanding your often informative insight into tiers of the faith, you have also been drifting to a state where the only religion that will quench your thirst is “Louie’s religion”. Anyone or anything that fails to meet your understanding of [this] is to be rejected. The Catholic Church will not be an exception.

      The SSPX, which openly confesses that their mission is simply to hold onto and profess that true teachings of the Catholic Church, has not fallen in line with your thinking––either on this pope or on Amoris Laetitia. Moreover, they won’t even respond to your letters. How dare they snub you [you] no doubt ask. Quite clearly, there is only one response that is worthy of that behavior in your mind and that’s to throw them overboard.

      Aside from the fact that such action is simply petulant and disrespectful toward the only organization in existence that professes to offer and promote the true teachings of the Catholic Church that the Modernist leaders in Rome have long abandoned, it is sad. It is sad because you have more talent than you’re demonstrating. You will do as you wish, I’m sure, but my suggestion is that you take a break. Take a week or so to make a retreat and clear out some of that “Louie’s religion” from your head. You’ll be much better off and so will your readers.” End.

      February 13, 2018 at 9:03 pm
      • RCAVictor

        Editor,

        That’s quite a reply from that commenter, though not so sure the Church under the reign of St. Pius X was all that rosy, judging from the war he waged against the Modernists.

        Yes, I think the key to the whole problem is humility, or lack thereof. I’m also reminded, once again, of Our Lord’s warning about the future: “Iniquity will abound, and charity will grow cold.”

        Good thing L.V. isn’t a lawyer – he would apparently try every case without a judge or a jury, and hand down sentences himself!

        February 13, 2018 at 11:50 pm

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: