Papal Critic Sacked From Radio Maria

ImageOn February 13, 2014 Professor Roberto de Mattei (picture at source) published an article on the website Correspondance europeenne called, “2013 – 2014: Motus in fine velocior” (motion accelerates when the end is near), of which an English translation is available in our Documents section. Because of this article he was removed from Radio Maria where he had worked for several years preparing the weekly broadcast Radice cristiani [Christian roots].

Thus Roberto de Mattei in turn received the same treatment as another two Catholic intellectuals, Alessandro Gnocchi and Mario Palmaro, ousted from Radio Maria on October 11, 2013, two days after publishing an article together in Il Foglio (see DICI no. 284, 08/11/13).

In response to Radio Maria’s chief, Father Livio Fanzaga, who reproached him for this article and for his increasingly critical position with regard to the Sovereign Pontiff, Professor de Mattei recalled Catholic teaching on papal infallibility, which only applies under specific circumstances and does not exclude the possibility of error outside of these circumstances, in the domains of ecclesiastical politics, strategic choice, pastoral activity or ordinary magisterium. It is not a sin, he affirmed, but a Catholic’s duty in conscience to point out these errors, with all the respect and love due to the Sovereign Pontiff. The saints did the same. He who notes of the shortcomings of the hierarchy in all reverence does not sin; on the contrary, he sins who keeps silence. As far as Roberto de Mattei is concerned, he states that he wishes to continue to exercise his Christian liberty in defence of the Faith that he received at baptism and that remains his most cherished possession; he will never cease to tell the truth, with the help of the Holy Ghost, and this ever more loudly, so great is the silence of the one who should be the voice of the truth.

Roberto de Mattei is Professor of Modern History and of the History of Christianity at the European University of Rome, where he is head of the department of Historical Sciences. He is also head of the Lepanto Foundation whose goal is to defend the principles and institutions of Christian civilization though their many works, publications and public actions. From 2003 to 2011, he was vice-president of the National Research Council and Member of the Board of Guarantees of the Italian Academy at Columbia University in New York. From 2002 to 2006 he worked as a consultant for the Italian government ministry of foreign affairs.

He will give a lecture in Paris on March 11, 2014, at 8 pm, on the topic of “The influence of Vatican II on the current pontificate; pastoral activity from John XXIII to Francis” in the crypt of the Chapelle Notre-Dame de Consolation, 23 rue Goujon, 75008 Paris. After the lecture he will sign copies of his book, Vatican II: an Unwritten Story (available in English from Loreto Publications). In this thoroughly documented work, Prof. de Mattei has taken an original standpoint with regard to the works of the Council, that of the conservative minority, making it a truly revolutionary addition to contemporary historiography. Free entry, donations accepted to cover costs. For further information please call 06-28-73-77-79.

(Source: Correspondance europeenne – DICI no.291 dated February 28, 2014)

 

33 responses

  1. Madame Editor,

    The soft-back cost in America of Professor Roberto DeMattei’s book Vatican II – An Unwritten Story is $34.95 but unfortunately the cost of First Class International postage to the U.K. is a staggering $74.90!

    However, the book is available in electronic format for $25.00 as the following link indicates, and the link also gives details of the book including a copy of its index:

    http://www.loretopubs.org/ebook-the-second-vatican-council-an-unwritten-story.html

    It is very greatly to be regretted that a scholar of Professor DeMattei’s standing has been deposed and that all good Catholics who depend upon his knowledge will now be deprived. Let us hope that he finds a new platform very soon.

    • Leprechaun,

      I’d like to know a bit more about the author before I’d think of buying his book – his sacking follows the sacking of another two intellectuals and at the time their treatment was reported as being of note because they were “mainstream” and not “traditional” Catholics (words to that effect). So, while it is very interesting that there is to be no tolerance of any criticism of Pope Francis from even those who are going along with the rest of the revolution, I’m not sure that I’d spend money to read what I already know, with bells on, from other Vatican II authors.

      The report over at the Eponymous Flower is worth reading. “Radio Maria Italy is the mother and main transmitter of the largest independent Catholic radio networks in the world”

      So, we don’t want any criticism, actual or implied, being let loose over the airwaves now, do we?

      Let’s see if the much publicised “humility” of Pope Francis will lead him to ask for the re-instatement of his critic(s). Just don’t hold your breath.

        • Great Pretender, that’s a really good article from the Lepanto Foundation and the final paragraph is just beautiful. I copied this as an example:

          Pius XII remind us, in fact, that: “If Peter has the keys of heaven, Mary has the keys to the heart of God” (Discourse: Questa viva corona of 21April 1940).

  2. Talk about freedom of speech! And they used to condemn atheistic communism for this type of thing.

    It won’t be long now until they are organising rendition flights.

  3. Pope Francis seems to have more in common with Protestants than with orthodox Catholics – he even addressed them in friendly terms at a charismatic conference. This has to be seen to be believed.

    • This is absolutely disgraceful. He sacks people making legitimate criticisms of him and praises schismatics in public.

    • Lily,

      Someone posted that video on another thread recently – probably the old “Pope Francis Latest” thread. It really does, as you say, have to be seen to be believed.

      Just imagine if the Pope spoke as warmly of Bishop Fellay as he speaks of the schismatic Tony Palmer, whom he calls his “Bishop brother”. Tony Palmer is a Protestant! If he’d called Bishop Fellay his “brother Bishop” – the outcry would have been as loud as it would have been swift! The shock-horror! Imagine Mgr Loftus’s next Catholic Times article!

      And what’s this asking Protestants for a blessing, as he asked those gathered in St Peter’s Square at his first appearance after being elected, to bless him.

      How does a lay person DO that? And do Protestants DO blessings?

      On the topic of the sacked Roberto de Mattei (and others) – it is very significant that such “mainstream” Catholics, and academics at that, are concerned enough about this pontificate to put their necks on the line.

      Interesting times, folks. Interesting times.

    • This video is beyond absurd.

      As if its content is not idiotic and scandalous enough, when viewed against some of Francis’ other recent howlers, he is left without a shred of credibility.

      In the video address to the US protestants, he says Jesus Christ is “the only Lord”. So how are his muslim friends supposed to take that, given he recently told them to stick with the faith their parents instilled in them?

      Additionally, the heretic he calls his “brother bishop” wears a fake Roman Collar and also is guilty of personal financial excess (these types always accrue major personal wealth) and – like many protestants – preaches the “prosperity gospel”; that is, if you have faith, God will make you rich.

      How does the prosperity gospel stack up with Francis’ idea of a poor Church, for the poor?

      For anyone who cares to actually consider what he says, rather than get caught up in all the touchy-feeling, lovey-dovey nonsense, he is always left with egg on his face and has obviously never been introduced to the concept of thinking before you speak.

      While we are all guilty of mistakes or expressing ourselves poorly, I find it difficult to believe that any right thinking person could unwittingly make such completely contradictory – and so wholly absurd – statements.

      If someone who you knew in daily life made such ridiculous statements – contradicting themselves every time they spoke etc – you would think they were “at it”, or even “extracting the urine” as the saying goes.

      I know older people can sometimes have difficulties with their memory etc, but I am loathe to mention senility as a possible cause of this.

  4. Lily, Thanks for posting this although I have to say that I was embarrassed watching it and it did not fill me with respect for Pope Francis. You are quite right – he does sound as if he cares more about the Protestants. There is no doubt that he wants to unite all in one broad communion. I am appalled. It is very depressing.

    • “It did not fill me with respect for Pope Francis” – it filled me with shame. Those Protestants deserve better, they deserve the truth, especially from a pope.

    • I agree with you Bededog. I commented on this issue on the former Pope Francis Latest thread. The former Jorge Bergoglio made a habit of receiving blessings from evangelical protestants- have a look: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3umXcnVB7SI

      It’s almost as sickening as the time when JP2 was ‘blessed’ by a hindu witch doctor.

  5. The Professor said the following, taken from the article above, which has been said loads of times on this blog. It is very useful to hear it from such a notable intellectual:

    “Professor de Mattei recalled Catholic teaching on papal infallibility, which only applies under specific circumstances and does not exclude the possibility of error outside of these circumstances, in the domains of ecclesiastical politics, strategic choice, pastoral activity or ordinary magisterium. It is not a sin, he affirmed, but a Catholic’s duty in conscience to point out these errors, with all the respect and love due to the Sovereign Pontiff. The saints did the same.”

    Unfortunately, very few Catholics seem to agree with this and think the Pope should never be criticised. It’s almost impossible to argue with them, this is fixed in their minds.

    What a shame that this good man has lost his job for doing something that is actually a duty.

  6. To briefly resurrect the case of the sycophantic fraud known as “ChurchHairspray.TV,” Editor, I received this video rebuttal to a Voris screed against several very visible traditionalists who have been, justifiably, very vocal in criticising the Pope. It was recorded by Louis Verrecchio: http://www.cfnews.org/page88/files/751b83874a7bdfab126e65e854b51207-193.html

    Perhaps Voris will soon launch another calumny, this time against Robert de Mattei, in order to shore up his papolatry…

  7. Could someone please state the grounds for Papal Infallibility, in terms of the Extraordinary and Ordinary Magisterium?

      • Josephine,

        So a Pope is only infallible insofar as he does not contradict a previous dogma/ doctrine, or preach something that is not heretical? Pope Francis is guilty on both these counts.

  8. I think that journalists who try to counteract the errors of the modern Popes publicly are doing a virtuous work. If Pope Paul VI or Pope John Paul are in purgatory or heaven how could they not be grateful for every time that some faithful writer or speaker tried to neutralize their errors. It’s very wrong to mock or ridicule the Pope but very charitable to him to try to prevent him from harming souls.

    • 3LittleShepherds,

      “It’s very wrong to mock or ridicule the Pope”.

      Every time someone says that or similar stuff about showing reverence to bishops due to their high office, I think of this quote from St Catherine of Siena, from a letter she wrote to some cardinals, criticising them:

      “You clearly know the truth, that Pope Urban VI is truly pope, the highest pontiff, chosen in orderly election, not influenced by fear, truly rather by divine inspiration than by your human industry. And so you announced it to us, which was the truth. Now you have turned your backs, like poor, mean knights; your shadow has made you afraid. You have divided yourselves from the truth which strengthens us, and drawn close to falsehood, which weakens soul and body, depriving you of temporal and spiritual grace. What made you do this? The poison of self-love, which has infected the world. This is what has made you pillars lighter than straw-flowers which shed no perfume, but stench that makes the whole world reek! …This is not the kind of blindness that springs from ignorance. It has not happened to you because people have reported one thing to you while another is so. No, for you know what the truth is; it was you who announced it to us, and not we to you. Oh, how mad you are! For you told us the truth, and you want yourselves to taste a lie! Now you want to corrupt this truth, and make us see the opposite saying that you chose Pope Urban from fear, which is not so; but anyone who says it – speaking to you without reverence, because you have deprived yourselves of reverence – lies up to his eyes.”

      I know these were cardinals she was writing to and not the pope but I don’t think that matters. If bishops, including the Bishop of Rome, don’t deserve reverence, why should they have it? I’ve never liked the distinction between the man and the office when it is applied to showing reverence.

      I’m not saying I would ridicule a pope but I would understand only too well if others did so – Pope Francis does set himself up to be made fun of, IMHO, what with photographs of him wearing tin hats and red noses.

      • I still think it’s wrong to mock or ridicule the Pope. I certainly think St. Catherine was disgusted that the Bishops left themselves open to be treated irreverently. We all feel the same about the Pope and the red nose, etc. but to join in in mocking the Pope is grotesque.
        That said, the gentle satire of The Eye of The Tiber or Editor’s cute cartoons seem totally inoffensive to me.

        • 3LittleShepherds,

          I agree that it’s wrong to mock or ridicule the Pope and I also agree that it’s not offensive when there’s some fun poked in Catholic Truth or the hilarious Eye of the Tiber website. Serious mocking would be very wrong – I completely agree with you.

      • Michaela,

        Those are strong words from St Catherine of Siena, and I’d say she is right about the hierarchy losing the right to be treated with reverence in some cases.

        I also agree about the abuse of the need to make a distinction between the man and his office. That is really pointing out that high office doesn’t mean someone is a great person or holy. It doesn’t mean that someone in a high office, even in the Church, has to be treated with a lot of deference or reverence etc.

        I do think you’re right that Pope Francis has “set himself up” to be made fun of due to the red nose etc. but no Catholic should mock or ridicule the pope. That would be very wrong.

    • 3LittleShepherds,

      “If Pope Paul VI or Pope John Paul are in purgatory or heaven how could they not be grateful for every time that some faithful writer or speaker tried to neutralize their errors”

      I often think that all the praise these popes get (if they are in purgatory) – will only be heaping coals of fire on their heads, as the saying goes, so I agree with you that they would be grateful to people like the sacked journalists who are trying to put things right that they have said or done.

%d bloggers like this: