Pope Francis & ‘Rebel’ Christians…

(Vatican Radio) Christians who say “it’s always been done that way,” and stop there have hearts closed to the surprises of the Holy Spirit. They are idolaters and rebels will never arrive at the fullness of the truth. That was the message of Pope Francis at Mass on Monday morning at the chapel in the Casa Santa Marta. Click here to read more  

 

Don't worry, Lord, I'm working on those new wineskins! I think the faithful are getting the message!

Don’t worry, Lord, I’m working on those new wineskins! I think the diehards are getting the message!

Comment

So, Catholics who choose to stick to Catholic Tradition, and refuse to follow Pope Francis’ conveniently liberal “God/Holy Spirit of Surprises”, continue to be attacked mercilessly (note) and are now  even to be labelled   “idolaters and rebels” who will “never arrive at the fullness of the truth” – unlike every atheist, agnostic and peddler of false beliefs who have received the pontiff’s blessing and assurance of salvation no matter what they think, say or do in matters of theology and morality.  He must have been absent the day they taught the Thinking Skills class.  I mean, he didn’t so much as whisper a protest during the same-sex “marriage” referendum in once-Catholic Ireland, to cite but one major example of his dereliction of papal duty,  while he waxes lyrical at every opportunity about those of us guilty of nothing more than adhering to the Faith of our Fathers. Laugh? I thought I’d never start.

Pray for Pope Francis, of course, but make no mistake about it. He’s no Pius X, and yes, I managed to keep a straight face when typing that, even if I did think “as if…” 

Here’s something to discuss, however, lest we are tempted to spend the thread simply repeating the obvious;  is it true, in your experience, that more and more Catholics in the diocesan parishes (you know, within the “mainstream” Church structures) are becoming concerned at the utterances and behaviour of this Pope?  I’m hearing this quite a bit from Catholics who are still within the “mainstream” structures. What about you?  Are your friends and relatives becoming concerned?  And if you are an occasional blogger here or a lurker who falls into the category of  “mainstream”, tell us your thoughts.  Soon! 

101 responses

  1. “I wonder that you are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ, unto another gospel. Which is not another, only there are some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema.”

    St Paul; Galatians 1:6-9

    “Christians who say “it’s always been done that way,” and stop there have hearts closed to the surprises of the Holy Spirit. They are idolaters and rebels will never arrive at the fullness of the truth.”

    Pope Francis; January 2016

    • Re the above, I’m, not sure if the comparison I make is wholly legitimate, but I’m sure the point I am trying to highlight is obvious!

    • By “surprises of the Holy Spirit,” it sounds like Pope Francis is saying that divine revelation did not end with the death of the last Apostle, that new revelations are forever a possibility, that doctrine is not fixed but is rather evolutionary. He even appears to confirm this by going on to speak of arriving “at the fullness of truth,” as if the Church was not endowed with the fullness of truth from the day of divine institution.

      If there is one thing we Catholics were always taught by the Church, it is that the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of truth, not surprises. Pope Francis, with respect, makes the Holy Spirit sound like a maverick magician.

      • Athanasius

        As it says in Holy Scripture, The church must always draw on its store of things old and new.

        The Church can gro in its own self undersatnding, and also find appropriate ways of proclaiming The Gospel to each new age, and different cultures.

        And as I said on another thread, whilst drawing on Holy Scripture it must address new moral questions unknown to The Early Church. I cited the eaxmples, of I.V.F, , Nuclear Weapons, and aparthied. The Church must awaken to a New Dawn with a consistent message to share, but one adapted to the time each generation lives in.

        • In my earler reply to Athansius I unintentionally missed out mention of Tradition. The store on which The Church draws includes Holy Scripture, and Tradition.

          I think Blessed Cardinal Newman uses different language to speak of that which The Pope speaks of, and he wrote of deveopment of new insights over time. New insights into what is alreday proclaimed to be true.

        • Who Alone Can Judge,

          I think Pope Gregory XVI responds to your comments much more eloquently than I could. Here’s what he wrote in his 1832 Encyclical Mirari Vos:

          “To use the words of the Fathers of Trent, it is certain that the Church “was instructed by Jesus Christ and His Apostles and that all truth was daily taught it by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.” Therefore, it is obviously absurd and injurious to propose a certain “restoration and regeneration” for her as though necessary for her safety and growth, as if she could be considered subject to defect or obscuration or other misfortune. Indeed these authors of novelties consider that a “foundation may be laid of a new human institution,” and what Cyprian detested may come to pass, that what was a divine thing “may become a human Church…”

          I reckon that just about destroys the argument for Vatican II reform and all the evolutions that came after. Pius XII was so prophetic in his pre-Council lament:

          “I am worried by the Blessed Virgin’s messages to Lucy of Fatima. This persistence of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a divine warning against the suicide of altering the Faith in her liturgy, her theology and her soul…I hear all around me innovators who wish to dismantle the Sacred Chapel, destroy the universal flame of the Church, reject her ornaments and make her feel remorse for her historical past. A day will come when the civilised world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God.” (Mgr. Roche, Pie XII Devant L’Histoire, p. 52-53).

          This is precisely what has happened under the pretext of bringing the Gospel to the modern world in a new way. I hope you can see this.

  2. I’d venture that “surprises of the Holy Spirit” is Francis’ clumsy attempt to refine his previous catchy anti-Catholic phrase, “God of surprises,” which – as Christopher Ferrara has already pointed out – is just a reference to himself. Moreover, this new phrase could be an oblique attempt to reinvigorate the old “spirit of Vatican II” cloak, which has been the chicken soup of the modernist soul for the past 50 years. His reference to arriving “at the fullness of truth” also betrays him as a disciple of Teilhard de Chardin, so perhaps we will also hear, at some point in the near future, some Francis version of the Omega Point. Maybe he’ll call it the journey to the Point of Surprises, as he condemns all of us who reject his despicable surprises.

    The truly appalling and tragic thing about all this is that Francis has made it clear that his only enemies are faithful Catholics! If that is not a sign of diabolical influence, I don’t know what is. What does this deluded man bring to the Baby Jesus? Not gold, not frankincense – only myrrh.

    But to address your topic question, Editor, I have had no contact with the Novus Ordo world, save for one funeral, since about 2007 or 2008, so I couldn’t really say how much concern is building up in that world. However, at our parish festival back in September, I did hear that we had several visitors who were interested in joining our parish, having become refugees from said world, because they had had enough of the madness.

    Another factor in the unknown buildup of concern is the effect of the Fifth Column on these faithful. I mean the likes of Jimmy Akin, Mark Shea, Michael Voris et. al., who make a spiffy living off of assuring the faithful that “there’s nothing to see here,” while promoting themselves as defenders of the Faith. How many faithful still take these traitors seriously, I couldn’t say.

    • RCA Victor,

      I think that’s a pity if you don’t have contact with the mainstream Catholics. If they don’t meet traditional Catholics how are they to really get to understand what is going on and that there are options to the new Mass. I hope that your situation is just an accidental one and not a deliberate policy.

      • Margaret Mary,

        It’s not deliberate at all, I simply have no opportunity to socialize or interact with “mainstream” Catholics – except on blogs, which is generally futile, in my experience. In fact, there is a mainstream parish right across the highway from us, that offers a TLM said by a faithful old priest who can hardly walk, let alone ascend and descend the altar steps. I don’t know how many of those faithful attend that TLM – but their parishioners have been instructed that they may not attend our Masses….for the usual false reasons….so the propaganda portraying us as pariahs works quite well, generally speaking.

        I know that some of our parishioners do have contact with the mainstream, because they have family members who reject the TLM, and their interaction stories range from frustrating to downright infuriating. I myself do not have any family who practice the faith. Those who did have long since passed away.

        What sort of contact do you have with the mainstream? And what sort of results have you had getting them to understand the crisis in the Church?

        • RCA Victor,

          I tend to agree with your point of view that mainstream Catholics are generally not interested in the old Mass or Tradition. The ones who do take their faith a bit more seriously and who question things are usually to be found on Catholic blogs. I have a lot of family members, aunts, uncles, cousins, who won’t hear a bad word about their modern parishes and priests. Strangely enough, the older Catholics are the worst.

          • Athanasius,

            The only exceptions to this – among the laity – that I know of are mainstream Catholics who would like to attend a TLM, but do not have one near them or are not willing, or are unable, to travel the distance required to hear one. I’ve come across that sort of blog post numerous times, and frequently people who post that also ask what they should do – i.e. continue to hear the NOM, stay home, etc.

            There is another interesting exception to this locally, in that our priests seem to have friendly and not infrequent interaction with some mainstream priests of the local diocese (including the Msgr. of the “hostile” parish across the highway). I remember one incident last year – I was in our church basement, alone, printing some music, when I heard someone knocking on the glass doors. I looked out and saw that it was a priest! So I let him in – he claimed he needed some coffee really badly as he was falling asleep on the road on his way somewhere. There was no coffee made, so I raided the fridge and gave him a glass of Coke! We chatted a bit, then he went on his way. I found out later that this priest knew our Prior and had actually stopped by looking for him!

            As Editor might say, go figure….

            • RCA Victor,

              Yes, it is encouraging to know that our Traditional priests often keep contact with local parish priests. They are usually younger priests as well, and that bodes good for the future.

        • RCA Victor,

          I’m glad you are not shunning mainstream Catholics. It’s not that I think they are looking for the truth about the crisis, I agree that in most cases they’re quite happy with the status quo but that is all the more reason for them to meet with others who do know the truth and can give them some information to move them forward.

          I have a lot of contact with mainstream Catholics and I find that there are some who are realising more and more that there is something badly wrong. For some reason, they can’t see that the Mass is the main issue, they think that the Mass is the Mass no matter what. Those of us who can see that the Mass is the issue but just can’t get to a TLM, are not, I suppose helping them much. To stop going to Mass altogether and stay home on Sundays would just let them point the finger and say they knew it all along, we’ve lost the faith! LOL!

          Even attending the NOM and refusing the sign of peace and receiving on the tongue irritates some people. It’s a really weird place to be right now, and I don’t know the answer but I think we need to press on and just keep saying that the Church is disoriented right now.

          • Margaret Mary

            I agree wholeheartedly, and admire your fortitude. I see people such as yourself as lonely warriors, left behind the lines in a war, who are still fighting bravely on against all the odds. (I do have a romantic streak don’t I?!).

            God bless you.

      • RCA Victor
        I agree with you about the likes of Akin, Shea, Voris. They are doing great damage to Tradition by glossing over the problems with Pope Francis and pretending that all is well.

        Margaret Mary
        I work with ‘mainstream’ (Novus Ordo) Catholics, and it’s not perhaps as easy as you think. I regularly try to help them to ‘understand what is going on’ and guide them towards the traditional Mass, but the pull of the status quo – and lack of solid spiritual formation for many years – seems to be too strong for them to resist, and although they are nice people, and not unkind to me, I get the impression they think I am part of some extreme minority fringe, just because I attend the TLM and actually believe all that the Church teaches. It’s an uphill struggle, believe me.

        • Westminster Fly,

          “the pull of the status quo – and lack of solid spiritual formation for many years – seems to be too strong for them to resist,”

          I totally agree with you there. You have hit the nail on the head.

          • Westminster Fly and Margaret Mary,

            The most damaging aspect of the “lack of solid spiritual formation,” in my experience, has been papolotry, applied of course to the NOM (“What’s wrong with it? All the popes since the Council have said it!”) but also to every new pearl of tainted “wisdom” that falls from Francis’ mouth. I did not grow up Catholic, but this must be the carryover of “pray, pay and obey” that cradle Catholics keep referring to, apparently well in force during the 1940s and 1950s.

            • Yes RCA, you’re dead right. The mainstream Catholics I work with are diehard papolators. They raved about Pope John Paul II, but I did detect they were a little cool in their attitude towards Pope Benedict (maybe because of Summorum Pontificum?) but they seem more enthusiastic about Pope Francis, and lapping up all this ‘Year of Mercy’ stuff. They also don’t understand at all about the dangers of ecumenism either, which I think is another very damaging aspect.

              • RCA Victor and Westminsterfly

                They’re only diehard papolators when it suits. They don’t feel the need to obey when it comes to contraception.

  3. So much for the Year of Divine Mercy and the “who am I to judge” lark.

    He didn`t take long to break his mercy promise or to start judging people.

    He must be the type of person who would train a police dog to attack someone and then shoot it when it is retired for being too dangerous.

  4. My computer has been on a Go-Slow today – I’ve been trying to get in to post this latest scandalous news for, literally, hours. Way behind with everything else.

    There can be little doubt that this Pope is well and truly earning himself notoriety in the history books. No doubt. Not that the muppets in the parishes who go along with it will realise that. They’re in too deep, it seems, as they continue to prefer, to paraphrase somewhat their usual riposte, to be “wrong with this Pope than right with the deposit of Faith and all that derives from it.”

    It will be very interesting to learn the names of the priests in Scotland who do go along with this. It will tell us all we need to know about the level of their Catholicity.

    • Yes, Editor, it is truly scandalous. This was mentioned on the General thread also. I think that Pope Francis must be a closet Protestant or something; is there no end to the countless ways in which he feels that he must interpret scripture, Tradition and church practices for the modern world! What is even more scandalous is that there are Catholics who will happily go along with this scandalous practice of allowing women to participate in the Mandatum. it has been going on for years, though; I was one of those who had my foot washed on at least one occasion (!; before my “conversion”, of course! I never agreed with the practice, though.

  5. Editor,

    I suppose that will be Our Lord put in His place, who chose only men, His Apostles, for the washing of the feet!! But it gets worse under this Pope – he includes non-Christian women in the washing of the feet as well.

    I cannot understand how the higher clergy in the Church are so silent in the face of the damage this Pope is causing. One thing is for sure, I’ll be sticking with the Traditional Maundy Thursday Liturgy.

    • Athanasius,

      I couldn’t agree more – I must remember to post the times of the SSPX Holy Week services for both Edinburgh and Glasgow on our blog this year, and encourage as many parishioners as possible to attend. Bloggers from south of the border are free to do the same.

      I’m also hearing great things about the Immaculate Heart of Mary parish in Balornock, Glasgow. I’m told the priest there is working so hard to stick to Catholic Tradition, that the muppets are leaving in droves. Good riddance.

      I’ve heard this from others in the parish who love their PP and his solid sermons and appreciate having the TLM during the week (unfortunately, no Sunday Mass – yet).

      Apparently, the muppets are not just muppets but nasty muppets, having been heard name-calling their priest. Let even one of them come forward to meet with the CT team – I, for one, would just relish a “quiet” (ish) conversation with him/her, for just five minutes. Make that three.

      So, we can be sure that there will be at least a minority of priests who will remain faithful to the traditional men-only washing of the feet, even if some daft feminist-type tries to change his mind.

      Now, I really must catch up with the February newsletter, which was just about finished when my computer went on strike. Still, it’s an ill wind….because, as Murphy’s Law would have it, this latest news – both about the Immaculate Heart parish and this latest attack by Pope Francis on Catholic Tradition – have come just as I am about to begin to write my editorial. 😉

    • The change is regrettable, but The Supreme Pontiff has Universal Authority over such things. No Catholic could quibble with that fact.

      • Who Alone Can Judge

        “The change is regrettable, but The Supreme Pontiff has Universal Authority over such things. No Catholic could quibble with that fact.”

        This is the great error of our times, not formally held by Catholics at any time from St. Peter, that the Pope has the authority to alter the faith. He does not have that authority and the quicker blindly-obedient Catholics familiarise themselves with the Church teaching on the limits to Papal authority, the quicker they will start flocking back, red faced, to the faith of their fathers.

        • To alter an aspect of Liturgy is not to alter the faith! The topic under discussion is The Mandatum, and it was not incorporated into The Mass until 1955. A change that was accepted then under the same Universal Authority.

          • Who Alone Can Judge

            I beg to differ. The liturgical change, as you call it, the Mandatum of 1955, was wholly consistent with Our Lord’s own action in the Cenacle. It was an action continued in the early Church by Apostolic Tradition. The ateration that Pope Francis has just introduced is a complete stranger to that ApostolicTradition; a modernist, politically correct disfigurement of the sacred liturgy that offends against Our Lord’s own example.

            If Our lord had wanted women to have their feet washed at the Mandatum then surely the Blessed Virgin would have been the one chosen for such an honour. The fact that He did not even include His own Mother, the most worthy of all women ever born, is proof positive that Our Lord meant the Mandatum to be a male only liturgical action.

            By his action, Pope Francis only harms further the distinction between men and women in the liturgical offices of the Church, which no doubt will further embolden the feminists to demand a female priesthood, just like the pagan religions have. You need to view this change more deeply to see exactly the damage it will do to the faith. No Catholic worthy of the name should go along with this liturgical abuse.

            • Athansius

              How odd, if you agree with something it is consistent with Tradition, and, if not, it isn’t. Fidelity to Tradition is not to be judged by individuals in a wholly subjective, pick and mix, way. To be faithful to Holy Scripture and Tradition is to be attentive to The Magisterium, especially The Pope.

              • Who Alone Can Judge

                “How odd, if you agree with something it is consistent with Tradition, and, if not, it isn’t.”

                You have that back to front, which I think you already know. In fact, if it is consistent with Tradition then I agree with it, and, if not, I reject it.

                Pope Francis’ new Mandatum is dangerously opposed to Tradition, therefore I reject it, as every knowledgeable and faithful Catholic should. The Pope is the Vicar of Christ, not God incarnate!

                  • I also know of one parish priest who is considering retiring over this. “As long as I have been a parish priest I have refused to wash the feet of girls or women out of fidelity to Church teaching. Now the Pope has made me look a fool.”

                    And the poor man has a point.

                    • Prognosticum

                      I don’t know the circumstances of the priest you speak of but I think it is high time that priests did less retiring and started to fight in the light. That may mean discomfort, misunderstanding, persecution, etc., from those imbued with Modernism, but I see no alternative if fidelity to the Faith is to be maintained. retiring is too easy an option.

                      While he weighs his options and prays for guidance, perhaps this priest, and other good priests, could in the meantime omit the Mandatum from their Holy Week services. I’m not absolutely sure of my ground here but something tells me that the Mandatum is not mandatory, it can be left out.

            • Athanasius

              So Bishop Schneider, seen as some as a guardian of “Tradition” in the just published article on Rorate Caeli? He says The Mandatum was not part of the Holy Mass, and is, as I at least knew, optional anyway:

              “The universal tradition of the Church never allowed the foot washing during the Holy Mass, but instead outside of Mass, in a special ceremony….Thanks be to God no priest or bishop is obliged to wash publicly the feet of women on Holy Thursday, for there is no binding norm for it, and the foot washing itself is only facultative. ”

              To repeat what I said: The topic under discussion is The Mandatum, and it was not incorporated into The Mass until 1955. A change that was accepted then under the same Universal Authority.

      • Who AloneCG

        LOL. Universal Authority my foot. The parishes where I live have been ignoring the men only washing of the feet for years; they don’t give a hoot for universal authority when it doesn’t suit them.

        • You can rightly challenge in some gentle way those who ignore Papal Acts, but surely no loyal, “Traditional” Catholic can mock those who do so, whilst at the same time ignoring that Authority themselves?

          • Who Alone Can Judge

            You sound like you’ve been living in a bubble, and on another planet, for the last several decades. “Rightly challenge in some gentle way those who ignore Papal Acts”? Dearie me.

            One would need to have spent 24 hours a day for the last 50 years on such a task – and to absolutely no purpose. I know, I’ve tried. Let’s see, there’s communion in the hand, “extraordinary” ministers, girl altar servers etc etc. All protests ignored/denied until such offences became common practice, at which time they were sanctioned. I’m afraid mockery is the gentlest response I can make to your post.

              • EMHC are generally not permitted. The situation must be absolutely desperate before permission is granted. This was the teaching, still in force, of John Paul II. Most of us in our lifetime should never see an EMHC, that’s how restricted the practice is. Yet, every parish has them!

                Altar girls are just another of those Portestant liturgical abuses that speak for themselves. No doubt there is a restriction by a Pope in some weakly worded diocument somewhere that has again been ignored.

                These scandals have no place in the Traditional Catholic faith, they are abhorrent aberrations that don’t remotely resemble the early Christian practices they claim to have revived. Their origin is in the Protestant revolution, not in Tradition.

                • I think I would sooner have Catholic Altar Servers than Catholics that think after The Rosary, and The Mass, the next best thing is sending any criminal to The Guillotine!

                  • Who Alone Can Judge

                    “any criminal to The Guillotine”?

                    It is not a good sign when people start exagerrating what others have said in order to put their argument in a bad light. That’s not the way Catholics should debate. We have a duty to honesty.

                    Other than that, altar girls are part of a Modernist plan to humanise, that is, de-supernaturalise, the Catholic Faith, which is a great danger to souls. Indeed, since Vatican II we have witnessed souls abandon the faith in their millions.

                    Now my question to you is this: which is worse, the death of a body or the death of a soul?

                    You see how superficial and emotional your comparison is?

              • EHMC are only “permitted” because the Vatican is too weak to enforce its own rules. In the very first document on the subject, the Instruction on the Laity, 1997, article 8 reads: “even a packed church is not a reason for their use.” Even now, with very few packed churches, they’re used all the time. Numpties.

                Girl altar boys, ditto. Especially the “numpties” bit.

                Yet the novus ordo faithless continue to squeak “it’s permitted” …”obedience”…

                As Archbishop Lefebvre said: “it was Satan’s masterstroke to get Catholics to disobey the whole of Tradition, in the name of obedience”.

                Check it out in his Open Letter to Confused Catholics cos they don’t come more confused than the muppets defending such aberrations from Catholic liturgical discipline and practice, today.

                Shucks. I must watch this. I’m getting to be much too gentle in my responses these days.

              • Who Alone….

                Did you miss “all protests ignored/denied until such offences became common practice, at which time they were sanctioned“? Do you get that the “gentle challenges” were ignored? Do you get the point now?

    • Athanasius,

      “But it gets worse under this Pope – he includes non-Christian women in the washing of the feet as well.”

      Oh yes, the Muslim prisoner; was that last year or the year before? Tragic how the Pope feels that he can correct Almighty God who chose only men (viri) for many things. Hardly the best example of humility.

  6. It certainly looks as if all Our Lady of Fatima’s prophecies are coming thick and fast as the Pope who must teach what is sacred doctrine is now teaching what seems to be a free for all attitude which only sows confusion.

    I’m reminded of the text in 2 Timothy. Ch 4.1V.,2

    “Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, entreat, rebuke in all patience and doctrine.
    For there shall come a time; when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itchy ears.
    And will indeed turn their hearing from the truth, but will be turned unto fables.”

    Itchy ears all around including our mainstream pastors.
    Paul to Timothy finishes with “Be sober” …..Pass the water!

    And now what we have is a mercy door (they are making a specific entrance inside the main parish churches as way in to the mercy alter with an image of the Divine mercy on show as per instructions from the pope) Its so crazy.

  7. Credo in unum Deum, the Nicene Creed, plus the Ten Commandments, when believed, taught, and adhered to, and with the Graces that flow from the Mass of All Time, would be the most merciful remedy for this sorry, sad little world of ours, and once more mankind might look again beyond the sun, moon, and stars, where eye has not seen nor ear heard, nor has it entered into the heart of man what things God has prepared for them that love Him.

  8. Attono

    Agreed! But God has a plan that has been revealed to us through Our Lady at Fatima. Therefore, it is in the fulfilment of Our Lady’s request for the consecration of Russia by the Pope and bishops to her Immaculate Heart that the triumph will come. God has placed the sanctity and security of the entire world at the disposal of His Vicar on earth and His bishops. It remains only for them to imitate the example of the Blessed Virgin at her Fiat and obey humbly. Sadly, easy as it is, the devil has managed to prevent their compliance with all manner of human argument, and the rot goes on.

    • Just want to thank you Athanasius for your sound, patient and charitable contributions to the CT site. Your comments and Leo’s are always instructive without endangering my spleen. May God reward you.

      • Dia Mhuire Duit

        Thank you for a very kind comment that does more good than you know. God bless you.

      • Dia Mhuire Duit,

        HellOOOOOO! I’m here! Hell-O-O 😀

        I was just thinking what a thankless job this was, being a blog administrator, when I read your hymn of praise to Athanasius & Leo. Ach well, I told myself, I started out with nothing & still have most of it left. Don’t take it to heart, I told myself.

        Then I thought, this day was a complete waste of make up – just read Dia Mhuire Duit’s post, I said to myself… (not sure if that really is a name or if it’s a new blogger with a drink problem…)

        Finally, I told myself not to get upset. After all, Dia Mhuire Duit is bound to be a man and most of them are annoying – although not all. Some are dead.

        Jealous? Me? Moi?

        NO, Dia Mhuire Duit, YOU’RE jealous because The Voices are talking to ME !

        • Editor

          Dia Mhuire Duit, unless I am mistaken, is an Irish Gaelic greeting in the holy names of Jesus and Mary. I thought you hailed from Irish stock?

          Anyway, you leave Dia Mhuire Duit alone. He/she obviously appreciates the efforts of the lower staff at Catholic Truth. Now if that’s not a nudge for a pay rise, I don’t know what is. So, stop frittering your cash away on make up and start making up my wages!!

          • Athanasius,

            I thought it likely to be an Irish greeting, perhaps invoking Our Lady but no sign of the Holy Name. And I knew Our Lady would enjoy the joke! Yes, I’m of Irish stock but recently we’ve been learning to speak English. Can’t wait to finish the course – I’m almost fluent (or should that be “fluid”?) 😀

            I’m onto that pay rise right away. You’re moving up the scale fast, from an annual pay in 3 figures, to 6 (£000.000)

            Now, I have to disappear for a bit – I’ve got a date with a guy called Rabbie Burns. Hails from Ayrshire. Wish him luck…

  9. I think that we can be certain that there will be no consecration of Russia during our present pope`reign.

    There`s more chance of Glasgow`s Barrowlands being done.

    • Frankier,

      Pope Francis supposedly requested on two occasions that Cardinal Policarpo Consecrate the Pontificate of the Pope to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. If this is the absolute truth, and that Consecration was carried out – Then it is illogical NOT TO CONSECRATE Russia to the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

      You might well be correct that Russia will not be consecrated by this Pope and the Bishops. For there is a decided contempt about Fatima and the consecration of Russia. We know it will be done and Our Lady said it would be late.

      If ten percent of the Austrian people held a 10 year campaign of Rosary crusades and the Russians up and left without a shot be fired. Just imagine, if ten percent of the world’s population held continuous Rosary crusades for the consecration to be done. How quickly would it be carried out.

      • TR

        I feel that the Pope who is destined to carry out the consecration will do it in the early days of his pontificate.

        • Frankier,

          It is more likely that a Pope will find himself having to do the consecration in response to some super power confrontation that develops suddenly and brings the world to the brink of war. But who knows what God has set out as the means by which the Pope and bishops will finally correspond with His will.

          • Athanasius

            It seems to me that, when you consider the state of the world in the present times, those things are going to happen/is happening during Pope Francis` reign and I certainly can`t see him carrying out the consecration.

            In fact, I doubt if he even believes in the Fatima message.

  10. Editor,

    If it makes you feel any better, I’ve always admired the sound, patient and charitable way you used to wield that rolling pin….

    I came across a passage in Trojan Horse in the City of God this afternoon which was a perfect commentary on Pope Francis. (BTW, Athanasius, I’m thoroughly embarrassed to admit that I had this book on my bookshelf all along, having started in way back in 2005 and never finished it. Yes, it’s indeed lonely at the top, Editor, but even lonelier when you can’t remember where the top is….)

    This is from Chapter 5, :The Vivification of Religion”:

    It is difficult to understand how the vivification of religion can be sought in a secularization of religion…True vivification requires that the supernatural spirit of Christ be fully thrown into relief. This means eliminating any blurring of the distinction between the natural and the supernatural. Yet the progressive Catholics opt for more blurring. They believe that vivification can come to pass through secularization….[by recommending] worldly activism and bohemian freedom…What the progressives call ‘leaving the Catholic ghetto’ is in reality giving up the Catholic and keeping the ghetto. They would replace the universal Church with the ghetto of universalism, with imprisonment in a stifling immanentism, with isolation in a world that sits in umbra mortis, the shadow of death…”

    It is painfully obvious, then, that Francis is the culmination of this false vivification, or renewal. Not, apparently, because he wishes the Church any harm (giving him the benefit of the doubt), but precisely the opposite: he is completely possessed by the idea that renewal consists in the embrace of the faults of humanity; thus he is driven to acquire the “smell of the sheep.” Clearly he is completely unaware that acquiring the smell of the sheep causes him and his fellow travelers to completely lose the sweet and supernatural fragrance of Our Lord and Our Lady, and the clouds of their incense that waft constantly through the halls of Tradition.

    • RCA Victor,

      Yes, that passage from Trojan Horse sums up precisely the agenda of the Modernist, and in particular this Pope. Well did Fr. Malachi Martin warn that if a Jesuit should ever become Pope we should run for the hills. The Jesuits sure ain’t what they used to be. Once champions of orthodoxy (at the Reformation), they became the chief architects and peddlers of the New Gospel of Modernism, whose poisonous doctrines have spread through the veins of the Mystical Body of Christ like a supernatural septicaemia.

      • Athanasius,

        I had no idea what a “septicaemia” was until I looked it up, but it would be a good thing to get rid of during Septuagesima!

      • I am forced to agree, albeit reluctantly because I have a great affection for the Jesuit order. It is sadly undeniable that the Jesuits are among the chief architects of the Conciliar and post-Conciliar debacle. Karl Rahner, in particular, has injected much poison into the body theologic which has spilled over into pastoral practice with disasterous consequences.

        The Order was founded on the principal of obedience and began to go awry when this principal was called into question. Not only, but its downfall illustrates the truth that institutional pride is every bit as poisonous as personal pride. My experience of contemporary Jesuits is of men who continually imply–but without saying as much–that they have received a special revelation which has been kept from the wider Church, to which they consider themselves infinitely superior. It is not unlike the gnosticism of old.

        • Prognosticum,

          The real architects at the heart of the Jesuit revolution against the Catholic Faith were Teilhard de Chardin and Henri de Lubac. Teilhard died in 1955, so it was left to Henri de Lubac to carry the Modernist evolutionary approach to doctrine into Vatican II. Heavliy censured and restricted during the reign of Pius XII, he was recalled by John XXIII and given a powerful role in the preparations for Vatican II. His influence in the construction of two of the most controversial documents of that Council, Gaudium et Spes and Lumen Gentium, is generally accepted. He succeeded in his task and the Catholic Faith has paid a heavy price ever since!

          Interestingly enough, Popes John Paul II, Benedict XVI and Francis have all sung the praises of this Jesuit theologian, once forbidden by the Magisterium to write or teach his dangerous doctrines.

          In fact, Benedict XVI, Ratzinger, was a particular friend and colleague of de Lubac, having founded together with him and other notorious disciples of the Nouvelle Théologie the International Theological Journal, Communio. This journal is what we might call the more restrained, perhaps more ambiguous, approach to the infiltration of Modernist thought into Catholic doctrine as opposed to the much more openly radical Concilium, co-founded by a number of individuals whose names once populated the Holy Office Index of ‘Those suspect of heresy’ including Karl Rhaner, Ratzinger’s one-time friend and fellow Index companion.

          So here are these two international theological journals vying with each other for supremacy in Catholic intellectual thought, one openly radical, the other less so and all the more dangerous for it, from whence sprung that novel idea of a so-called “conservative” liberal rapproachment between Sacred Tradition and Modernism termed “the hermenuetic of continuity”.

          The process puts me very much in mind of how the 20th century enemies of the Church went about the business of de-Christianising the world. On the one hand there was greedy Capitalism, which suppressed the masses under heavy workloads and poor wages. On the other, Communism with false promises of a fairer distribution of wealth that ended in worse subjugation and greater poverty. The same hand was pulling both strings, vying one power against the other as apparent antagonists. The result was a materialistic class struggle that left no room for the supernatural life of the soul. Hence the completely atheistic climate we live in today.

          Neutralising the Catholic Church was essential in this process, as the great Encyclical Letters of the pre-Council Popes, exposing the works of the enemies of the faith while exhorting the virtues of true Christian Social Justice, amply demonstrate.

          And so we ended up with a purely pastoral Council being called and then usurped by Modernist thinkers who used it as a vehicle for introducing evolutionism into doctrine. The result has been confusion in everything that was once certain and established and a consequent corruption of doctrine which, while not Magisterially imposed (which is impossible), has nevertheless become the “ordinary form” in universal believe and practice, a form which is almost devoid of the divine but saturated in the secular.

          This explains all the social justice concerns above those of the soul, the commitment to ecumenism and inter-religion above supernatural truth and infallible dogma, an incessant fixation with human dignity above the dignity of God, etc. It is, in effect, what Pius XII prophetically warned of, viz., a Divine Church being turned into a human institution, the logical end of Modernism.

          Hence we find ourselves under this particular Pontificate of Francis, who, differing from his immediate predecessors, is more a Concilium thinker than a Communio one, with all the radical innovations that entails, such as the Mandatum changes and the recent moral controversies.

          These were issues that the Communio Popes would never have contemplated and for which fidelity they have wrongly been dubbed “traditional” or “conservative” Popes. A truly Traditional Pope would be sound in both faith and moral teaching, not just in one or other of the two essential elements which, like the union of body and soul, constitutes a fullness of orthodoxy.

          Anyway, I fear I am beginning to ramble on a bit now so I’ll leave it at that. I hope I haven’t put everyone to sleep!

    • RCA Victor,

      “Yes, it’s indeed lonely at the top, Editor, but even lonelier when you can’t remember where the top is…”

      Hilarious! That really did make me laugh out loud!

      And this is beautiful:

      “…acquiring the smell of the sheep causes [Pope Francis} and his fellow travelers to completely lose the sweet and supernatural fragrance of Our Lord and Our Lady, and the clouds of their incense that waft constantly through the halls of Tradition.and his fellow travelers to completely lose the sweet and supernatural fragrance of Our Lord and Our Lady, and the clouds of their incense that waft constantly through the halls of Tradition.

      When you’ve finished that book of poetry, remember to come back here and talk to us!

    • Thank you for this quotation. I have the volume in question and you have encouraged me to re-read at a distance of more than ten years.

      Of course, at the heart of Francis’ thinking sits a fundamentally flawed understanding of the Church-World relationship. He seems to think that the World is benign with regard to the Church, or at worst neutral, when the World is in reality inimical to the Church.

  11. As a priest friend of mine is wont to say, these are evil times. One could talk about Holy Father Francis until the cows come home, but that will not make him change. Suffice to say that he possesses three traits which not infrequently combine to devastating effect in human affairs: a mediocre intelligence (cunning does not equate to intelligence), a lack of prudence (prudence, in my opinion, is the Jesuit virtue) and an ignorance of, as well as a disdain for, history.

    All of us who love the Church and are possessed by Tradition must use the arms of prayer and fasting to repel this onslaught of the evil one who will use this Pope to make clerical celibacy an option and in so doing will further divide the Body of Christ.

    Pope Benedict, you have a great deal to answer for. Cursed be the day you met Cardinal Bertone.

    • Prognosticum,

      You might remind your priest that if we DON’T talk about Pope Francis, we are neglecting our prophetic duty, as baptised and confirmed Catholics, to warn our less informed neighbours, who may be (and are being) led astray by his constant talk of (false) humility and (false) mercy. Not to mention his open assaults on the traditional Faith and his personal attacks on those “rebels and idolaters” who adhere to it.

      As I have said frequently on this blog, prayer and fasting is the equivalent of our everyday meals, essential, but very basic, nourishment. And the reason we take our everyday meals is to fit us for work, not to sit around lamenting the unemployment statistics. Similarly, the reason we pray and fast is to fit us for all the various efforts to which we are duty bound – including the Catholic apostolate.

      If this is the same priest you’ve quoted before on this blog, I’d caution you to listen to him with your critical faculty on full alert. It’s sadly one of the major problems we face today in countering this crisis, that the clergy – even the best of them – are often part of the problem, albeit, possibly, for the best of motives. Motives, however, don’t change the rightness or wrongness of an act or advice. So, before you tell me, be assured that I have no doubt that he is a wonderful priest etc. He’s just like most, it seems, not very clear thinking about the role of the laity. Afraid that we will do harm and so on. Tell him not to worry. Tell him I’m still hearing The Voices. That should allay his fears 😀

  12. Prognosticum

    Prayer and fasting are, as you say, crucial to ending this present crisis in the Church and the Papacy. However, I would caution that action, or rather reaction, on our part is also a duty. St. Paul demonstrated this with St. Peter, as did St. Athanasius with Liberius and the Arian episcopate of his time. If we love the Church and the Pope then we must have the strength of character to resist dangerous innovations and make it known to all why we act as we do. Silence is not an option under Francis.

    As for Pope Benedict, he knew precisely what he was doing when he abdicated the Papacy and what kind of dangerous precedent he was setting. Yes, he did some good things for Tradition while he was Pope, but let us not forget that Ratzinger the theologian is a seasoned Modernist, once on the Holy Office Index of those suspect of heresy. Because of the good things he did while in office we tend to overlook the serious down side of the man over many decades. Still, I would have him back tomorrow in place of Francis.

    • I did not mean to imply that Francis should not be criticised. I meant rather that he is impervious to criticism.

      He was elected in order to pursue an agenda. And pursue it he will.

      • Lol again. I remember looking at some Muslim sites after Pope Benedict had visited a mosque and the learned opinion seemed to be that he had thereby converted to Islam!

  13. I’ve only just been able to visit the blog after a time of computer problems and I must say that when I first read this papal rant elsewhere, I thought, like Chris Ferrara, that this Pope is most decidedly no longer in full possession of his marbles, if indeed he ever was. Looking back to the very beginning of his pontificate, he seems to me to have shown a steadily-worsening grip on reality, discernible for one thing, in his worsening insensate hatred of traditionalists. There is nothing rational in this rant – it’s downright embarrassing.. I suppose I should say he shows a worsening grip on ‘Catholic reality’, as that is all we’re privy to, but I wouldn’t mind betting that his friends could also tell us a thing or two. I’ve no patience with the view that because he’s a Jesuit he must have a formidable intellect. The Jesuits used indeed to be formidable intellectuals, but that was before their Catholic wits were rotted by their very own Pierre Teillard de Chardin et al, and it was through the pre-conciliar Jesuits that Modernism came eventually to hold almost the entire Church in its deadly grip.

    I haven’t had any experience of mainstream Catholics beginning to see that all is not quite right in La-la Land. Rather, having been softened up for more than 40 years, they seem to see every aberration and novelty, heretical or otherwise, as the ‘teaching of the Church’, as we have seen from one blogger at the beginning of this debate. I think the immediate post-conciliar problems were caused by fatal ‘obedience’, as has often been said here, but this is no longer the case. Obedience is a thing of the past. Self-interest, worldly comfort and feeling good are the order of the day, so let’s have women priests, conscience-permitted contraception and sacrilege, approval of sodomy, sodomite ‘marriage’ and so on, but let’s have none of those traditionalists, we must hate them like good Pope francis hates them. Arrrrrgh! Perhaps, as it’s somewhat difficult to accuse a pope of heresy, his doctors may one day pronounce him unfit for office by reason of insanity. Dream on.

    • Christina,

      I wonder if it’s a steadily worsening grip on reality, an accelerated loss of his limited number of marbles, or just the angry reactions of a narcissist and tin horn Latin American dictator to his self-righteous revolution being resisted (e.g. by The Remnant’s petition). The angrier he gets, the more personal and vitriolic his attacks become, and the already thin Catholic veneer falls away completely to reveal an emperor with no clothes…

    • Christina,

      His attitude to traditionalists is more nuanced than you think. I know for a fact that he has expressed his appreciation for certain individual priests of the Fraternity of St Pius X whom he regards as exercising particularly fruitful apostolates. He has even gone out of his way to meet such priests and encourage them to ‘return’. And I am prepared to bet that Bishop Fellay would get a better deal out of him than he would ever have got out of Benedict.

      Of course, he does not–cannot–understand traditionalists and their reluctance to embrace the Conciliar and post-Conciliar reforms. But as a liberal–of sorts–his default position is that there is space in the Church for everyone.

  14. Prognosticum, the accusation of obstinacy and the sin of idolatry gives little room for nuance. Can you expand on what you say, especially on knowing for a fact that he has expressed appreciation for the ‘fruitful apostolates’ of certain SSPX priests?

    • I vaguely recall reading somewhere that Bergoglio and the SSPX had a cordial relationship in Buenos Aires, but I too would be interested in Prognosicum’s elaboration.

      As for “there is space in the Church for everyone,” (which was actually Benedict’s approach as well) Francis’ diatribes don’t seem to support that. More likely, “There is space in the Church for everyone who agrees with me.”

    • Christina, on this video Bishop Fellay suggests the the Pope is targeting “conservative American Catholics” and not Traditional Catholics. At least he says he was told that by a prelate in the Vatican. He also says that the Society have the Pope’s ear. He really puts a different light on Pope Francis. But, I warn you, it is long!

      • Crofterlady,

        I see you’ve also posted this video on the GD thread, but it would be good to have it on the “pro-life thread as well” (See Kill Rapists not babies) if you think it worth posting there.

        I’ll remove it from the GD thread as we’re running out of space there and, Murphy’s Law, some blighter is liable to start discussing it on the one thread which is about to close!

        I notice when you posted it on the GD thread you remarked that we were no doubt discussing it somewhere… but worry not, you’re getting there. One of these days you’ll hit on the right thread right away! I just hope I’m around to see it…

        Looking forward to hearing the Bishop’s talk.

      • Thank you Crofterlady, and what a wonderful Superior General the SSPX has. I was amused to hear him use the word ‘crazy’ quite a few times in that particular context.

  15. I think Prognosticum is referring precisely to the cordial friendship Cardinal Bergoglio showed to the SSPX Superior in Argentina, which he followed through on as Pope when he kept his promise to have the SSPX in that country declared “a Catholic institution”.

    It is also true that Pope Bergoglio sent some senior prelates to examine SSPX seminaries followed by a declaration of validity on SSPX absolutions during the Holy Year of Mercy, actions on his part that seem to contradict his harsh words for Traditional Catholics in general.

    So the question is this: Is Pope Francis trying to lure the SSPX into a false sense of belonging with a view to crushing it at some future time. Or is he genuinely of the opinion that there is a place for the SSPX in his vision of a broad Church based on the Anglican model? The jury is still out on that.

    One thing is for sure, his favourable words and actions in regard to the SSPX will forever stand as Papal testimony that the SSPX is not formally considered to be outside the Church, as so many lying enemies within have consistently maintained. For it is not within the power of even a Pope to accord Sacramental faculties to a formally schismatic organisation. So whatever his motives, Pope Francis has done a great service to the apostolate of the SSPX in the Church.

  16. I’d say that most ‘mainstream’ Catholics tend to go to mass and read the Catholic papers without really developing their faith. They seem enthralled by this pope, and won’t change unless they encounter a deepening of the faith. It’s simply that their faith is lukewarm and needs to be ignited. Pope Francis’ modern traits seem inspiring to them…

    • Yes, top marks, Crofterlady! Ten out of ten!

      I saw that yesterday and thought seriously about using it as a thread here, but didn’t – just as well because guess who would have gone off and posted the link on the GD thread? Yip. top marks for getting it right again – oor Crofterlady! 😀

%d bloggers like this: