The following comes from an Oct. 16 story by Russell Shaw on Aleteia.com. Shaw is a former spokesmen for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
When Pope Francis today (October 19) formally declares Pope Paul VI “Blessed,” the event will recall one of the most painful periods in the history of the Church together with the long-suffering servant pope who stood at the helm when the storm was at its worst.
Pope Paul came to the papacy in 1963 in many ways superbly qualified for his daunting new role. When death took him 15 years later, he left Peter’s chair bearing an almost visible burden of disappointment and grief, having absorbed the shock of a hectic and deeply disturbing decade and a half.
His credentials for the papacy were peerless. As a close collaborator of Pope Pius XII from 1937 to 1954 Monsignor Montini had acquired rare insight into the structures and personalities of the Church. As Archbishop of Milan from 1954 until his election as pope, he’d gained hands-on experience in governing one of the world’s premier sees.
After initial skepticism about Vatican II, he emerged as one of the council’s leaders in the crucial first session, playing a central role in shaping its agenda. When Pope John XXIII died between sessions, the conclave of June 1963 chose him as pope on the firth ballot. Now he appeared poised for a pontificate of historic significance.
And so it was. But not in the way anyone expected.
His tenure had its high points—the historic meeting in Jerusalem in January 1964 with Orthodoxy’s Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras I, the triumphant close in December 1965 of Vatican II, the council he’d guided through three tumultuous sessions to a conclusion that seemed to promise bright hopes for the future, his trip soon after that to the United Nations in New York where he electrified the world with a moving address in which he cried out, “No more war!”
But something else, little noted at that moment, was soon to emerge that would change everything—for the Pope and the entire Church.
At the time Paul came to office, a commission established by Pope John to study the population question had been weighing the Church’s teaching on birth control for several years. Would the Church accept the Pill? Could it allow other methods of contraception? Questions abounded, together with leaks from what by now was being called the “birth control commission.”
Fed by people with agendas, speculation that change was coming soon emerged. And Pope Paul studied the arguments and prayed. Too long, some people said. With the passing of time, the speculation became a widely shared certainty that change was a done deal. Then, on July 25, 1968, Humanae Vitae appeared, and the angry advocates of change confronted an uncompromising condemnation of contraception in any and all forms.
The exodus from the priesthood and religious life had begun several years earlier, but now it was blamed on the Pope. Defenders of Paul VI and his encyclical were either ignored or vilified. The virus of dissent—not only about contraception but much else besides—spread rapidly and, with media support, soon became entrenched. The “smoke of Satan,” Paul famously said, had seeped into the Church.
After Humanae Vitae Paul’s pontificate continued another decade–10 years that continued to witness innovative papal actions and important new documents. But the man at the center of it appeared increasingly weary and sad.
Was his sanctity forged and tested during that last, difficult decade? Pope Francis calls Humanae Vitae prophetic. As his beatification nears, those of us who admired Paul VI say: At last he’s getting his due.
Click here to see Pope Paul VI on a Visit Outside the Vatican.
To read the original story, click here.
The name of this website is interesting and probably informative. The actual Greek word for truth is “Aletheia” which the webmasters have intentionally misspelled, at least if you believe their “About” page: https://www.aleteia.org/en/world/article/about-us-6342305057341440 Seems as though their aim is to present a partial truth or maybe something that looks deceptively like truth but isn’t really true.
Or maybe they just don’t edit very well since the article states that Bl. Pope Paul VI was chosen pope “on the firth ballot.”
This is the pope which made himself basically a CEO of the Church. He was like Hamlet; he could seldom make up his mind, and then it was too late. He introduced all the reforms which have proven to be the downfall of the Catholic Church. He himself said that the smoke of Satan has entered the Church, but then with his liberal friends, Satan was allowed to come in. These are proven facts.
Father Karl, I agree with you, the article has things in usual liberal perspective blaming things upside down. Many Roman Catholics didn’t believe in preventing contraception nor abortion, so the smoke of Satan wasn’t the point there, the true point was the abolishment of the efficacy of the 7 Holy Latin Sacraments to 7 powerless modern rites still labeled as sacraments by the V2 church.
I’d like to share this Vatican (AP) article with you and others. It was published by one of many newspapers in the world that perhaps in our days gets smothered by the news of that day, the Lunar Landing and Walks by the Apollo 12 Astronauts. This I have found in the archives in the Gettysburg Times of Gettysburg, PA, and the Oswego Argus-Press of WI, both dated 19 November 1969. It counters what Benedict the XVIth claimed not long ago.
Pope Defends New Rites
VATICAN CITY (AP) — Pope Paul VI defended controversial new rites for the Roman Catholic Mass today and said all Catholics “must promptly adhere” to them.
His words, at his regular general audience, met recent criticism by Antonio Cardinal Bacci and Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani, two semi-retired conservative members of the Roman Curia, who had suggested the new Mass was almost “heretical”.
Recalling that the second Vatican Ecumenical Council had asked for the changes in the Mass, Pope Paul said that using the new rites was “an act of obedience, a fact of coherence with the Church itself, a step forward in its authentic tradition, a demonstration of fidelity and vitality to which all must promptly adhere.”
Moreover, the Church alone has the legitimate worship of sacrifice, and the salutary use of the Sacraments, which are the efficacious instruments of divine grace, used by God to produce true holiness. Hence, to possess true holiness, we must belong to this Church. The Church therefore it is clear, is holy, and holy because she is the body of Christ, by whom she is sanctified, and in whose blood she is washed. Catechism of Pius V
CCC 675 Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers. The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the “mystery of iniquity” in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh.
Well, it seems as if you and Doug are among those whose faith has been shaken.
Faith in God, no, faith in ministers who seemingly opt to teach a new gospel – absolutely.
The Gospel taught by the ministers of the Catholic Church is that of Jesus Christ. There is no other. I have never heard a different gospel declared at the Catholic Church.
But once again, if you did hear a priest preach a Gospel different from that of Jesus Christ (which I doubt) you should notify the bishop. You should not lose faith in the Church.
I haven’t lost Faith in the Church, mous. Your doubts are your own.
If you had left it at the first sentence, you would have not sinned. (unless you were lying)
Correction:
your scruples are your own, mous. God bless and try to be well. Give your doubts to God and He will heal you.
Ann Malley, can’t you just be a nice person?
Anon, where in the Catechism of Pius V is your quote?
Article IX “I Believe in the Holy Catholic Church; The Communion of Saints”
First Part of This Article “I Believe in the Holy Catholic Church”
The Marks of the Church
Holy
Last paragraph https://www.catholicapologetics.info/thechurch/catechism/ApostlesCreed09.shtml
Anon: I got it thanks.
Whether or not Pope Paul VI is in Heaven is known only to God. But is not the beatification of him and the canonization of Popes John XXIII and John Paul II de facto the canonization of the Second Vatican Council and it’s radical departure from Church doctrine, liturgy and praxis? We have seen the attempts by Pope Francis and Cardinal Kasper at the Synod to change Church doctrine and to punish those (Cardinal Raymond Burke) who stand in their way. And these attempts are all couched by the references to the Council, of how we need to see things in a “new” light. As if God changes, or His ways reach an expiration date.
Pope Paul VI was indeed correct about the ‘smoke of satan’ entering the sanctuary. For whatever reason, he was either unwilling or unable to do anything about it. And thus, now we have a Church where 2000 years of teaching and doctrine are suddenly up for vote. That is why it is difficult to accept these recent canonizations/beatifications of popes who endeavored to ‘dialogue’ with the world and shun tradition, rather than evangelize it with the timeless and beautiful Mass and the Church’s clear and unchangeable doctrine, which is only the teachings of her Divine Spouse.
Nothing has changed.
Many Cardinals, Bishops, and Priests do not encourage people to read the Bible, so everyone will know the teachings of God.
Now we have the CCC since 1997.
Yet people are not encouraged that to read that in entirety either.
The only new thing is the heresy of “GRADUALISM” to condone or affirm people in their mortal sins and the permissiveness of allowing everyone to receive Holy Communion unworthily.
(This amounts to throwing Holy Scripture and the CCC under the bus. And those ignorant of the Bible and CCC don’t even realize what is happening.)
It is not pastoral, nor charitable, nor merciful to affirm anyone in their mortal sin.
How he suffered? Look what Pope Paul VI did to the Church! He destroyed the Mass; he destroyed the Catholic Church, he destroyed Catholic culture. Basically he was a huge train wreck. Because of him, the Catholic Church is in shambles. The liberals want to glorify him, but true followers of Christ see the havoc and destruction he caused. Instead of unifying Christianity, he caused more separations. If he is canonized, I believe it will be a terrible error. Some who destroys the vineyard of the Lord cannot be seen as a saint. Ave Maria Purissima!
I agree. He took away our Mass and gave us birth control.
Yes and he started smoking in the Vatican! He personally gave Dan Brown the Da Vinci Code. And he wouldn’t wear that pesky Papal tiara!
No Warren Goddard, Pope Paul Vi did not give us birth control. In fact he prophesied quite wisely against it.
By birth control I mean artificial contraception.
Anne<
Natural Family Planning is natural in that it monitors natural fertility cycles and uses abstinence during selected fertile periods to regulate and space (1) conceptions for ideal family size. (2)
Without abstinence, regulation is impossible (3) and, without regulation conceptions may increase excessively (4).
Conceptions increasing “excessively” implies that conception is natural; an act of nature alone – Deism.
Some couples, though, believe that God is the conception soul Supplier and faithfully entrust their family size to His plan for peopling Heaven.
“As long as there is no sincere determination to let the Creator carry on His work as He chooses, then human selfishness will always find new sophistries and excuses to still the voice of conscience.” Pope Pius XII 1958 Address To Large Families.
1.. Pope Paul VI 1968 no. 16 On The Regulation of Birth.
2. Karol Wojtyla (Pope John Paul II) p.243 Love and Responsibility.
3. Ibid., p. 284.
4. Ibid., p. 238.
Anne, why then is his Humane Vitae encyclical entitled “ON THE REGULATION OF BIRTH”?
oh fer god sake. What small minds you leave us with o, lord. Can you please give us something more substantial to battle?
That is what the encyclical was discussing — the artificial regulation of birth versus the natural means for spacing children for a good reason, such as a woman’s health. You do know that children can even be spaced by breast feeding. Do you not? I am not sure all that was discussed in the encyclical, but it certainly was an apt subtitle for the encyclical. I have it, but have not read it for quite some time since I am a senior.
Warren Goddard, regarding your post today, October 24, at 7:40 pm, without getting too much into my private life, I used to belong to and contribute to the Couple to Couple League. I was taking a medication at that time that could have caused a deformity in an unborn child, a serious enough reason to use natural family planning I believe. I know what natural family planning is. I just do not understand your comment about Pope Paul Vi, now St. Pope Paul Vi having given us “birth control”. He did not.
Correction: Blessed Pope Paul VI.
While Paul VI’s great encyclical on birth control proved ever so prophetic and true, I still find serious fault with him. He destroyed the mass. His liberalism was one of the causes of the almost total disappearance of true and faithful catechesis. He himself realized the harm he had done to the church. Why is all of this overlooked. I fear our new progressive Jesuit pope will do much the same. Please pray that our church can survive his tenure.
Dear Alan, Blessed Paul died in 1978. Ratzinger has had his finger on the switch in one way or the other ever since. Blame him for whatever problems you find the the Church because in one way or the other, every document, every policy, every appointment since 1978 has had HIS imprint, not Paul’s.
I find your tone rather telling, Anonymous, ‘Blessed Paul’ as opposed to ‘Ratzinger.’ Why such rancor and lack of respect? Same goes for the anger behind ‘HIS’.
Sounds as if you may have your own ax to grind.
Oh Ann Malley, Critic of the Century, oh ever Perfect One. In case you didn’t know it, Paul VI has been beatified and is therefore referred to by the official title “Blessed”. But you in your zeal for something to criticize seem ignorant of such a basic fact of Catholicism.
Of course, Paul VI may now be called ‘Blessed’. I was referring to the derogatory tone you directed at the Pope Emeritus.
So while you equate knowledge of a new blessed not even a week old with basic Catholic facts, you zing right over the common courtesy of treating a living person with due veneration if only for the office he holds.
No wonder you are confused. Get better, mous.
Dear Tone Police, AKA Ann Malley. How about you police your own tone for a change? Oh high and pius one, your tone is almost always so condescending to everyone around you you have lost any credibility on the matter.
“Oh high and pius one, your tone is almost always so condescending to everyone around you you have lost any credibility on the matter.” = A poor “anonymous hostage” to the father of lies and a possible candidate for becoming # 21
“As for his work as an exorcist Father Farao says,” Despite its popularity in the media, exorcism is really rare,” explains Father Farao. “I’ve only been involved in about twenty of them but, when it does happen, it’s a very powerful experience.”
Thank you, Anonymous, for you loving reply in defense of Pope Emeritus Benedict. That says much about you. Regarding being pius (pious), I cannot help what you think, obviously. You are your own mous. But do not ascribe the feelings of superiority you struggle with onto others – you do yourself a disservice.
That said, a tone does not negate logic, Anonymous. Perhaps you should focus more on the meat of the issue and less on seasoning. Salt and peppered air doesn’t make a meal.
Allan,
We have God’s promise that it will survive. How many will be left in it is another question!
May God have mercy on an amoral Amerika and His Church!
Viva Cristo Rey!
Yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher, Founding Director
Concerned Roman Catholics of America, Inc
In my mind, John Paul II had an answer to the new rite of the Mass, and he recognized that there is room for the traditional Mass, from the books prior to 1962, and gave those of us attached to that Mass the ability to petition for it, and to be able to attend it. The order which is dedicated to it is the FSSP, with priests who are formed in the traditional way. Regardless of all the posturing about what Paul VI did or did not do, for me that one act by John Paul II was meaningful and monumental for the Church. The answer for anyone who is not happy with the changes that were made, find a personal parish with FSSP priests who are dedicated to the sanctification of their congregants souls. THAT is the only answer to all the questions that have revolved around the secular press releases about “change in the the Church”. Bottom line, if we are to be included in those called AND chosen, we must put on the “new man” receive the sacraments frequently and earnestly, heartfully, so that we are personally prepared to meet the Master of the Wedding Feast. The gospel from the 19th Sunday after Pentecost (1962 books) will answer any questions. I don’t want to be thrown out into the darkness, where there will be “weeping and gnashing of teeth” (look to Jesus, He is ultimately still the head of His Church, He is still in charge).
Blessed Pope Paul VI was a great pope. He, along with the other post-Vatican II popes have helped saved the world from World War III occurring, which would surely have resulted in nuclear holocaust and the wiping out of the human race. Praise be to God for his great service!
This reply is to Jeremiah’s post. Don’t you think, that a strong, faithful Church, with a strong backbone of prayer, true practice of the Faith, and a correct Mass and Sacraments, according to God’s Plan– is the best thing, that can help save the world from a terrible war?? Plus– Our Lady of Fatima had plenty to say, on this subject– avoiding a terrible future war! I believe all that Our Lady of Fatima tried to say to us! However– it seems that perhaps many of our modern Popes, would not completely agree with me!
“…a strong, faithful Church, with a strong backbone of prayer, true practice of the Faith, and a correct Mass and Sacraments, according to God’s Plan– is the best thing,”
Precisely so, Linda Maria. Thank you again for cutting through the mustard and getting to the meat.
God bless!
I thought that is what we have? A true Mass, seven sacraments, parish faith formation, etc. How is that different from before VII, except for form? When the Priest says the words of consecration in the NO Mass, they are the same as the older form of the Mass. There is still transubstantiation is there not? How are the sacraments different. We have the Rites of Initiation, Baptism, Eucharist and Confirmation, Anointing of the sick, Reconciliation, Holy Orders, Matrimony. What has changed?.
What has changed? = Fidelity to “all” Church Teaching
CCC 675 “The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth will unveil the “mystery of iniquity” in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth.”
Archbishop Wilton Gregory Promotes “Gay Pride” March in Atlanta
https://eponymousflower.blogspot.com/2014/10/archbishop-wilton-gregory-promotes-gay.html#comment-form
I will sum it like this for you Bob, how we pray, effects how we believe, effects how we live….if you cannot see any changes you are truly blind. Wreck the liturgy and you wreck the world
Paul VI is a most interesting Pope, not in an individual way, but as the chief character in a play written by the Holy Ghost. Certainly, Paul was an enigma, being so well prepared for his position, and yet presiding over the destruction of centuries of liturgy, belief, and Traditions. “Fr. Karl” makes a plausible point of Paul’s Hamlet-like persona, and its tragic results.
And yet, even with all these failures, Paul was responsible for “Humanae Vitae,” an astonishing work of Papal theological art. Even in a time of sexual crudity, a time of Satan, the Holy Father stood firm on a topic of supreme importance. He turned the Catholic Church away from its “Lambeth Moment” and towards affirming its dependence on God and His will in bringing children into the world.
Paul made simply awful mistakes; mistakes not likely to be repeated on today’s stage with the power of social media to influence policy. However, Paul also stood alone in the harsh light of public criticism and bowed his head to the Holy Ghost, when it counted. Many Traditionalists see Paul as the Devil’s tool on Earth, but his role in the Church requires a more nuanced understanding.
We must be grateful for Paul’s ultimate strength. Recall that Peter — St. Peter — did just about everything wrong, including publicly denying Christ three times. When it counted, however, Peter stood tall. This is why all must pray for Francis.
The last two pontiffs in the Roman Catholic Church before V2 were Pope St. Pius the Vth who reigned in the 15th century and Pope St. Pius the Xth who reigned at the the turn of the 19th century. Imagine 400 years had gone by in cannonizing two holy non-martyred pontiffs. It goes to show how strict the cannonization standards were back then for the many centuries, as the Church would not want any stain on her reputation for cannonizing someone who later was found to be a heretic or something,
Now we fast forward to the 21st century, and in just a few very short years after diluting the canonization standards, 3 V2 church leaders are canonized amidst much controversy as many in the faithful saw the bad fruits of their works. It is though, for the V2 Church to show face and credibility and substantiate that its leaders have gone in their minds the right way, justifying all the changes, that the V2 Church needs to host 3 canonizations. Politics makes strange bed fellows so they say and it is so sad how its smoke has invaded the Vatican.
Today is the feast of Pope St. John Paul II. Please pray to him.
St. Pope John Paul II, we STILL love you.
I will never forget the Sunday, in 1969, of our parish’s first Novus Ordo Missae. The “Mass of Pope Paul VI!” Our Pastor appeared, in a new, long chasuble, similar to a Protestant minister’s robe. A heavy “Protestantized table altar” was moved in front of the main High Altar. The new, Protestant elements, were vaguely recognizable, from previously seeing Protestant ministers, occasionally speaking on television. The church organ and choir were gone (no music), there were no altar boys, no prayers at the foot of the altar. To the consternation of many, the priest turned to face the congregation, and gave a Protestant-style “Pauline greeting.” The professional, impersonal role of the priest, (the “alter Christus”) became personalized, and “humanistic.” “Father John Doe” was now “Fr. John,” like an adolescent boy, “learning and growing up.” The congregation was no longer worshipping God, it was “discovering their humanness,” with a lot of silly “1960’s pscyho-babble” concepts. Many people wondered if the Consecration in the New Mass was still authentic, despite being authorized by Rome.
Not all, nor most of all those changes that you mentioned, were in the Vatican II documents. Some priests took it too far and just rebelled and did things that were not according to the documents. Some realized their mistakes later and tried to rectify them, others just got worse.There are still priests and laity who bring in changes that are not according to the rubrics of the Ordinary Mass. I think what Pope Francis is doing is trying to strike a balance between the two extremes — being too strict or being too lax. That is at least one of the things he included in his comments in the final Synod document.
This post is to reply to Anne T., Anonymous, and anyone else interested. I had to make some generalizations, with very few words, due to word limitations, of these posts! I would suggest to anyone interested, to carefully read through both the old Latin Mass text, and note all the details– not only the text, but all the other details, regarding how the Tridentine Mass was said. Next– compare it with the text, and all the details, of the correct way, as authorized by Rome (not some lone priest’s misinterpretations!) of properly celebrating the New Mass! You will then see for yourself– just why so many in the Catholic world (including well-instructed, devout Catholic schoolchildren!) were deeply shocked with the New Mass! I have no authority, of course– to make a proper judgment, before God, between the two Masses! What does GOD want? Was the Protestant Reformation correct in some ways, in God’s eyes? Were Catholics misled, in previous centuries? Were we all taught wrong? Really– what does GOD say??
Linda Maria, I too was brought up with beautiful Biblical English. First from the Kind James Bible and then from the more accurate English of the Douay-Rheims Catholic version. I know that the English, and I suspect the Latin, of the newer Mass cannot compare in beauty, majesty, and possibly some of the accuracy, of the older Mass. Personally, I wish that Vatican II had used the Latin of the 1962 pre Vatican II Mass but with the English updated somewhat, but it did not happen. From what I have heard the Spanish translation of the newer Mass (Ordinary Mass) was not riddled so much, but remained true, or truer, to the Latin. I have sympathy for those who loved the older Mass, and had so much stripped away so fast, including much of the beauty and traditional furniture inside the churches themselves — statues, kneelers, altar rails and so forth. I remember one beautiful Catholic church in California that looked like nothing but a union hall by the time some priests got through with it. Some did it with good intentions, thinking too much statuary was a scandal and would lead to idolatry, but they should have taught the parishioners, and the Protestants, what the Communion of Saints is really all about and how Biblical it really is. Some priests were poorly educated themselves biblically and did not know how to answer Protestant objections. Some Catholics, both cradle and converts, are trying so very hard to remedy that now to make up for some of the misunderstandings and mistaken ideas of our past. Churches should be orderly and neat without clutter, but not stripped of all their traditional beauty. I am lucky enough to be able to go to two churches in the surrounding area that still have altar rails. I do think, though, that some churches decided to take them out because their population was getting older and could not kneel as easily. Just my opinion.
On the other hand, Linda Maria, if the Communion of Saints and the proper use of statues are not explained to some baptized people properly, they have often fallen into idolatry. Some now are confusing the Virgin Mary with the Goddess Isis, the Aztec Goddess Tonantzin and other mother goddesses, although the Virgin Mary and her Son teach just the opposite of these goddess religions. The Virgin Mary took the place of those goddesses and crushed them and is not anything like them. Many of them had the snake for their symbols, but the Lord Jesus, the Virgin Mary and true Christians are said to crush the heads of snakes, often meaning false pagan religions.
All in one sunday? Be real! Whatever protestentaizing you believe you experienced did not happen on that one Sunday. Stop with the drama already!
Stop attempting to undercut the real life experience of others just because the history they tell doesn’t fit the narrative you’re attempting to promote, mous. The fact that you tell others to ‘get real’ is really rather a joke considering you cannot even venture out past your own anonymity.
How much do they pay you to attempt to squelch the memories of others?
Ann Malley, how much are you being paid to undermine the Catholic Faith?
Can’t pay me enough to undermine the Catholic Faith, Anonymous. That’s precisely why I post here. Thanks for asking. But it would appear the comfort zone of supposedly being in full communion was/is your price. Whatever full communion means these days. Lots of division under that banner.
Ann, doesn’t this anon. remind you of Wormtongue? Hissssss.
You are right Dana! What a beautiful compliment to the many truths that both you and Ann Malley post on CCD.
Our anonymous trolls are so very transparent. They bend over backwards to protect perversions and even tell us that Sodom and Gomorrah was severely punished because of it’s lack of hospitality to visitors and yet when any visitor reminds them of God’s Revealed Truth then all of that “hospitality spin” selectively goes right out of the window.
Catherine, you should review the 9 ways of cooperating with another’s sin. You know that Ann Malley does not attend a Catholic Mass and tells as many falsehoods about the faith as that nun with the False stories on the Blessed Mother.
Why are you risking hell by supporting her? Just what do you believe? She has either led you astray (she has also messed up Dana) or you are she and you are the schismatic.
I did notice a post of yours where you called Anonymous mous like she does. Didn’t know what to make of it. And I noticed that you spelled your name wrong once, Caterine, like you are using more than one name and had to retype and messed up?
It is not really important if you are she except that then you should learn the Faith a lot better and stop posting falsehoods and lies. I notice she could not answer again when someone asked her what the Pope had said that conflicted with the Faith. She (you?) is just a troll who likes to stir up trouble and lead the innocent astray. She can never back up her accusations. Please get right with God. This is a time in the Church when we need all hands on deck not goofing around in the lifeboats pretending to be a false savior.
Ann Malley, OK so you do it for free. Great. You seem to have a problem with grandiosity. We already have a Savior. And we have the True Church. If you were really interested in helping people to the True Catholic Faith, you would actually know it. Anybody can bellyache about Church leadership. You are no different than Call to Action, Dignity USA or Voice of the People.
“This is a time in the Church when we need all hands on deck not goofing around in the lifeboats pretending to be a false savior.” = I couldn’t agree more…. so stop hiding and trying to silence those who do speak up.
There is only one Savior but the recent Synod showed that there are those who think they have more mercy than Our Saviour. I am sorry to disappoint you but whoever is posting as Caterine must be intentionally writing that name. Yes I saw that name too. Perhaps that is really their name. Who are we to judge? I did not write those posts so once again you are the one who is mistaken about thinking that I wrote them. I did write the word mous, though. I think the word “mous” is probably a much more endearing little nickname than writing the name kanonymous.
Boy, Dana, Worm Tongue aka: mouses are all around. “…that nun with the False stories on the Blessed Mother.” Not sure what mous is referring to now, but whatever. Can’t get a straight answer, or even a moniker, from our stalwart defenders. Defenders of ‘what?’ is the question. But that’s okay, too.
Keep spinning on your own dime, mous. As for your advice: “…If you were really interested in helping people to the True Catholic Faith, you would actually know it.” I would say, follow your own advice, mous, instead of getting all fusterpated when your cyber-foot stomping doesn’t elicit the response you demand.
And when you get really riled, look back to CCC 675 and think about it. Any assertions of grandiosity are only in your mind, mous. The idea that you put yourself in a position to determine who is ‘messing up’ who is rather grandiose.
For we do have a Savior – Jesus Christ. Not you, mous, and not necessarily those in the hierarchy who are leaning toward rejecting His word in favor of their own – however merciful it may sound. That’s what the CCC 675 is about.
“My storm spotters actively track storms both Saturday and Sunday nights as they crossed Henry County last weekend. One of my volunteers was out tracking the storm while his home suffered over $4,000 in storm related damages.” – Quotes regarding “spotters”
spotter, While you are out actively tracking Ann Malley the storm is devastating your own home.
….. and ‘Spotter’! I like that. Can we expect that you will consistently use that moniker so that we can ‘spot’ out your actual pov?
Hope so.
And Catherine, thanks for reminding Dana and I of what all this attention means. Thank you mous and spotter.
This reply is to the post of Anonymous, that begins, “All in one Sunday?” I described accurately, the beginning of the first Novus Ordo Missae, that shocked everyone, even devout, well-catechized Catholic schoolchildren— in my parish! I described the beginning of this Mass, in our church — and my first reactions, which I know were shared by many! Due to word limits for these posts– I could only write about my first reactions, at the beginning of the New Mass! There it is! Maybe you and others, felt something either similar– or different! Everyone is free to write about their experiences! But why criticize others’ experiences? Big waste of time, I am sure you will agree!
Anonymous, when you can not win a debate on the facts,
you merely attack the person.
This is Marxist Saul Alinsky’s tactic, but you probably already know that.
That’s a good analogy Catherine. The hospitality argument is like saying Ted Bundy got the electric chair for disliking women!
Dear Dana, the “hospitality argument” is what scripture itself says about the sin of Sodom.
…and they keep coming, Dana. The latest one I heard was that Monica Lewinsky wasn’t a victim of Bill Clinton for sexual harassment. Why? Because she was willing. Monica was, however, a victim of Bill Clinton’s because he was not kind to her offer of ‘love’ but toyed with her affections. Good grief.
Goodness, Dana, you’ve arrived. YFC just called you ‘dear’!!! My heart is all aflutter.
…. as for scripture, YFC, keep reading. The connection to sodomy being an abomination before the Lord is there. And we ALL know that context means everything.
“The hospitality argument is like saying Ted Bundy got the electric chair for disliking women!” = I will remember that one! : )
I will continue with what I said in my previous post. Right after Vatican II, over 200,000 priests (and some bishops, too!) resigned, and many thousands of nuns left their vocations. The Church began to strongly emphasize humanism, and the “common man’s” humanistic joys of Marriage. Religious vocations were downplayed, and the holiness of a celibate life, consecrated to God, was suddenly questioned. Our beautiful old Latin Mass was forbidden, and our traditional devotions, including the Rosary, were discouraged. Our Church was no longer holy and reverent, towards God. A once-ancient, extremely stable Church, had become a secularized, trivialized, cheap, “1960’s social experiment,” with all responsible Church governance and leadership, foolishly abandoned. Bl. Pope Paul VI complained that the “smoke of Satan” had entered the Church— and that most nights, he painfully “slept on a crown of thorns!” It is good, if he found his way to Heaven– but for everyone else, there was almost nothing left in the Church, to guide our footsteps to holiness– and to Heaven!
and became apostates—
…talk about being overly dramatic, mous. Sorry, but your scare tactics cannot rewrite that which has been and is today.
It is very disturbing, the cheapening, the disrespectful “humanizing,” of the modern-day Popes, since Vatican II! A Pope is NOT some cheap, degraded secular American pop culture figure, for ignorant kids to treat like Elvis Presley! How horrifying it is, to see the Holy Father referred to, as “JPII,” or “B16!” And what do these irreverent, uneducated, ignorant people call Pope Francis? My God! A Pope walks in the shoes of St. Peter, whose authority is of Christ! The role of a Pope is very holy! “Tu es Petrus!” He is our supreme religious leader, of great dignity, authority, respect, and reverence! His role is Divinely given, by God! The humanness of a Pope, should be authentic, but always spiritually mature– a pure, humble vessel, consecrated to the service of God, with non-attachment to created things, the things of Nature, of humanness, and of the temporal, worldly life. With the traditional, spiritual practice of detachment, he can thus serve God in the proper manner, with no conflict, no self-interest, corruption, or degraded, human motives. He must be a wonderful, mature, paternal, Christ-like role model! And a strong force of moral and spiritual guidance and authority, for the world to look up to– with great respect!
So Linda, maybe you should castigate Cardinal Burke who has clearly set himself up as an anti-Pope. He criticizes the Pontiff in public every chance he gets. Horriffic, if you ask me.
Horrific perhaps because the cardinal virtue for you is to do whatever the hierarchy tells you, no matter whether it conflicts with God’s word or not. That’s not, Faith, mous. Not in Our Lord anyway.
What conflicts with God’s Word?
…ignoring the continued sacrilege of giving public pro-abortion politicians Holy Communion. Attending the religious services of other ‘Christian’ denominations. And perhaps even ignoring the sacrilege of giving Communion to divorced and civilly remarried Catholics.
…what would you propose to do with a Pontiff who confuses the faithful on a regular basis?
…and what’s with this charge of Anti-Pope. Shame, mous. That is a horrific judgment.
Where is any of that in God’s Word?
When Catholics use the term God’s Word, we are referring to the Bible.
Letting ones yes mean yes and one’s no mean no is in God’s word, Anonymous. And that, in increasing instances, is not what the Church hierarchy is teaching, by way of example, the flock to do. That’s the disconnect of which I speak.
That is why I refer back to the CCC 675. I didn’t write CCC 675. And I’m not seeking to lead anybody anywhere, Anonymous. Rather I am questioning the disconnects seemingly within our own Catholic Church – the disconnects between what the Church actually teaches and requires and what is actually done. Or more importantly, what is NOT done.
If you can speak to these anomalies minus the hostility, great. I would love to understand your pov.
I wasn’t hostile to you. I asked you a couple questions. I am not the anonymous who criticized Cardinal Burke. I support Cardinal Burke and hope that he is our next pope.
Letting one’s yes mean yes and no mean no was Jesus’ prescription to avoid swearing. I do not understand your reference to it in this case.
The rest of your post, I do not know what you are talking about.
I also am not the anonymous of the first post to which you replied. I think I misread your post to mean that you were accusing Pope Francis of saying something that conflicted with God’s word, which reading it again you did not say.
Whereas you may not understand my reference in this case with letting one’s yes mean yes and ones no mean no, perhaps you will understand Christ’s telling the woman at the well that the man she was ‘with’ was not her husband or telling the woman caught in adultery to go and sin no more. Perhaps you will understand the charity behind Our Lord’s giving His disciples the hard teaching about the necessity of eating His Flesh and drinking His Blood and then letting those that would go their own way. He did not chase them down and water down Truth.
That is the example for us, Anonymous, in my view, and that is why I find if increasingly telling (as per CCC 675) that there are prelates inside the Church who are even arguing Christ’s teachings. We are to be the light to the world, shining from atop the bushel, not hidden beneath it so as to keep the world in darkness.
It is Pope Francis who has rejected living in papal apts in the Vatican, dressing and acting like a pope or even signing his name like a pope. Until this past weekend I’d say he wasn’t a big fan of the papacy.
Like Obama refusing to wear the flag pin during run-up elections, Dana. These actions are in reality very singular, garnering attention to the ‘individual’ which is anathema to the humble man. (Much like attempting to strong arm ‘brother’ Bishops.)
…a modest or low view of one’s importance (humility), in my view, would preclude a person from rejecting the honors/dignity of an office. For the truly humble man would understand that the honors/dignity were not meant for him at all, but rather for the office he holds, however undeserving. He would accept the office and the trappings that go with it out of respect to those that came before, not counting himself worthy to make demands (I won’t sleep in the Papal Apartments, but rather see the Vatican put out to accommodate my wishes.)
Much like you wouldn’t catch the Blessed Mother in her Fiat stating that All Generations shall call me Blessed, but ‘I’ don’t like that so I’m just going to tell them to call me nice and leave it at that. Even though the ‘office’ was granted to Her by God Almighty.
But if the idea is to be like St. Francis, who didn’t progress to the priesthood out of humility (he didn’t think himself worthy), I would hope the Holy Father understands that if by way of Providence, St. Francis had been elected Pope, he would have rejected the office while he had the chance to exercise his will, or having taken up the onus, I have no doubt St. Francis would have carried the weight of the Papacy (trappings and all) for that his ‘yes’ would mean.
It’s so good to share here. My sentiments exactly. Also, ironically, it was not so long ago that I read that a recent bio of St. Francis revealed he was a real stickler for ALL the traditions in liturgy, with beautiful and elaborate altars and nothing simple about it. I will try and find the title of the book. I think it was reviewed In New Oxford Review.
…as a very holy priest told me, “I could dress in rags, it wouldn’t matter, but for the altar, no, it must be the very best that we can give.”
No, Anonymous, Cardinal Burke has not set himself up as an anti pope. He only explains what is in Canon Law as he has such a degree. I like Pope Francis, but it would be better if he did explain himself more clearly at times, as there will always be others who will spin what he says and twist it if he is not as clear as possible. There should be room in the Church for those who wear “fancy clothes”, as some put it (more formal clothing being a better term) and those who wear simpler clothes as St. Francis did. Remember that none of the saints all wore the same clothing. They wore clothing and attire according to their individual station in life. One would not expect a St. Thomas More, a Lord Chancellor of a country, to wear the clothing of St. Isidore a farmer. I see a lot of class envy in all this, and I certainly am not “upper class” by any means. By the way, St. Thomas More. if you do not know, wore a hair shirt under all his finery to remind himself that everything he had came from God;
Burke is not an anti-Pope because he wears fancy clothes. He is anti-Pope becasue he sets himself in public as someone who knows better than our Pope, has established a following for himself that is anti-thetical to the real Pope, and many hope that our real Pope will die early and be replaced with anti-Pope Burke. The fact that he wears frilly gay clothing simply makes him look silly, but that is not what makes him anti-Pope.
What magical infusion do you think comes about when a man is raised to the papacy, Anonymous? There is no infused super knowledge. Cardinal Burke is not ‘setting himself up’ as someone who knows better than the Pope. Rather, he is speaking clearly which is his duty as a Bishop. And he is using the teachings of the Catholic Church as his basis for doing so. Would that all Bishops approached their duty as such.
As for describing traditional Roman Catholic vestments as ‘frilly gay clothing’ it sounds more like you have issues, not Cardinal Burke.
“He is anti-Pope becasue he sets himself in public as someone who knows better than our Pope, has established a following for himself that is anti-thetical to the real Pope, and many hope that our real Pope will die early and be replaced with anti-Pope Burke. ” = That is a particularly vicious and evil lie but to be expected in the battle for souls. You can be sure that the protection of some delicious sin motivated such a stench filled post.
There is nothing new under the sun. Cardinal Burke is no more anti-Pope than St. Catherine of Siena was anti-Pope.
The Saint Succeeds
“Catherine, undaunted, was determined that her trip to Avignon would be worth while. She spoke directly with the pope, openly condemning the abuses practiced by priests and prelates, the luxury of the papal court, and the many vices which flourished under his very eye. Gregory inquired how Catherine could know about certain specific things he knew to be true. The saint replied, “to the glory of Almighty God I am bound to say that I smelt the stink of the sins which flourish in the papal court while I was still at home in my town, more sharply than those who have practiced them, and do practice them every day here.”
When the Vicar of Christ asked her what was God’s will concerning him, the saint replied: “Who knows God’s will so well as your Holiness, for have you not bound yourself by a vow… Fulfill what you have promised to God.” Pope Gregory was greatly shaken. For while still a cardinal, he had made a vow that if he were ever elected pope, he would return to Rome. But he had never told a single person! On September 13, 1376, a day or two after Catherine had already left for home, Pope Gregory XI departed from the papal palace in Avignon — forever.”
His duty as Bishop is to submit to the Supreme Pontiff. He is a disobedient bishop, setting himself up in public as anti-Pope. Burke should be excommunicated.
Anonymous, St. Paul the Apostle and St. Peter the first pope had a disagreement over the gentiles coming into the Church and whether or not they should keep the Kosher Law. It is all recorded in the book of Acts. After St. Peter had the vision from the Lord with the basket of unclean food coming down from the sky and a voice — the Lord’s — saying take and eat, the issue was settled, the Gentiles did not need to keep Kosher. Now we are celebrating the feast of Saints Peter and Paul all on the same day. Could it not be possible if in the future the Church has a feast called the feast of St. Pope Francis and St. Raymond (Burke). Stranger things have happened.
Catherine knows everything to know about stench filled posts beccause she offers them time and time again!
Once again, Ann Malley, you do not seem to believe traditional Catholic teaching. “There is no infused super knowledge.” You are trivializing the graces given to the Pope to guide the Catholic Church. Along with papal infallibility, Catholic tradition teaches that God will give everyone the graces they need to perform their duties.
….but you are again negating God’s gift of free will. For while folks do receive the graces to do their duty, folks very often do not. Hence the saying, the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak. (Judas received a bounty of graces we can only imagine, but what did he do with them?)
As to trivializing, there is no trivializing, mous, but rather your consistent over simplification that the Pope and Bishops are somehow immune to sinning. Sin often comes in the form of not doing one’s duty and/or doing it incorrectly.
If you truly believe that being Catholic is simply executed by relying on grace with no need to comply with it, then you should have no issue with me, mous. I received Baptism and as such am now, according to you, hard wired to do my duty. So there we are.
That said, how do you explain the outrageous deviation from that which is Catholic presented at the Synod? And by Bishops no less. Are they not given the grace to do their duty? And yet the things proposed were scandalous.
Instead of focusing on clothing, one should ask why Cardinal Burke is granting interviews to and supporting the pro-gay BuzzFeed website. Cardinal Burke is not at all what he appears to be, which is probably why he’s being moved out of his position of influence.
Dave N., please give the website or source of such information.
Many people may not realize this, but the text of Bl. Pope Paul VI’s Mass– the Novus Ordo Missae— was written in a very short period of time, after the Second Vatican Council. A liturgical commission called the “Consilium,” headed by Fr. Annibale Bugnini (later made a Cardinal Archbishop), was appointed for this task. Six Protestant experts who had been “Observers” at the Council, assisted Bugnini. Bugnini was the main author of the Council’s “Sacrosanctum Concilium.” Bugnini’s six Protestant theologians who assisted him, were of the following denominations: Two Lutherans, one Methodist, one Calvinist of Taize, one Anglican, and one Episcopalian. All critiques of the almost-heretical New Mass were rejected, and the New Mass was quickly mandated. After first appearing in April of 1969 — the entire Catholic world was ordered to have this New Mass in place, by Advent of 1969. Many Catholics– even schoolchildren!— were greatly shocked at the heretical nature of the Novus Ordo Missae– it in no way resembled the True Mass!
You make so much up. please stop spreading division in the Church.
Thank you Linda. Of cource That’s true.
No Linda Maria, it isn’t that we don’t realize that people say that. It is that we vetted it and found out it was not true.
Linda Marie, Get a grip of yourself, seek the truth, and have the courage to face it. Hopefully Frank would agree.
Pope Francis, Andy, Pope Francis, please. You are not one of the successors of the Apostles.
Good grief, Anne T. When I first read ‘Frank’ I didn’t know who in the world Andy was referencing. Thank you for clearing that up.
Ann Malley, with all these anonymouses or (church mice which ever you prefer) running around, I have no idea which is which. Do you? I have begged them to put a number or letter after their “anonymous” post, but none of them have seen fit to do it. We do have to put some humor in all this mess, or we would be roping each other with Rosaries and beating each other over the head with Bibles. Not too Christ like. His choice was a whip. Now I am going to get off of here before I get myself into more trouble than I have.
So will there be a popularity vote on the passages in the Holy Bible now to retain or disdain them? Will St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans Chapter 1 versus 27 – 32 describing how much God is offended by homosexuality be ripped out of the Holy Bible? The modern magesterium is not about pleasing God; but about pleasing sinful man. Woe to the hypocrits and wolves in sheeps clothing.
From “the Rhine flows into the Tiber” p. 26 : “An address was also made by Giovanni Battista Cardinal Montini, Arcbishop of Milan, who a year later would be presiding over the second session of the Council as Pope Paul VI. He expressed general satisfaction with the schema [to redesign the Mass] , particularly because it stressed the pastoral aspect of the liturgy”. This speech got Paul VI elected Pope and sank the Catholic Church into the weakened position it is in now. Pope Paul VI caused enormous damage, at least to my life.
We do not need more aggiornamento to accept homosexuals to the new world standards recently achieved in 2014 than we needed to jump with both feet into the depraved standards of 1968 when the New Mass was promulgated by Pope Paul VI. The timing of both initiatives is bad for our Faith.
I will say one last thing. Since the worldwide shock and shake-up, of poor Bl. Pope Paul VI’s Vatican II, and its New Mass— many formerly strong Catholic countries of the world, have nearly-empty churches, and few priests and nuns! Many Catholics sadly deny belief in the Real Presence! And many in various formerly strong Catholic countries— have gone to evangelical Protestant groups, to seek a more solid, reliable religious training and support, lifelong, for their marriages and families. Saddest of all, there are former Catholics, in many countries– who have lost all sense of faith in God, and have simply become atheists! I am terribly sorry, for poor Bl. Paul VI’s true, sad legacy! What a beatification, for everyone to see, and to ponder! What will future history books say?? Well, it is all in God’s hands!
Thank you for sharing your personal insights, Linda. I’ve tried to get people from my church to share their experiences and they really don’t see anything amiss. They usually say they prefer the new Mass as they can understand it now, but as I’ve mentioned here before, they’re totally clueless about so much of the faith that I don’t even think they realize what they’ve lost. A great divide has surely shaken today’s Catholic faith and I’m looking to our brothers and sisters suffering around the world who aren’t even afforded a real Mass, let alone in Latin, and yet carry on the faith as best they can. The beautiful culture built by the Catholic Church is being threatened more each day and the people who hate Her and celebrate her inner struggles are to be pitied, and the people within the Church who have no idea what is being lost and what is at stake are to be utterly rejected, for they are the fomenters of dissent and the profane unholiness that has beset the Church. Keep speaking out, LInda, Catherine, Ann, Kenneth, St/ Christopher and other faithful voices.
And you keep attempting to draw out those souls in your parish, Dana. Just asking the questions is often what gets folks to think…. to remember. It was exceedingly painful for my Dad to remember. That’s part and parcel of why he would get fussy and dismissive about it. Almost like Stockholm Syndrome. But if those who support modernity in the Church are in such a state that they cannot even answer simple questions or feel the compulsion to stifle honest dialog from fellow Catholics, that indicates a vacuum of understanding if not continuity with that which has been handed down. That being the deposit of the Faith.
That is another reason why folks get cranky and dismissive. But if the idea is to evangelize, these modern day Catholics need to understand that there are many non-Catholics that see the rift as well. People are far from blind. Much like your husband, Dana. And until Catholics can live the Faith and correspond without fear about the disconnects and the Truth, there will be no spreading of actual Faith. That’s just plain unacceptable!
Prayers for your niece! God bless.
Thanks for thinking of her, Ann. I can’t tell you how she’s doing because she won’t see any of us but I know your prayers can only bring comfort to her.
Dana, I have made the intention to keep your niece in my prayers for her spiritual and physical health. May God heal her of any ailments and may the Holy Virgin and all the saints intercede for her at the throne of God. In Jesus’s name. Amen.
Thank you so much AnneT. I just received a very warm note from her yesterday, so I know that all of your prayers are truly working!!
WOW! That’s great news, Dana! Thank you so much for letting us know. Please keep us posted and praise God :)
From what I read recently, from a Catholic post (Rorate Caeli, or Angel Queen), Father Louis Bouyer wrote in his autobiography, that he helped compose Eucharistic Prayer II in a Roman restaurant. He was a convert to Catholicism, and in the beginning he was all for liturgical reform, but later regretted this. When I was a seminarian, studying theology, Father Jordan Aumann,O.OP told us that it was a shame that the Mass which was so ancient, with the various rites (Dominican, etc) was redone in such a hurry by a group of consulters who had no respect for tradition.
This is in reply to the post of Fr. Karl. I so appreciate your posts! I, too, read and was told at the time, of the shocking, careless manner, in which the New Mass was originally written, in a very brief time period! It was a Catholic catechist’s NIGHTMARE– of poor, almost heretical theology, as well as a complete break with the ancient, True Mass! Previously, over many centuries, the Mass had been occasionally revised or corrected, in appropriate ways. Some religious orders, like the Dominicans or Benedictines, also were allowed their own peculiar adaptations. But the Mass had never before been TOTALLY DESTROYED– and replaced with a totally new, and highly-questionable “Mass,” with an almost-heretical theology! Only Protestant Reformers did this kind of thing, during the Reformation! And the Vatican II Mass resembled a cheap POLITICAL TOOL, to seek worldwide Christian unity! Oh, what a SHOCK! (Or– was the Reformation considered to be correct, by the Council Fathers?!)
“… was redone in such a hurry by a group of consulters who had no respect for tradition.”
Just another validation of what is able to be seen without aid of microscope, doctorate, Pontiifcal degree, etc. Like giving a newly minted adult (all of 18) the keys to the family estate and saying, “Do what you think is best,” and expecting to recognize anything but the physical address upon returning home.
I wish everyone would learn to connect the dots and see the stark truth. On one side of the spectrum they are criticizing the modern church and its leadership for the awful fruits that they have excellently and accurately cited that have come to bear. On the other hand, they love the modern church leaders and would follow them like pied pipers into the turbulent seas. How can any sane God-loving people be that way? Don’t tell me it is willingness to forgive those who are resisting God’s teachings and imposing those errors for years on us sheep.
Since Pope Francis does not what us to be “rigid”, – – – – – – what DOCTRINE (below) does he want us to throw under the bus ? ? ? ? ?
Please be specific.
“Thou shall not commit Adultery” – GOD’s Commandment
Ex 20:14 ; Deut 5:18.
“Thou shall not covet thy Neighbor’s wife” – GOD’s Commandment
Ex 20:17 ; Deut 5.20.
Teachings of JESUS about divorce and remarriage – Mk 10:6-12; Mt 5:32.
Teaching of JESUS about adultery, mercy, and required repentance – “Go and Sin NO more” – Jn 8:11.
(CCC 1650 & 1651)
Teaching about homosexual acts:
Gen 19:1-29; Rom 1:24-27; 1 Cor 6:10; 1 Tim 1:10; Jude 1:7
(CCC 2357, 2358, 2359 & 2396)
St Paul – 1 Cor 11:27-30 about condemnation for receiving Holy Communion unworthily.
(CCC 2120, 1451)
CCC: ” 81 Sacred Scripture is the speech of God as it is put down in writing under the breath of the Holy Spirit.
And [Holy] Tradition transmits in its ENTIRETY the Word of God which has been entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit.
It transmits it to the successors of the apostles so that, enlightened by the Spirit of truth, they may faithfully preserve, expound and spread it abroad by their preaching. “
He didn’t say he was asking for doctrine to be less rigid. Not everything is about doctrine. Some things are about internal procedures. Some are about the services the Church provides to the poor. Some are the roles that the laity have in the Church especially women. Some are the canonical procedures we use to determine the validity of a marriage. Some are language choices we use to convey [or not] the dignity and respect owed to every human being. We are talking about the methods the Pope has at his disposal to seek advice from his Brother Bishops.
We are so used to the conversation being about doctrine, ever since Ratzinger came on the scene, we forgot that doctrinal adherance is only one part of what it means to be Church.
The teaching of Jesus (Doctrine) is the main part of what it means to be Catholic – so we can get to Heaven to be with Him.
A small committee of Bishops can make recommendations for the things you mention YFC. Just like they did for the Vatican bank.
The dignity and respect owed to every single person is already in the CCC, they do not need a Synod to repeat Doctrine.
The Pope spoke loudly and clearly through his personally appointed – featured speakers. And it was all about Doctrine.
And as a woman, I am perfectly fine with my role within the Church, so don’t lump us into your twisted homosexual thinking.
“…And as a woman, I am perfectly fine with my role within the Church, so don’t lump us into your twisted homosexual thinking.”
Thank you, Meredith, for speaking up on behalf of those women who are content with the role they have. Women must truly be the heart of the family, otherwise the Devil wouldn’t be trying so hard with every generation to rip it out.
YFC, who are you trying to bs.
They did not discuss procedures at all. They discussed Doctrine.
Answer Matt’s question. Which of the Doctrine in Matt’s post – topics of all which were discussed at the Synod – does the Pope (or yourself) want to throw under the bus ?
Meredith, you aren’t listening, are you. There were no changes to doctrine discussed. This was not even a doctrinal gathering. I’m not sure if you are not listening, are truly ignorant, or simply lying. But you are adding division and damage to the Church by spreading the false idea that new doctrine was considered at the Synod. It simply was not. If you and Matt want to create some general aspersions in that direction, it seems to me that it is up to you to provide evidence for your accusations. Matt asks which of a set of items he has cherry picked does the Pope want to throw under the bus. Then answer is “none of the above,” yet you aren’t satisfied with that answer. What EXACTLY was said that you believe to be new doctrine?
I hope everyone will read this excellent article by Anthony Olsen. It is so applicable to what we’re discussing.
https://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2014/sanity-in-a-time-of-madness.html
He who has ears, listen.
No one at the synod questioned doctrine. That was not the issue. It would be helpful if people would actually write the specific thing that they are referring to and give a source.
Documents on SYNOD from the Vatican web site:
INSTRUMENTUM LABORIS
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/synod/documents/rc_synod_doc_20140626_instrumentum-laboris-familia_en.html
PARTICIPANTS
https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2014/09/09/0620/01369.html
“RELATIO POST DISCEPTATIONEM” interim report (which contained the fraudulent paragraphs which would allow changing Doctrine written by Forte).
https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/en/bollettino/pubblico/2014/10/13/0751/03037.html
“RELATIO SYNODI” of Oct 18, 2014 has not yet been posted in English on the Vatican site.
Yes, per the qappointed guest speakers of the Pope – who recommended relaxing Doctrine related to divorced and remarried Catholics and practicing homosexuals receiving Holy Communion, etc.
There are many articles on the net, search for yourself.
Any time one speaks on RELAXING Doctrine, that is the devil’s code word for CHANGING Doctrine.
The official word for the heresy being perpetrated was called “GRADUALISM”.
None. Didn’t you keep up with this story at all?
Someone has said that we got the virtue of Hope with St. John Paul II with his “Be not afraid”, the virtue of Faith with Pope Benedict and his great writings on doctrine and theology, and now we are getting the virtue of Charity with Pope Francis. I think they are right.
Thank you for writing that, Anne T.
Do you know who wrote this quote, Anne T?
“Charity is the secret weapon Jesus Christ places in our hands, the only thing that can assure us of victory.
The first one to use it will win.”
Dana, I heard it used on EWTN. On the program Women of Grace they mentioned it, but I do not remember who they said was the first person to say it. I had just turned on the television and did not catch that part.
Dana, the quote also mentioned Pope Benedict’s contribution to the improvement of the liturgy, I did not quote it exactly for I posted it from memory. His book as Cardinal Radzinger called “The Spirit of the Liturgy” is a marvelous book, and I learned a lot about the early Church liturgy from it and the meaning behind the symbolism of the liturgy
Dana, I think what was said and meant is that we got teachings about hope from St. John Paul, about faith from Pope Benedict and now were getting teachings about charity from Pope Francis. I was somewhat paraphrasing it all from memory. My first post was not an exact quote.
Thank God Michael Voris has recently apologized for his awful “Pope harming the Church” Vortex episode. It takes a lot of humility to publicly admit that kind of mistake, and then promptly take action to amend it.
It takes even more humility for a Bishop to admit that a mess was created.
From Bishop Tobin: Random Thoughts About the Synod on the Family | Roman Catholic Diocese of Providence
https://www.diocesepvd.org/from-bishop-tobin-random-thoughts-about-the-synod-on-the-family/
—” The concept of having a representative body of the Church voting on doctrinal applications and pastoral solutions strikes me as being rather Protestant.
— In addressing contemporary issues of marriage and the family, the path forward will probably be found somewhere between the positions of Fr. Z and the National Catholic Reporter.
— Have we learned that it’s probably not a good idea to publish half-baked minutes of candid discussions about sensitive topics, especially when we know that the secular media will hijack the preliminary discussions for their own agendas?
— I wonder what the Second Vatican Council would have looked like and what it would have produced if the social media had existed at that time.”
Archbishop Chaput blasts Vatican debate on family, says ‘confusion is of the devil’
https://www.religionnews.com/2014/10/21/archbishop-chaput-blasts-vatican-debate-family-says-confusion-devil/
Thank you for this, Catherine.
Let’s not forget that the Bible was created by a vote of Bishops at a Synod. A lot of scripture was left out because it didn’t have the votes of the Paulists. Our faith has always been developed by vote in some shape or manner at the various Synods.
Let’s also keep in mind that this Extraordinary Synod was simply the preparation for the real Synod that takes place next year.
“Our faith has always been developed by vote in some shape or manner at the various Synods.” = So what! All the more then are YOU and many others culpable for encouraging history to repeat itself.
Let’s not forget that Jesus was also clandestinely voted out in the first Synod of the Agony of the Garden. For thirty pieces of silver, Judas voted Jesus out and the rest of the bishops fell asleep and abandoned Him.
Thank you for making us aware of this, Jeremiah.
All should watch it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4m2O0DVex84
Now of course he will become a target on the Internet by schismatics.
I am glad that he realized the ball that he set in motion.
I have been very concerned about him recently and praying for him.
I know a convert who became so distrustful of the Church because of watching Michael Voris’ Vortex that she became prey for the schismatics.
I will still pray for him and for the convert and the schismatics.
I would pray that the individual swayed by watching Michael Voris use his/her energies to study the actual Faith that goes far beyond a particular pontificate. Being so-called prey to schismatics would not be an issue if the order of business in every diocese was teaching what the Church actually holds to be True and binding – and not a polyglot of opinion and wishful ‘brave-new-world’ spin as was shamefully presented at this Synod.
Understanding the reality that Christ is the head of the Church and nobody else is a great starting point. And that the Holy Ghost was promised to preserve the Church, not to prevent particular individuals with a great deal of teaching authority from misusing said authority to sow confusion and discord by making messes.
Pray for good and holy priests and a hierarchy that believes firmly in the deposit of the Faith, whole and entire, firmly enough to go to the wall in its defense. That would be a real formula for evangelization.
That said, Michael Voris set no ball in motion. He merely reports on the ball that has been and is being played hourly by those we assume to hold the Faith. Not all do, however, and that is not Michael’s doing.
He held himself responsible. I don’t know that he did anything wrong. I think he just realized that it had the potential to be an evil influence.
Bishop TOBIN –
“ — The concept of having a representative body of the Church voting on doctrinal applications and pastoral solutions strikes me as being rather Protestant. “- Bishop Tobin
“ Pope Francis is fond of “creating a mess.” Mission accomplished.” – Bishop Tobin
“— Relax. God’s still in charge.” – Bishop Tobin
https://www.diocesepvd.org/from-bishop-tobin-random-thoughts-about-the-synod-on-the-family/
Anonymous, you are one of the most dishonest people !
Voris did NOT set any ball in motion.
His own apostolate of Church Militant TV has a policy of not knocking the Pope – even when the Pope is wrong. That is his choice.
Personally I prefer the truth – even with the Pope is wrong.
Note that Voris never said the reporting was incorrect.
What did I say that was dishonest? You must have really misinterpreted what I wrote.
You wrote this:
“…I am glad that he (Michael Voris) realized the ball that he set in motion. I have been very concerned about him recently and praying for him. I know a convert who became so distrustful of the Church because of watching Michael Voris’ Vortex that she became prey for the schismatics.”
That is laying at the feet of Michael Voris who, for all intents and purposes, is doing a bang up job reporting the ‘schismatic’ activity going on INSIDE the Church, mous. And despite what you may believe, Mr. Voris isn’t writing letters to Bishops asking them to perpetrate the malarky that they do in order to make a news program out of it.
OK, Ann Malley, by DEFINITION, there is not schismatic activity going on in the Church. Although there may be people who think like schismatics or who are in error or who don’t like the Pope, that is not the definition of a schismatic. Try looking in up in canon law, the CCC or a Catholic dictionary.
And one of the errors of the schismatics that led this convert astray was that the ministers in the Church are the real schismatic. Because this convert doesn’t know, any more than you do (apparently) that it is by definition it is impossible.
And I laid nothing at the feet of Michael Voris. He probably does not understand how badly he has hurt some of the innocents in the Church and I wrote what I wrote hoping that he googles himself and can find out so the he will stop because his work is having an unintended consequence. He does not intend to discourage the faithful nor does he intend to lead others to sin (gossip, rash judgement, calumny and slander) but he does because people paraphrase and retell things inaccurately. I’m not blaming him, I am warning him. If he knows this, he will understand the seriousness of it and will try to amend it.
Although a Pope is elected for life unless he resigns of his own free will,
we must be truthful that there have been 12 very corrupt Popes in the past.
This included a Borgia – Pope Alexander VI, and playboy Pope Benedict XI.
Christ’s chosen 12 apostles were sinners, 11 of whom repented.
Someone above suggested that we will never know why people are leaving the Church unless we ask them. That has been done. CARA is a most respected polling organization for issues Catholic. The reason people leave the church, especially young people:
1)Too strict on abortion and homosexuality
2)Too strict on birth control
3)Treat men better than women
4)Too strict on divorce
5) Clergy Sex Abuse
A new study shows that the young people (30 yrs and under) who are still in the church cite the above reasons for being disillusioned with the church. They are a small group, because the others in that cohort don’t come to church. A recent study also indicated that for young people, belonging to a denomination is like belonging to a hate group in our current society. This is not good news for the church’s future. We have three choices. We can say this is what we believe, take it or leave it, we can do a better job of explaining the teachings of the Bible and the Magisterium, or we can alter some of our rules and regulations and the way we enforce them. But, doing nothing is delusional.
JESUS let many disciples (followers) LEAVE rather than CHANGE (relax) His teaching. – – – – – Jn 6:66.
He even asked His apostles if they were going to leave also.
The problems you discuss, Bob One, have been created by many Diocese Bishops (and their Priests) over the past 45 years for not accurately and completely teaching the Faith.
To this day, many do not actively and publically promote the reading of the Bible and CCC at home by all literates over age 15. Instead they let their sheep wallow in sin and misunderstanding and ignorance.
“There are not more than 100 people in the world who truly hate the Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they perceive to be the Catholic Church. ….As a matter of fact, if we Catholics believed all of the untruths and lies which were said against the Church, we probably would hate the Church a thousand times more than they do.” – Bishop Fulton J. Sheen
” My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge;
because you have rejected knowledge,
I reject you from being a priest to me.
And since you have forgotten the law of your God,
I also will forget your children.” – Hosea 4:6.
Right is right, and wrong is wrong.
How about just plain teaching the deposit of the Faith, Bob One? Asking kids why they are leaving the Church when they have been left to be catechized by the world is no barometer of where the Church is failing in Her teachings. It is rather a testament to a complete VOID in teaching.
Much like letting a child grow up without any rules or responsibility and then expecting them to sign on board to be a ‘responsible’ adult at say 17 or 18. Sorry, too late. Thinking your going to make Catholics out of those who, despite being ‘in’ the pew, have been led to believe, think, and act as they please and still think they are Catholic is delusional. Like wondering why oh why can’t Johnny read if he’s never been taught the alphabet.
Should we alter the alphabet to say elvish script (from Lord of the Rings), ebonics, or perhaps Klingon (from Star Trek) because the ‘kids’ are excited about learning these things! Come on. Be a parent. Teach already. Take ownership for the lack of teaching and just start. It’s hard, yes, but ‘relaxing’ the doctrine or disciplines is just a method of changing the Faith. Not admitting that last bit is such a sham. For while kids might be lazy and disinclined (as they ALWAYS have been to take the bit), they do not appreciate being patronized and are not fooled by it in the least.
Also, Bob One, the study you cited was young people who are still ‘in the Church.’ Thank you! For you have illustrated a definite problem. ‘In the Church’ does not equate to having the Faith.
As Catholics are we not chartered with spreading ‘the Faith?’ If that is so, our deviation to keeping people ‘in the Church’ is precisely that, a deviation as keeping people ‘in the Church’ is, by the CARA’s data, no evidence of Faith.
Ann Malley, please read the last paragraphs of Matthew, The Great Commission!
“belonging to a denomination is like belonging to a hate group in our current society” only Bob One comes up with statements like this. Perhaps Bob One may be its society that is the hate group,…
The Vatican Insider has the sermon of the Holy Father today in the article “Francis: In the Church too, divisions start in the heart.” I liked everything in it. I suggest we all start to read his sermons every day, so we know what he actually says, instead of what some other person says he said with their spin on it. Remember Pope Francis does not speak much English, though he tries, and every interpreter is not necessarily a good one. I am sure there are other places where one can get a good interpretation of his sermons, such as on EWTN.
Anon. Where is this quote in Pius V Catechism?
Moreover, the Church alone has the legitimate worship of sacrifice, and the salutary use of the Sacraments, which are the efficacious instruments of divine grace, used by God to produce true holiness. Hence, to possess true holiness, we must belong to this Church. The Church therefore it is clear, is holy, and holy because she is the body of Christ, by whom she is sanctified, and in whose blood she is washed. Catechism of Pius V
Warren Goddard, i answered that question but here it is again:
In the section on the Creed, these is a section on “I Believe in the Holy Catholic Church:
There is a section on the Marks of the Church. It is the last paragraph in the subsection “Holy”.
I gave a link in the other answer. It is online in several places.
Here is one:
https://www.catholicapologetics.info/thechurch/catechism/ApostlesCreed09.shtml
Anon: Thanks again.
You are welcome.
So many posting on this web site are blind and it is not LInda Marie. They can’t see the wolves from the sheep. They are blind because the devil is the great deceiver, the father of all lies, he has hood-winked them into following a counterfiet church. They have been given many examples of the destruction of the church over the last 50 years and yet the blind either deny and refuse the truth and accurate testimony, are to scared and to weak to investigate the truth for fear of what their findings will shock and dismay them and realize they have been misled. God is the truth, the way, and the life. He is the light of the world. He shares with those who have plenty of sanctifying grace the truth, and it leads them to everlasting life. Prayers are so important. Without prayers we can not talk to God and we risk going to heaven, so pray often and if you love God, keep Him beside you in constant prayer asking for His help, His guidance. Trust in Him completely to show you to His Heavenly Kingdom. Go find a Roman Catholic parish that practices tradition to be assured that you are receiving sanctifying graces to strenghen and enlighten you.
James, your post is heretical if you meant to say that only attendees of certain Roman Catholic parishes receive sanctifying grace. They all do.
YFC, you should have said – everyone who is not living in mortal sin can receive sanctifying grace.
For example those supporting or affirming or practicing homosexual acts, fornication, or adultery can not receive any sanctifying grace until they go to Confession, Repent and try to sin no more.
CCC: ” 1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself.
It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace,
that is, of the state of grace.
If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ’s kingdom and the eternal death of hell,
for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. …..”
James what do you mean by Roman Catholic parish that practices tradition?
James is one of the sedevacantists who post here.
Andy, Those parishes that follow the Roman Catholic Church and its unchanging faith instituted by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ Himself, not those misled by men who thought they knew better than God Himself and set out to start a new religion like Luther, King Henry the VIIIth, and the V2 council liberals who broke with tradition instituted by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ Himself. The are those parishes that you will know by the reverent and exemplarary examples of their holy priests and parishoners toward the Blessed Sacrament resting in the center of the Altar in the Sanctuary. You will know them by their practice of the 7 Holy Sacraments in Latin and the Holy Sacrifice of the Tridentinel Latin Mass, the Mass for All Ages that were codified by Pope St. Pius the Vth who so strongly defended tradition like Pope St. Pius the Xth resisting liberal changes to their death beds and inturn preserved the Roman Catholic faith keeping it in tact for nearly a thousand years, except for adding (not subtracting anything) a few saints feast days and rites/prayers.
One can find where many of these holy parishes are in North America and Europe by browsing the key word traditio for a Latin Mass Directory. Pray the Holy Rosary as for many who are unable to reach one of these parishes, their only source of refuge is Our Lady by saying the Rosary just as She had predicted.
Anomynous, you criticize those that do believe in the papacy and in those that believe in preserving the Roman Catholic Church founded by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ Himself. Rather than criticize, try opening your eyes through prayer and look through the eyes of traditionalists who hold to ancient Roman Catholic Church teaching, the very faith of our great-grandfathers.
You will know them by their fruits said Jesus in the gospel. For nearly 2000 years the unchanging Roman Catholic Church grew and flourished just as Jesus had wanted it to, then during the V2 Council the smoke of krept in just like Paul VIth is quoted to have said and it has been continuing to implode since then. Millions of souls have lost the Roman Catholic faith, many have either joined protestant, evangelical, or new age churches, or have become agnostics, they just don’t care. Yes there are two churches claiming to be Roman Catholic, but one is counterfiet, the one that has changed and adopted Luther and a host of other protestant ideas, like ecumenism. Visit Lutheran church services and you will be astonished to see what most modern catholics might think, they (Lutherans have become like us, oh how wonderful ecumenism is in their perception). On the contrary, the V2 Church has changed to be like the Lutherans and other protestants, adopting their beliefs and ways. Luther and the Anglicans were excommunicated for the similar (if not the same) heretical beliefs, just like ecumenism is today. Look at the outcome of the recent Synod, and the widespread pedophile priest scandals. Do you think those scandals would really happen in Christ’s Church? I mean do you really?
I thank God for showing us Roman Catholics practicing tradition His Way, His Truth, and His Life. It is the Roman Catholic parishes strictly abiding to tradition where the future of the Church is and where Jesus promised He will be with Holy Mother the Church until the end of time. Meanwhile the V2 Church will continue its 50 year track of drawing further away and continuing to fade away. IIn 20 years with nearly half the modern V2 clergy over 65 years old, who will be left to turn out its lights?
Just a little catholic trivia history, which says a whole lot. It was Paul VIth who approved the changes to the Sacrament of Ordination. The changes followed the Anglican Church rite which Pope Leo XIIIth had declared as invalid in the 19th century and therefore the Anglican clergy were not valid bishops and priests. So what does that mean for todays V2 clergy, invalid? If not, why not? Pope Leo XIIIth could not publicly make a mistake in faith and morals because of infallibility. What was true then, is equally true today. God does not change His mind, only people do.